A Threshold of Moral ToleranceAccommodating LGBT Human Rights

in Contemporary Uganda

April 2012

Chloe Schwenke, Ph.D

&

Prof. A. Byaruhanga Rukooko

The Goal: Human Flourishing/Well-being

• Successful execution of a rational plan of life, by which the person determines the good for himself or herself.

• John Rawls

• “That human persons are flourishing means that their lives are good, or worthwhile, in the broadest sense.”

• Thomas Pogge

Moral Vocabulary?

• Myth of value-neutrality• “Us” and “Them”

– North and South– experts/managers and “beneficiaries”

• Ethics as rules vs. ethics as principled motivation

• Ethical thinking, ethical discernment– Ethical justification

• Development

“Development”

• More than “democracy”• What it isn’t

– Goulet’s “triple curse” of underdevelopment• Poverty• Powerlessness• Hopelessness

• The translation of economic opportunities into social opportunities

• Stability and peace

• Democracy and participation

• Justice, human freedoms/human rights

Why “Morality”?

• An important way of thinking about development ~ moving beyond Codes of Conduct or disclosure rules

• Qualitative focus to “development” ~ pursued through discernment and moral intuition– Development for what? For whom?– Development meaning what? Who defines this?– How much is enough? Who gets to decide?– Who is responsible for development? Why?

– What about trade-offs? And the losers?

Human Dignity ?

• What to do in societies seemingly hostile to the concept of human dignity?– Severe and worsening poverty – Deprivation of opportunities– Loss of hope, limited options– Loss of “voice”, lack of power – Dehumanization, extreme violence, SGBV

• Is respecting universal human dignity an important goal of development that ought to be prioritized by USAID?– Merely rhetoric?

Common Good Goals: Stability, Safety and Security

• Conditions of stability, order, predictability, and freedom from bodily harm

• Healthy environment ~ to live within a country without becoming ill, or dying early

• Economic security– Access to employment and/or other forms of

welfare

• Rule of law and defense institutions that ensure safety ~ police, judiciary, military

Participation & Voice ~ Who Governs? Why? How?

• Power, wealth, and “voice” concentrated at the center ~ national governments & elites– Weak or no accountability to non-elites, women,

marginalized groups

• Governments generally fail to:– Offer and sustain vision-driven leadership– Demonstrate a public service ethos– Manage equitable distribution– Facilitate local participation– Listen to non-elite citizens

Participation and Inclusion ~ 1

• In conditions of scarcity, who ought to decide:– What “good” development and “good” governance

mean – What the obligations of good governance impose,

and when they must be met – What should be done when “good governance”

values clash with other values • Where’s the balance?

– Popular participation in governance vs. representative democratic institutions of government vs. elite control

– Hijacking or manipulating public participation

Participation and Inclusion ~ 2

• Is meaningful popular participation in decision-making a realistic expectation?– expensive, prolonged, subject to failure

– who identifies the “stakeholders”? on what basis? who is excluded? why? with what mandate?

• Does donor-facilitated “stakeholder participation” reflect accurate demographic and power realities?

Moral Visibility

• Illustrative moral and ethical dimensions:– freedoms and opportunities ~ who enjoys?– land ownership & access rights ~ who controls?– environmental/ecological integrity ~ who profits?– inequitable distribution ~ “trickle down”– rights of vulnerable & marginalized minorities– democracy, deliberation, and participation – gender equality and women’s empowerment– reducing corruption and promoting integrity– mitigating/preventing violent conflict – caring about people and the environment– modeling public service

Ideals ~ 1

• Social justice– Fair, even-handed treatment of all individuals and

groups within a society– Prerequisite for the achievement of human

flourishing

• Rasmussen

• Care– The “caring relationship” between self and others

• Gilligan

Ideals ~ 2

• Distributive justice– On what basis should social institutions distribute

burdens and benefits? Enforced how?• John Rawls

• Civic virtue, integrity, transformative leadership, “followership”

• Aristotle• Joanne Ciulla

• Human rights and freedoms • Amartya Sen

Reality Check

• “Survival takes priority over dignity”– Margalit

• Political leadership in the South is often top-down or even autocratic – Neither accountable nor inclusive– Seldom issues-driven

• Power prevails over principles– Low public expectations of integrity– Thin view of the “public good”, weak social capital– Large segments of the population (women) lack

voice

Development … For What?

• Ideals of human and social well-being• The “decent society” ~ honor in equal

measure = universal human dignity– Margalit

• Respecting what is “truly human” – Rousseau, Kant, Nussbaum, Sen

• Achieving freedom and human agency– Sen, Crocker

OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES

core methodology of normative analysis

Five Objections

1) Moral issues are largely arbitrary and subjective in nature, changing in scope and intensity

2) Seeking common ground on moral concerns risks upsetting the status quo

3) The quality of a moral dialogue on substantive issues depends upon uncommon tolerance, reflection, mutual respect, and a deliberative ethos ~ rare in governance processes

4) Moral values and systems are largely unreliable in policy making ~ universalism vs. relativism

5) Moral values are extremely difficult to measure, monitor and evaluate

Response to #1

moral issues are largely arbitrary and subjective in nature, changing in scope and intensity•Morality is not arbitrary

– persuasively justified and rational– ethics is the systematic and critical study of moral

beliefs, values and concerns •In ethics, our values and beliefs are organized into various (and to some extent, competing) systems, each of which exhibits coherence and matches our considered judgments and deeply felt beliefs

Response to #2

seeking common ground on moral concerns risks upsetting the status quo•Yes ~ attending to moral concerns risks upsetting the status quo by thoughtfully challenging the existing economic and power relationships within any given society •The existence of widespread poverty, corruption, injustice, and the lack of universal respect for human dignity demand such a challenge

Response to #3

the quality of a moral dialogue on substantive issues depends upon uncommon tolerance, reflection, mutual respect, and a deliberative ethos•If this claim were accepted, it would be difficult to imagine a society’s moral progress over time•Leadership of morally virtuous persons is not a necessary condition to progress•The application of an ethical framework to the participatory process may facilitate a moral dialogue of substance and quality

Response to #4

moral values and systems are largely unreliable in policy making•Certain values are universal and fundamental to human nature

– e.g. Universal Declaration of Human Rights

•Local culture, tradition, and context ought to significantly influence and shape the implementation of development initiatives

– provided they are responsive to universal values

Response to #5moral values are extremely difficult to measure, monitor and evaluate•Empirical data says much about progress in achieving morally desirable goals

– birth weight of babies ~ a good proxy for measuring shortcomings in quality of life and the need for better nutrition and health care

•Qualitative factors are subject to meaningful evaluation through a variety of techniques, from focus groups to surveys

– the experience of poverty, the enjoyment of basic freedoms and opportunities, and the prevalence of respect for human dignity