Justice beyond politics...

Yesterday I watched the absolutely brilliant Michael Sandel documentary Justice:A Citizen's Guide on BBC iPlayer (thank goodness for proxy servers!)

Sandel's main gist, revealed through interviews with other academics & philosophers and regular people, was that our way of thinking has become dominated by two ideals.

First, that of Kant's Categorical Imperative, the idea that some moral rules should be absolute and the underlying justification for human rights.

Second, and even more powerfully, that of John Stuart Mill's Utilitarianism, the idea that we should be aiming to maximise our collective pool of happiness.

Drawing on the philosophy of Aristotle, Sandel makes the proposal that these two ways of thinking are missing something vital, an idea of what the 'good life' should be, a target for us to aim towards.

His theory really resonates with the conversation I've been having with myself about idealism vs pragmatism.

Kant is pure abstract idealism, removed from the messiness of everyday life and lacking in real emotion or usefulness for that reason. It just doesn't hold up in real life.

Utilitarianism on the other hand, is pure pragmatism and seems to suck any higher purpose out of life. It reduces us to short-term thinking and misguided notions of what is really valuable in the long run. It also focuses our thinking sharply on individual needs at the expense of collective interests. It has helped create the kind of politics that aims to appease rather than inspire.

As we wake up to the fact that this kind of individualism is not only destructive but also misguided, we need to re-orient our society to become one that can accomodate ideals and a willingness to talk about the kind of world we want to live in but also takes account of the messy nature of reality and of our way of thinking. We need our moral ideals to be based more on empathy than on abstracted reason.

Of course, Sandel isn't the only one talking about this. The Tory rhetoric about the big society plays to the idea of a more involved citizenship in which we all play a part in shaping the world. The rhetoric though is undermined by cuts that are disproportionately affecting the poor. Without moves towards a more equitable distribution of income then talk about a more involved citizenship and us 'all being in this together' will ring hollow.

Perhaps then it is Sandel's grass-root citizen-ship groups that offer our best hope. But whilst these are admirable and will undoubtedly lead to more positive outcomes, I don't believe they are enough alone.

The pragmatic mode of thinking in politics can't be isolated from the concurrent growth of business and corporations. The notion of the consumer has penetrated political thinking and shaped the way the political parties approach the electorate. Often they seemed to have borrowed the worst tactics, playing to underlying wants and desires rather than offering a compelling vision of what we really should be doing.

Business too needs to start offering a genuine vision of what the 'good life' should be and letting this guide what they do. There are some positive signs that this beginning to happen but, as in politics, it needs to extend beyond mere rhetoric, and be an authentic guide to action, even to the extent of corporations beginning to take a more active role in political lobbying if necessary.

Finally, the program just reinforced for me what a wonderful thing the BBC is for airing this kind of programme. Over my lifetime, I have seen their content gradually dumbed-down, in the name of competing with commercial stations which have often churned out lowest common denominator crap. But with the introduction of digital and BBC4, they're back to producing television that really does have the potential to educate.

As the zeitgeist begins to switch, their mission to 'To enrich people's lives with programmes and services that inform, educate and entertain' feels more relevant than ever.