MIDTERM HANDOUT (IAH 231B – SPRING 2012)HANDOUT ON MIDTERM: The exam will consist of 35 multiple-choice/true-false questions, but only your best 33 answers will count. You will receive an extra point for taking the test, for a potential total of 100. There is no penalty for guessing. The course handouts should “guide” your study, as we will explain. We will highlight aspects of the Glossary that are relevant. The purpose of this test is to make sure you arefollowing the reading. The midterm will NOT include anything from Protect and Defend. Material from the films we have sampled will be relevant. I will briefly summarize the “points” of the various film clipswe have watched below. For your reference, the films include: G.I. Jane, The Majestic, The Verdict, Network, Swordfish, The Sum of All Fears, “The Measure of a Man,” All the Kings Men, The Corporation, Dangerous Beauty, Iron Jawed Angels, “Unfinished Business,” Last of the Mohicans, Network.The focus of the course is "ethical dilemmas in government decision making." The first two texts of the course frame this overall focus in the context of a democratic society. Nathanson analyzes the main justifications for government authority, ending with an appeal that we become “critical citizens.” Nathanson does not, however, provide (what I regard as) satisfactory criteria for “critical citizenship.” To do that seems to entail a more detailed study of “distributive justice”—the standard for fair distribution of society’s benefits and burdens. Okin deals with this issue, with special emphasis on the relation of traditional concepts of justice to the roll(s) of women in society. We will find that justice isinexorably tied to rights. The section of the Glossary that deals with Rawls is in play for this exam. BRIEF SUMMARIES OF THE MAIN POINTS OF FILM CLIPS WE HAVE SEENNetwork includes a very powerful scene in which Ned Beady (as a media CEO) tells Howard Beal that there are no governments—just IBM, Exon, and other big corporations. The film calls attention both to the way news is managed and to the close connection between government and large corporations. Democracy, I (and others) have argued, requires that a wide variety of views be presented in the national media. Otherwise, the media become propagandists for some particular view or small range of views. This message is very important for our course on the ethical issues involved in government decision-making.In the scene we saw from Swordfish, Hugh Jackman is challenged by John Travolta to decide whether he (Jackman) could kill one innocent child to wipe our all the world’s diseases. Jackman says he could not make that decision. Travolta accuses him of hypocrisy. Travolta says that thousands die every day who could be saved. I said I thought Travolta was referring to those who die because of such things as dangerous products, pollution, government and corporate policies that deny life saving resources, and so on. This exchange highlights the difference between “utilitarian” and “deontological” ethical theories (see the Glossary), but Travolta takes the exchange to a different level (reframes it) by his reference to what we might call institutional (or structural) problems. Once these are considered, the decision of how to balance utility with rights is more complex. I leave it to you to think about this matter further. The exam can only focus on what we mention here—including the “different level” talk. Jim Carey in The Majestic confronts himself when he is called before the House Un-American Activities Committee. He has never been a “hero.” In fact, he has been the opposite. Spurred on by a letter from Luke (the dead WWII soldier from Lawson CA with whom he was confused when he got amnesia) and the copy of the U.S. Constitution Luke’s former fiancée has her father give him, Carey confronts the committee and challenges them to live up to the ideals on which the nation was founded—especially the First Amendment. It is noteworthy that Carey rejects the idea that the Constitution and Bill of Rights are “just contracts subject to renegotiation.” These documents, he tells the members of HUAC, have been paid for with too much blood, as he holds up Luke’s (Congressional) Medal of Honor.The speech by the nuclear terrorist in The Sum of All Fears is designed to convey the idea that “fascism”is a very real threat—but one most have dismissed because they identify it with the Nazis and Hitler’s totalitarian Third Reich. But the classic definition of ‘fascism’ refers to a state in which government and business come together. (Fascists have sometimes been referred to as “corpos.”) I don’t suggest the U.S. is a fascist state; I do suggest that it could become one. The price of freedom, as has often been repeated, is eternal vigilance. I believe this is especially true today. At the end of this statement you will find a summary, by political scientist Lawrence Britt, of the basic tenets of fascist states. To compile his list, Britt examined the fascist regimes of Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia) and several Latin American regimes.All the King’s Men includes a speech by Willie Stark (who is supposed to be Huey Long) in which he breaks free from the politicians who had (without his knowledge) enlisted him to split the vote of poor people in Louisiana so that the candidate of the wealthy and well heeled can win. That speech morphs into a series of speechs with the same theme. I showed this clip to let you see the power of oratory—especially when it carries the ring of truth. Franklin Rooselvelt called Long the second most dangerous person in the U.S. largely because of his ability to rouse people with oratory like this. The question I ask you is this: In the age of 24/7 TV and Internet, is it a single person we should be concerned about or thosebehind the scenes who manipulate what the rest of us see and hear—those who “manufacture consent” by constant repetition of things that are largely false.The Corporation expresses the following things to remember for this test: (1) The large (publicly held) corporation is probably the dominant social institution of our times. (2) Such entities are “legal persons” but not members of the moral community, so the usual moral categories simply do not apply to them (any more than they