Means and Ends

We sometimes hear formulations of the Iraq war that go like this: "Although the war has been poorly executed, it is a noble cause. " On Jonestown memorial sites, we see often the same kind of sentiment. While it is true that the experiment ended in disaster, defenders say, the followers of Jones were aspiring to ideals of classlessness and racial harmony.

Do the ends justify the means? Sometimes? Always? Never? Or is this statement meaningless?

My view: There are only means. An end that is defined as an abstraction as it almost always is makes such a cliche worthless.

Take for example civil liberties and national security and the proposition that civil liberties should be constrained to enhance national security-- a means to an end. That may be an applause line for certain audiences. But I would say that the entire sentence not only has no meaning but is dangerous until we know exactly who liberties are on the line and for what compelling reason thay must so be.

A good example of the catastrophic disconnect between means and ends (or what can be called application and principle) is the resolution to go to war in Iraq.
The authorization for the present conflict is section three of the Congressional Resolution on Iraq:

(a) AUTHORIZATION- The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to (1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and (2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.

These fuzzy statements are the legal basis for our involvement in Iraq that has resulted in so much bloodshed, the draining our of national treasury, and the erosion of US influence and prestige.

A coherent means cannot exist in the absence of a concrete and defined end.

Perhaps the proposition turns on the word justify, meaning in this context, a rational and proportionate relationship between a goal and the means whereby that goal is achieved. We don't spank a crying baby with a hatchet, for example. Of course, questions of national policy derive from this, i.e. Atomizing Hioshima --> defeat of Japan; or liberalizing abortion laws --> reduced juvenile delinquency. The policy question is of course whether these causalities really exist and even if they do exist whether they they are the best or only means to achieve those goals. Evil, it has been said, is the shadow cast by good. Or, to invoke another platitude, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Thus, it often happens that even when the goal and the means is presumed to be good and may even be good, the outcomes are nevertheless tragically evil.