I am asking this a as generally broad question. Generally speaking, does the end justify the means? I am leaving this intentionally vague as I am more interested in the mindset, and not specific examples.
It's too broad and open-ended in nature for me to take the poll, but I will answer as best I can in this reply. I have been pointing out for years now that at some point in their ideological devolution the Dem Party's leadership and their elite movers and shakers flushed the concepts of ethics, honor, and integrity to embrace the philosophy of 'the political ends justifies the means'. Obviously if one believes in ethics, honor, and integrity then this philosphy is wrong, but if one believes in winning, period, then it is undeniable that it generally works; especially since the nation's political Left gained almost total control of public education, colleges and universities, most media outlets, and the entertainment industry, pretty much across the board. They mostly control the political narrative in this nation. They are NEVER held to account for acting on their -- apparently -- preferred ideological philosophy. So mostly, they win by the leadership having adopted this means to an end.
Yeah, I can't really take the poll, either. In an ideal world (which has never existed) the 'ends' never justify the 'means'. But, in other somewhat-related contexts, it's valid to observe that "you reap what you sow". If you "sow" good stuff (whatever the hell that really is), then yes, it's fine to "reap" the results, and, in that sense, the end does justify (JUSTIFY) the means. Overall, it's just a bit too 'airy-fairy' for me, though. Very little in politics is 'egalitarian' in nature, so the whole argument is poxed from the beginning.
