The Moral Authority of Hitler and Kaine

Some contemporary politicians effectively wish to dispense with morality. 

In a recent interview vice-presidential candidate Tim Kaine said that 'people can make their own moral decisions-so did Adolph Hitler on his own moral authority. The idea that evil actions are moral decisions rather than immoral decisions require an oxymoronic regard negating the moral paradigm lest one assume that every decision is a moral one. Moral decisions are bracketed by universe of immoral decisions.

Morality is not set individually any more than language is created individually. It is a social phenomena. Morality is a description of what people of a society actually do. If their ethics are fundamentally, preponderantly immoral then the society can be said to be an immoral one. People have the choice of obeying or not social morality and moral norms.

Marcus Tullius Cicero wrote a treatise on natural law. He believed that nature itself has an implicit morality to wherein moral people must cohere. Cicero provided an example of the unnatural death of youth being wrong. He might have cited child sacrifice to Moloch as naturally wrong, whereas to Tim Kaine and Adolph Hitler that would be a personal moral choice.

It might be argued that personal moral decisions that do not involve others are in a realm wherein an individual has absolute moral authority. However decisions that do not involve other people in society at all-and even suicide involves others-would not be moral questions.

The Ten Commandments are not set individually. One may choose to follow or break the ten commandments yet one cannot create or uncreate the moral authority that provided them. Christians and Jews believe God provided the ten moral commandments. Tim Kaine might think that the ten commandments have no more moral authority than his own and that he and each individual should write in effect, their own commandments, disregard those of God and decide if they will or will not break them. If Tim Kaine and society did follow the course of creating and structuring their own moral authority exclusively it might be said that society was in a state of moral anarchy. When the Bible says 'thou shalt not kill', one cannot make a moral judgment of the commandment with personal authority. It is only possible to make an ethical decision to obey or disregard the commandment.

Moral norms are empirical facts describing concatenated mass social behavior. Individuals may use their own ethics that are decisive in following or breaking moral norms for whatever reason, however the moral paradigm is socially constructed or evolved, provided by divine providence etc.

I believe that in this age of fracture the destruction of conventional moral norms by democrat and Corporate party leadership is basically motivated to provide no resistance to the accumulation of wealth and power by one percent of the populous globally. With a doped up and immoral social order corrupt leadership would be more at home. When the environment breaks down too far and overpopulation or rebellion challenges the elite's position an immoral social order would provide less resistance to their mass destruction by elite that would a priori be a logical goal of a post-apocalyptic new world order.