Dirty Hands In Politics

I will take three different understandings of politics and morality as presented by Walzer and will analyze works of Machiavelli, Weber and Camus respectively.
In the paper “Political Action: The Problem of Dirty Hands” Walzer argued that no one can govern innocently, however, there is a possibility to make the right political decision. This will be true from the utilitarian point of view despite the fact that politician who had done it would still be considered as guilty of a moral wrong.
Moreover, it would be wrong to think that dirty hands problem is occasional and not every politician faces it. On the contrary, it has systematic and frequent character (Walzer 1973:162). Then why politician as an actor is different from entrepreneur who

Servant needs to please without making limits or restrictions on people who he is serving to. In reality politician is a “visible architect of our restraints” who “taxes us, licenses us, forbids and permits us, directs us” (Walzer 1973:163). We can see that instead of possessing politician, politician possesses us and does this for his and our own good, as paradoxical as it may sound. He can even use violence or the threat of violence against us with a potential of becoming a killer. That is why Walzer presented three reasons of why there is the problem of dirty hands in politics: politician needs to serve himself in order to act for others; politician needs to rule over others to serve them; politician needs to use violence against

The decision is hard as the leader is standing for pacifism, he has publicly proclaimed his views against torture and violence, and that was one of the reasons why people voted for him. To agree on torture for him means to betray the beliefs people chose him for. Moreover, he personally is against the torture and frankly believes that it is wrong. But he is convinced that torture is a needed measure within the current situation, and by going against his own moral standing he is doing that for the sake of his people. As for the rebel, we do not know whether he is personally responsible for the terrorist campaign, and he definitely does not deserve to be