Arrested Development and Philosophy_ They've Made a Huge Mistake - Kristopher G. Phillips [83]
In addition to securing things we need, governments may be in a better position to discharge moral duties that would otherwise depend on personal contributions. If the many unworthy causes Lindsay stumps for are any indication, private efforts to meet moral duties sometimes fall short. After all, people would rather donate to the imaginary disease T.B.A. than the very real Graft-Versus-Host which is affecting Tobias. Governments potentially do better in both identifying the real problem areas—things other than T.B.A.—and channeling resources to the real problems.
In addition to channeling resources, governments can secure rights better than individuals. We probably have a duty to ensure that people aren’t discriminated against in the workplace. While individuals can exert some social pressure to prevent discrimination, the U.S. government can impose stiff penalties, enough to “redo a kitchen,” in the process safeguarding the workplace for homosexuals against the antics of people like Barry Zuckerkorn. In order for the government to provide these services, however, it needs to have the power to keep us in line.
So, on the instrumental approach, the basis of our political obligations centers on the fact that government or political institutions are the most efficient means for securing public goods, like national defense, or meeting our moral duties, like charity or securing basic rights. What’s bad about treason is that it attempts to undermine or subvert this efficient mechanism. This approach to obligation, however, doesn’t provide a strong basis for criticizing many actions that fall under our understanding of passive-aggressive treason. While building model homes in Iraq may aid the enemy, it doesn’t seem to provide any direct support for Saddam in a way that undermines or threatens the ability of the United States to secure public goods or meet moral duties. On the instrumental account, George Sr. violates the legal definition of treason, but he does so in a way that isn’t particularly problematic. That is, he aids the enemy in a way that doesn’t undermine the basic projects that generate our duties or obligations to our government and fellow citizens.
As George Sr.’s case brings out, if the basis of our special obligation to our country and compatriots follows from the fact that our government can serve as an efficient means to our moral ends, then most acts that meet the legal definition of treason may not be as bad as non-treasonous crimes. Whether buying Gob a yacht with company money or lining the walls of the banana stand with cash, the Bluth Company consistently keeps money off the books and tries to hide it from the government. Unlike building the mini-palaces in Iraq, withholding money owed to the government directly impacts the government’s ability to secure public goods or safeguard rights. By withholding taxes, the Bluth Company fails to contribute to the country’s collective projects. Without money, the government can’t work to secure our borders or secure the rights of minorities in the workplace. These ends, which make government worthwhile and provide the basis for our political obligation, require contributions to the government. On the instrumental account, hiding that money in the banana stand (much less burning it) seems worse than committing passive-aggressive treason by building mini-palaces in Iraq.
The Relational Approach
The second approach to political obligation explains why Americans have a unique obligation to fellow Americans in terms of the nature of the special relationship we have with one another. The relational approach extends the idea of family obligations to the community of the state. Rather than look at the kinds of things the government can do (like the instrumental approach), the relational approach locates the basis of our obligations to fellow citizens in the nature of our relationships