About the Integrity Meter

HOME | About Us | Communities | Contact Us | Contribute | Search | Links |

GLOBAL DIALOG PROJECT | PREVIOUS ISSUES: 4.Democracy, Civil Liberties, and Freedom 3.The 21st Century Question: What Next? 2. Ripples of the Events of 911 1. The Initial Vision

NEWS | QUOTES | INTEGRITYMETER | FREEDOM | HUMOR | YOUR VOICE

CLICK HERE FOR DASHBOARD to post humor/thoughts/quotes/evidence/rants/insights!

Precepts of The Global Dialog Project Why Integrity Is Important Now About the IntegrityMeter The IntegrityMeter: 1. Rating The Bush Administration's Integrity to the United States Constitution | About the IntegrityMeter: Quantifying the Lesser of Two Evils Unfortunately, many times when we must make a decision, it is not about the best choice, but about which choice will do less harm: which is the lesser of two evils? There are many things that can go into that equation, but in terms of foundational principles, comparing the integrity of the choices - to our promises, our principles, and our future - is a good place to start. But how do we define integrity? Is integrity above loyalty, above party or sides in a war? Is integrity the same as resoluteness or even stubbornness? Is it sticking to what you believe regardless of the evidence? Does it take more integrity to admit you were wrong and so claim the power to change the situation? Have we confused the refusal to back down, or even strength, with integrity? Or does it take higher integrity to admit your judgements were mistaken, so you don’t drive the car off the ledge just to ‘prove’ you’re right about the road you’re on? It is time to build some shared cultural infrastructure to discuss and assess these issues . This societal meta-structure would have the aim of holding American leaders, actions, and institutions to their claims and promises. It would be a structure to organize information in a nonpartisan way, one that enables all points of view to contribute, but with all components dependent on facts and experience rather than unsourced or unquestioned assumptions. It would not be the province of specialists nor of a particular view. Like the Constitution, it would be a framework to measure ourselves against and hold ourselves to. The basis for the IntegrityMeter is that it is time for We the People to examine and investigate the evidence, source the facts, compare statements, and do the job the media is not doing. One function of the media is to support Integrity of information- but in general they have completely fallen down on their job, do little or no fact-checking, and present campaign spin as truth without questioning its basis or intention. To some extent, the internet and its bloggers are doing this. But a shared and integrative effort is needed to help us understand our beliefs and assumptions, and determine if our perceptions, and thus our actions, are based on truth and integrity, or falsehood and misrepresentation. By compiling our knowledge and making explicit our standards, we can construct a set of agreed-upon principles to build a solid foundation for the future we want. Do we believe in and support truth, integrity, accountability? Or not? Inaccurate or incomplete information leads to divided perceptions among the populace – and a polarized nation. Until well-intentioned partisans, non-partisans, and multi-partisans agree on standards of truth-telling and consistent ways to hold our politicians and institutions to their claims and promises, polarization will amplify, because there is no common ground. The IntegrityMeter relies on complex systems principles that facilitate distributed and decentralized interactions by many, many people. With large numbers of people, but small effort on the part of each person, we can bring data, facts, quotes, and actions together to assess the integrity of our elected officials, of our parties and institutions, and of our actions as a country. This kind of integration is crucial far beyond the current election. Regardless of who is elected, difficult issues must be faced and innovative solutions found. How to stem the tide of terrorism. What is the future role of the U.S. in the world – protector, bully, empire, benefactor? And perhaps most importantly, what kind of role do we want? What kind of role is consistent with basic American freedoms and principles. Americans need don’t need more information – we need more integrated knowledge, more context and political memory to match our past words with current actions, and to understand whether we, as a nation, are perceived to have integrity. Assessing Integrity Integrity can be assessed in multiple ways. There is personal integrity – a setting of internal standards that tells us when our behavior is congruent with our actions, or when we have crossed a line and must admit to being outside of alignment with our own beliefs. Sometimes it’s called character, but at its base, it is the matching of word to action, creating the consistency of a clear direction which can be assessed and whose consequences are clear. In a society, there are additional measures of integrity. The structural integrity of our democracy, for instance, was created by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, and leads to constitutional integrity. Our public officials swear to uphold it because they agree to support the integrity of something larger than themselves: our democracy, and the trust of the people – and they should be assessed on their integrity to the Constitution. Prominent also is the integrity of information - the accuracy of quotes, the context of the past, and the connections of the present which shift motivations and intentions, all hidden to the public. Without accurate and truthful and complete information, our perceptions are based on shifting sands, not the firm ground we need to choose a path of integrity. Assuming that is what we, as a people, want, of course. Lastly, we can think of integrity to something even larger - spiritual principles, human potential, the future of our planet. "Crimes against humanity" are an example wherein integrity to the largest principles and to our future, have been violated. Into this category also fall things like the support or destruction of freedom for individuals and cultures, irrevocable decisions on our environment such as nuclear testing or biological warfare, and the creation of debt we bestow to future generations. Whether we address these questions integrity to humanity and the futurein this context is up to you. On the issue of integrity rests the American justification for war, invasion, and political programs; credibility with our allies; and our own sense of self as a nation. Without integrity both individuals and nations are perceived as unreliable, hypocritical, or even despotic. But where is the firm ground – the shared ground we can stand on together in order to make principled, rather than partisan, decisions? Integrity, and its assessment, can be the shared ground we stand on. But first we as citizens must claim our own integrity, and agree that inaccurate assumptions, no matter whose, must be uncovered; that the ‘truth’ means the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth; and that mistaken judgments are to be acknowledged. Only then can we choose a path with greater integrity than one based on inaccurate information and perception, manipulation and spin.