Seductions of power: Political irresponsibility and the theory of dirty hands

Many prominent writers on political ethics suggest that refusing to employ violence and force when required is a mark of political irresponsibility given the specific demands and obligations of holding high political office. Such judgements fuel the theory of dirty hands, which famously holds that admirable politicians will sometimes have to commit or commission grave moral wrongdoing. Drawing on Bernard Williams's discussion of the audience of political philosophy, I suggest that the normative, action-guiding claims that the theory of dirty hands is standardly said to deliver are, ironically, likely to encourage dangerous forms of political irresponsibility. On the one hand, if the theory is intended to guide the action of high-ranking politicians, it is highly unclear that the responsible politician would accede to the suggestion that they must often act in ways that violate ordinary moral requirements which prohibit violent acts. On the other hand, if the theory is intended to improve the political judgements that citizens make about high-ranking politicians, it conflicts with a series of underlying political attitudes that responsible citizens will display.