首页> 外文期刊>Leadership >The interplay of the Dirty Hands of British area bombing and the wicked problem of defeating Nazi Germany in the Second World War - A lesson in leadership ethics
【24h】

The interplay of the Dirty Hands of British area bombing and the wicked problem of defeating Nazi Germany in the Second World War - A lesson in leadership ethics

机译:英国区域轰炸的肮脏手和击败纳粹德国的邪恶问题在第二次世界大战中 - 领导道德的课程

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

The British area bombing of Germany in the Second World War has provided for enduring ethical controversy. Eschewing conventional approaches, we present area bombing as a Dirty Hands leadership response to the Wicked Problem of Britain's wartime strategic predicament. Using historical methodology, we establish two distinct phases in area bombing: 1942-1944, when this was ethically contentious but politically necessary; and 1944-1945, which lacks a Dirty Hands legitimation. The second phase follows upon a six-month lull in area bombing during Bomber Command's assignment to Overlord (D-Day) duties. It is characterised by credible alternatives to area bombing, a waning sense of proportionality in Bomber Command activity, and intensifying death and destruction without justifiable purpose. We relate the breaching of the boundaries of Dirty Hands in Phase II to a precise date - September 1944. This coincides with the mutation of the strategic Wicked Problem into a Critical Problem, visible in the stalling of the Allied land campaign in France. Mistaking this for a Tame Problem, the C-in-C of Bomber Command, Arthur Harris, exploits the political context to escalate his commitment. Following Watters' alignment of Critical Problems with Virtue Ethics, we argue that Harris' leadership in Phase II is not consistent with Virtue Ethics (of which recognition of the boundaries of Dirty Hands is a function). Harris is the archetype of the leader who gets away with exploiting a Wicked Problem because his superiors have let down their guard. In the final instance, his failure of ethical leadership becomes their own.
机译:在第二次世界大战中德国的英国区域轰炸已经为持久的道德争议提供了良好的争议。避免常规方法,我们将区域轰炸作为对英国战时战略困境的邪恶问题的肮脏掌握领导力。使用历史方法,我们在面积轰炸中建立了两个不同的阶段:1942-1944,当这是道德上有争议但政治所必需的; 1944-1945,缺乏肮脏的手合法性。第二阶段在Bomber命令的覆盖(D-Day)职责期间六个月的区域轰炸。它的特点是可信地区轰炸的替代方案,在轰炸机的轰炸性的比例感,并在没有合理的目的的情况下加剧死亡和破坏。我们违反了第二阶段到精确的日期 - 1944年9月的违反恐慌。这一致与战略邪恶问题的突变恰逢一个关键问题,可见法国盟军竞选的停滞不前。误认为这是一个驯服问题,伯伯指挥的C-In-C亚瑟·哈里斯利用政治背景来升级他的承诺。在瓦特对德国伦理中的关键问题对齐,我们认为哈里斯在第二阶段的领导不一致与美德道德(脏手的界限的识别是一个职能的常规。哈里斯是领导者的原型,因为他的上司让他们的守卫贬低了一个邪恶的问题。在最后的例子中,他的道德领导失败成​​为自己的。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号