Can Good Intentions Justify Bad Actions in Politics?

In politics, good intentions cannot justify bad actions.
Describe a specific situation in which good intentions in politics might justify a bad action. Discuss what you think determines whether or not good intentions in politics can justify bad actions.
___

Politics is the process in which a group of people make, preserve and amend the laws under which they live. Politics exist in various spheres of life from government to the work place. Politicians (or those instituting laws) make decisions under different rationales and contexts. In the case of government, politicians make laws ideally with the interest of the greater good for their constituents and country. However good their intentions are, resulting bad actions cannot be justified.

The United States, in particular, has taken on the mission of spreading democracy and freedom in the world. That is the ostensible rationale for meddling into affairs of other countries. Granted, there are always accompanying reasons, including financial and security incentives. However, these other reasons seem quite self-serving and not as palatable to the ears of American people. In general, the government needs the moral support of the American people in order to intervene in other countries and potentially sacrifice young soldiers. The intention of spreading democracy and freedoms to those abroad per se sounds like a worthy cause.

However, several interventions in the name of democracy have ended up as bad "actions." The most recent one, the Iraq War, turned out to be a failure. The United States intervened with the intention of wiping out the threat of weapons of mass destruction and establishing a democratic government. Although the United States toppled the dictator and enemy, Sadaam Hussein, thousands of civilians and US soldiers have lost their lives. In the end, the United States never found the WMDs and the country continue struggles to help its citizens meet basic needs.

In the domestic front, the United States has been grappling with growing deficit and sluggish economy. Politicians want to keep showing their constituents that they are representing their interests by protecting entitlement programs, such as Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security. These programs are designed to be used as a crutch for people in case of hard times or old age. These programs are, indeed, valuable for taking care of the most vulnerable citizens. However, they are not sustainable as they stand---by adding tremendously to the deficit and inability of the United States to maintain a functioning government. Good intentions are behind funding entitlement programs but they do not justify its full funding.

While good intentions usually never justify bad actions, there are, of course, instances where the bad actions end up being the "right" decision in politics. For example, with the intention of overcoming partisan deadlock, politicians will compromise with the other side. This has been seen recently in the effort to balance the budget for the end of this fiscal year. Until the very last minute, the country was in danger of undergoing a federal shutdown. In order to keep the government up and running, politicians compromised and came up with a deal. Depending on one's point of view, the final budget was a "bad" action in that it fell short of reducing the deficit OR it cut several essential programs. While the action may be perceived as "bad," the intent to keep the government running justifies the budget agreement.


Indeed, politics is a game where tough decisions must be made. Politicians might publicly justify these decisions with worthy intentions. However, those intentions are often subjective and sometimes politicians do not reveal the full extent of their reasons. Bad actions usually cannot be justified by good intentions. However, in the interest of keeping the government running and moving things forward, one may be able to justify bad actions.