The Five Stories

An Imagination for Consequences: For this section, what stood out for me is the idea that Whistleblowers imagine possibilities that eventually influence their motives to act upon certain things. For Tom who was concerned with children playing in radioactive dust, it cost him his career over what most would perceive to be a rare possibility, one in which they have no responsibility for. Tom took it upon himself to speak out against the potential danger, while for everyone else, it seemed like it was, out of sight, out of mind. In this story the quote of “belonging to” stood out most for me because as Alford quoted, “Regardless of circumstances, chimpanzees, moneys, and humans cannot readily exit the group to which they belong. The double meaning of ‘belonging to’ says it all: they are part of and possessed by the group” (68). The way I interpreted this was that, Tom could not separate himself from those who were technically, actually responsible for cleaning the abandoned research site. By including himself in that group, he couldn’t separate the responsibilities from himself, and by speaking out against their failure to do so, he would be separating himself from the group of the company. In this case, his responsibility seemed to overpower his sense of security. A Sense of the Historical Moment: The way I perceived the story of this section was that, for Whistleblowers, if they are present when a duty calls upon itself, a sacrifice will be made for the greater good. In this situation, Joe was caught between Medicare fraud and the truth. He was being asked to lie about something that, presumably, didn’t affect him in any way aside from his sense of duty that led him to blow the whistle. His moral decision to do what he felt was just cost him his job. Joe goes on to say that, “If any of my brothers or sisters had been in the same situation, they’d have done the same thing. But they weren’t. It was my bad luck to be the one to have to pay the price.” (69). Basically, he was lowering himself from the role of a righteous hero, being a victim of circumstance. Identification with the Victim: “…I didn’t even know our clients’ names, but I had to choose. Only it wasn’t really a choice, you know, more like an ultimatum I gave myself.” (69). In this case, Anna had realized what her company had been doing. As it was later put in the text, she was choosing between “the executioner or the victim.” Anna saw that what he company had been doing to their clients was morally unjust, and that was enough to severe her long time relationships. As it seems, she was unable to comply with the “executioner” because the victim was being wrongly “executed”. The unfairness of this predicament led her to side with the victim, making a sacrifice. This characteristic is a part of her personality, a personality she had been developing through experience leading up to that moment. “What marks a historical moment is that suddenly it is, and we have to choose, suddenly to find that we have already made the choice a thousand times before in similar, less dramatic situations, even if we did not know it at the time. Not Very Good at Doubling: This section suggests that Whistleblowers are not good at detaching themselves in situations. They are incapable of consciously allowing an injustice to occur, regardless as to whether or not it pertains to them. “Doubling” is explained as almost living two different lives and I find this interesting because people develop “split personalities” in order to deal with various situations. “What is right in the corporation is not what is right in a man’s home or in his church. What is right in the corporation is what the guy above you wants from you. That’s what morality is in the corporation.” (72). Another interesting thing that stood out to me in this story is that he doesn’t explain it further as he suggests he could, but rather notes that it is a requirement to live in the modern world. A Sense of Shame: I find this story especially interesting because from an outside view, the Whistleblowers feel shame, but not for what someone may perceive from the outside looking in. “’Because I was part of that world…’ he said. He does not mean that he cannot separate herself from those who did.” (73). In this case, Alford explains how Whistleblowers feel shame from actions that are not of their own doing. The shame comes from guilt, which is said to be the “internalization of fear”. This, I believe, comes from the concept that wrong doing can and will be done by unjust people. “Shame’s origins in feelings of doubt and weakness about one’s goodness help explain the close relationship between shame and narcissism.” (74). e