Political Authority and Morality

The leaders are accountable for their actions and behaviors, and usually do the right thing because otherwise they would have to present their case in front of the publics. Political authority seems justified when there are norms and procedures that take care of the political manifestations and when people are given what they deserve the most – democracy. In essence, it is always a good practice to make use of the political authority to understand the nuances of the Western liberal democracy. This has been demonstrated through the works of Plato, Locke and Mill. The political authority is therefore a very common concept within the political discourse as it encompasses of people from different strata of life. The political authority is a very dire requirement within the political obligations which have been questioned by the works of Plato and Aristotle, and which remain significant even in the time and age of today. It is also a fact that within democratic set ups in a number of countries around the world, there is a good amount of discussion regarding political authority in particular as its role cannot be denied its due right. Within United States, political authority has been given much emphasis because it gives freedom to the people from the domains of the government. Indeed morality is a social contract for our mutual benefit. The ethical domains need to be in line with the way people conduct their lives. This means that people should adhere to the moral righteousness and thus give in their very best with regards to the manifestation of their actions and behaviors. Morality asks of people to be fair and forthright about their dealings and be clean related with their thinking mechanisms. They must put the good of the whole society in retrospect more than their own good (Thiroux 2003). What this eventually does is to demonstrate a sense of goodwill within the society and thus the people generally look up to one another in times of help and distress. Morality is indeed a state of mind, which gets represented in a whole lot of ways. In essence, human beings are generally good natured souls, who care about one another in a very open and direct way. Yet there are some individuals who think of their own gains more than anything else. This mars the ultimate basis of stability and growth within the society and essentially hurts the cause of the society in the larger scheme of things. Thus the human beings are a combination of both good and the bad within any society. One must understand that living morally is indeed something that comes out as a very natural and clean process. It is not at all hard and strenuous by any stretch of imagination. The need is to have a proper mechanism under which morality could be represented in a variety of ways, by the people, for the people and to the people (Morgan 1983). One should take up the Kantian theory of ethics which speaks exclusively of the moral domains within any society of the world. Since Kantian theory focuses on the manifestation of ethical norms and procedures more than mere feelings and emotions of mortals, one would absolutely buy this theory on any given day. In essence personal belief systems revolve around the rationale presented by Immanuel Kant in his theory. One should believe that he has hit the nail on the head whilst referring to the details related with the moral representation of people’s dealings in day to day lives. Morality is important to the day to day situations since people view things very differently on a normal basis. If individuals start acting in a very ethical fashion, it would not be much distant when one views the entire society as a combination of good men and women within its folds. Indeed a moral system needs to be structured and very clear in its content so that people