3 ms·
To be fair, situations were the objector is listened to are non-events the public will never know of, so it is hard to know the true ratio. I do agree that eth
by cmeacham98 6y ago
To be fair, situations were the objector is listened to are non-events the public will never know of, so it is hard to know the true ratio.
I do agree that ethics seems to take a saddeningly low priority in most powerful leaders in the world, but there are some areas in society where this isn't the case: I remember reading a thread a little while ago here on HN about how seriously safety is taken in nuclear power and how anyone involved in the process can object.
- vlovich123 6y agoI think we’re in agreement. All I’m saying is that that’s the default behavior for most people - no one wants to be left holding the bag. If you actually strive to create a different culture you can have different results. I don’t think this is a lack of ethics in the political class per se. It’s really hard to build this kind of structure, there’s no credit involved (since you’re preventing hypothetical future catastrophes), and politically difficult to defend to constituencies that don’t agree with your caution (“repeal regulations”). You might also be wrong and your opponents could be right so you’re taking a gamble on something that has little to no upside and lots of risk. That being said, (and as a person with a pro-nuclear bias) I will note though that Fukushima had engineers raising dissent about it and warning/begging/pleading with the bureaucracy to harden the defenses against a tsunami. Admittedly maybe you’re talking about Western policies.