There are a few with integrity. In England, Jacob Ree-Mogg is one. In Canada's past, Lester Pearson and Tommy Douglas were other examples.

@PBuck0145 ,
you're going back decades. Douglas was a good example but never became PM. Pearson was elected during a time of prosperity but i can't think of anything significant he could be credited for. i think rees-mogg was a british MP. i read his book "the great reckoning". but hardly think he could be considered a successful politician who accomplished anything.

@callmedubious
[cbc.ca]

@PBuck0145 ,
didn't obama get the same prize? and that was while he continued droning innocent civilians in the ME.

If it means that I have acted in a way which benefits people and organization affected, I don't give a damn if someone calls me a snitch.

Not snitching only protects the wrong-doer.

Let us not allow the idea of moral relativity to immobilize us in doing what we need to.

@wordywalt Yes, but what is it that we need to do? I could just as easy argue that any entity doing something evil is acting in the interests of the public. After all, the holocaust was justified to be in the public's interest, and that decision was as principled as any could be.

How the question is, how can you ever be sure that you are right?

@Happy_Killbot In the first case, I was a high school teacher and wanted our school to be a better school, but the principal's leadership was so ineffective that he was hurting the school and its students. In the second case, my actions were based on both informed experience and thorough knowledge of current educational research, and a better awareness of the nature of the school districts I served. My board overruled my boss and approved the directions I wanted m program to move. Actual positive results which received both state and national recognition, proved that I was right.

The third case was based on the observed function and structure of a state organization, on that same knowledge of educational research, and on research on effective organizations. The fourth action was based on that same body of knowledge and experience, contrasted with what the organization was actually doing, and on clearly fraudulent and illegal action by the larger organization. I am certain that I was right in all four cases.

@wordywalt I don't think you are grasping what I am trying to convey. Anything that is "right" in terms of future or present action has to be based on some arbitrary goal. If that goal is to make the school's leadership more effective, then replacing the president may be "right" but if your goal is to progress your own personal agenda, then having marginally effective policies may be "right"

My point is that not everyone's goals are aligned and they are completely arbitrary, and I believe morality is relative. This means your stated goal "increase morality in leadership roles" is also relative. So what is "right" to you may or may not be "right" to someone else.

@Happy_Killbot your evolution on what is ‘right,’ has little value... if anything is acceptable according to the person! Social norms may be different in other societies, but even there you will find right and wrong determined by what is collectively acceptable!

@Freedompath That's exactly what I'm trying to say. There is no value in doing the right thing because what is right is relative, and can more or less be whatever you want.

@Happy_Killbot that is contrary to what I am saying...only a narcissist does everything right! My self respect is the only thing that I can count on...so I figure out what does the least amount of harm to my fellowman and this planet! I am not here to waste my existence.

@Freedompath And what happens when what you think is right isn't? I am not here to waste other people's existence trying to make them conform to my view of what is right and wrong

@Happy_Killbot then you appear to not know what hurts your fellowman...aside from accountability, if it hurts other humans, then it is the wrong thing to do! If it is destroying our planet that we need to survive as humans, then it is wrong! This sounds black and white but it isn’t! I have a need to leave everything the way I found it or better! And, every human being is a person...and I intend to honor that life! To hurt them is wrong! For others to hurt me is wrong...

@Freedompath So what about a doctor who has to cut someone open in order to save them?

What about the farmer who has to cut down a forest in order to form new land so that people can eat?

What about the soldier who has to defend his country against foreign invaders?

Not only is this not black and white, this can't even be put on a spectrum.

Just because people are okay with something doesn't make it right.

Just because people are not okay with something doesn't make it wrong.

Like time and space it is relative.

@Happy_Killbot I am a human being...not an animal that does not evaluate...and I know from experience that the only humans that do not evaluate right and wrong...is the narcissist and the sociopath personality...I am not one of them. If you need to justify your own life, with no right nor wrong, then what comes out of that is your responsibility.

@Freedompath If you don't think morality is relative, you really need to consider the evidence. There are thousands of cultures, all with there different set of "right" and "wrong" and within them millions of individuals who also have there own personal set of "right" and "wrong"

[philosophersmag.com]

This idea of moral absolutism has been propagated by religious authorities for centuries because it's the only way they can justify that what they claim to be the way people should behave is how people should actually behave.

The irony here is that only the arrogance of a narcissist could consider there own personal set of morals should apply to everyone else.

[quora.com]