The Problem of Dirty Hands: Can Public Guilt Produce Public Awareness?

What implications does a dirty-handed politician‟s assertion that dirty hands are necessary for certain political achievements have on our understanding of the relationship between political actors and the political community? The problem of dirty hands, as described in Michael Walzer‟s “Political Action: The Problem of Dirty Hands,” occurs when a political actor finds that he must transgress one of his moral principles to accomplish what he sees as the right (and necessary) political action. While various political theorists have suggested that a political actor facing the problem of dirty hands ought to act as a consequentialist (and value the political outcomes of his actions above the “moral transgressions” they may require) or as a moral absolutist (and value his or her moral principles above any political goals), Walzer argues that a political actor can meet both moral-absolutist and consequentialist moral demands provided he does what is politically necessary (thereby violating his morals) but understands himself to be guilty as a result. Through guilt, we know the politician truly values the moral principles he has had to violate. As a result, Walzer suggests that a public display of guilt may help the dirty-handed political actor meet his or her moral and political obligations. My thesis explores the implications of Walzer‟s public guilt from the standpoint of the political community at which the declaration of guilt is directed. What does the political actor‟s declaration of guilt tell us about the politician‟s relationship to the political community? How