Integrity - the Key to the America's Fate?

The American democracy is far from perfect. Although the country is ruled by a system of, for, and by the people, there is still corruption in the democratic system. This corruption allows injustices to flourish in the hands of leaders, leaving faithful followers misrepresented. In addition to being misrepresented, citizens looking to overcome the system are powerless amongst the masses of people selfishly taking advantage of these injustices. Each microcosmic act of dishonesty contributes to a greater macrocosmic belief that lying in any form is admissible in society. However, without honesty there can be no justice. In order to successfully represent the American population in a society governed by democracy, it is imperative that citizens maintain their integrity by obtaining unfaltering honesty, resisting conformity, and by standing up against injustices.

In order for anybody to have integrity, they must first understand the meaning of it. In "The Rules about the Rules," by Stephen L. Carter, a Professor of Law at Yale, contends that integrity is a process that contains three steps. These steps include "(1) discerning what is right and what is wrong; (2) acting on what you have discerned, even at personal cost; and (3) saying openly that you are acting on your understanding of right from wrong" (183). This means that in order for people to have integrity, they must understand what is right and fight for it if it ever becomes compromised. In the case that injustices occur, they must be willing to correct these injustices even if it means going against society's standards. Openly stating that they are acting on their understanding of what is right may be difficult when faced with animosity; however, it is absolutely necessary in order to set an example and preach the significance of integrity. Simply conforming and letting injustices occur allows people to believe that lacking integrity is morally acceptable. Therefore, the absence of integrity in any democratic society is detrimental due to the inevitable presence of injustices.

The insufficiency of integrity is especially harmful in a nation that is self-governing. If people want to be truthfully represented, they must have the integrity to voice what they believe is morally and ethically right. In "Democracy and Things Like That," Sarah Vowell illustrates a situation where the absence of integrity leads to misrepresentation, which ultimately causes an inspirational message to be overlooked and damages a presidential candidate's character wrongfully. In the story, Al Gore gives a speech during the presidential campaign season to students at Concord High School (198). The students were surprised to discover that "contrary to conventional wisdom regarding his charisma deficiency, [Gore] was a hit" (199). He left them with a provocative speech, challenging them to become involved and make a difference. However, the media documented part of his speech incorrectly. By changing one word in a story Gore told about a young girl who made a difference in her community, the reporter altered the whole meaning of his story and made him look like an egotist and a liar. When people compromise their honesty, it is unfair and promotes selfishness and immoral decisions. This dishonesty on the reporter's part went beyond a single article, spreading to talk shows which bashed Gore's character and tarnished his image on national television. The reporter benefited at the expense of Al Gore by fabricating a story that would generate a lot of attention. Without integrity, people have no protection against such slander. Due to media's omnipresence, it is an easily accessible source of information that people turn to for their facts, granting it tremendous power. If presidential candidates are misrepresented, it becomes difficult to obtain accurate information which is necessary to vote for the right candidate. When people recall the negative stories about these candidates, they overlook the potential they possess to govern. This impacts democracy greatly because misrepresentation can cost a candidate success in the vote and another candidate with lower aptitude may triumph simply because they were not negatively represented.

When individuals and institutions act without integrity, the whole country begins to lose structure and justice. Rules become broken and injustices are disregarded, ultimately creating chaos and immorality. The absence of structure in the demoralized society would breathe life to greed and crime. When people go unpunished for their immoral acts, the society becomes void of justice. In "The Rules about the Rules," Carter tells a story about a professional football player who faked catching the ball during a game. The referee did not see the football hit the playing field because his view was obstructed and the player feigned victory. The broadcasters, seeing what had happened, commented: "What a heads-up play," which, according to Carter, truly meant, "Wow, what a great liar this kid is! Well done!" (181). Due to the absence of integrity on the player's part, the player's team gained an unfair, and more importantly, unearned advantage over the opposing team. The broadcaster's lack of integrity was broadcasted over national television, influencing the viewers, demonstrating that it was acceptable to cheat so long as one gets away with it. This concept translates into many other areas of life, such as academics, relationships, and work. When people lack integrity in these areas of life, injustices overwhelm the country, obstructing the very purpose of a democracy.

Even in a democracy there are leaders and there are followers. The leaders represent their followers and the followers support their leaders. However, as Peter J. Gomes argues in his piece, "Civic Virtue and the Character of Followership," virtuous followers are more vital than good leaders. Gomes states: "The strength of a people consists not in the greatness of its leaders... The strength of a people consists in the quality of its followers, people who are led not by leaders, but by visions, ideas, ideals, and passions" (248). In order for a community to prosper, members have to rely on their own convictions rather than simply follow the ideals of their leaders. They would have to contribute their own ideas, rather than blindly obey those of their leader. When the followers see corruption in their leaders, they have to overthrow them and demand justice in order to maintain their integrity. If they did not, their rights would be compromised and there would be no democracy.

In essence, if media lacked integrity, people would not be able to acquire accurate information. Should leaders be absent of integrity, followers would not be able to be represented. And, if followers had a shortage of integrity, inadequate leaders would be chosen. Overall, in order to be a truly democratic society, Americans would have to have integrity, because if society did not have integrity, there would be no representative democracy true to the people. This is essential because that is what the point of having a democracy is-the people-rather than the ones who lead them. As Gomes states, "Does [dissolving into something complete and great] imply that there is something greater than I am, and that without being dissolved into it I will not know what happiness is? Well, the simple answer to that is yes! That is exactly what it means. It means that to be a part of that which is larger, greater, more whole, more complete than I am, is the source of ultimate joy and happiness and responsibility" (244). With that said, the means to obtaining happiness is possessing integrity because integrity is the key to a successful democracy. The luxury of living in a democracy is often overlooked because Americans have had it their entire lives. However, without a democracy based on integrity, injustices would flourish, which enough reason to believe democracy is ultimately worth it.

References:

Carter, Stephen L. "The Rules about the Rules." Lunsford and Ruszkiewicz 179-190.

Gomes, Peter J. "Civic Virtue and the Character of Followership: A New Take on an Old Hope." Lunsford and Ruszkiewicz 242-249.

Lunsford, Andrea A., and John Ruszkiewicz eds. The Presence of Others: Voices and Images that Call for Response. 4^th ed. Boston; Bedford/St. Martin's, 2004.

Vowell, Sarah. "Democracy and Things Like That." Lunsford and Ruszkiewicz 198-205.