Rudy Giuliani’s personal life – especially his very public second divorce – is getting a lot of attention:

Larry Sabato, a political scientist at the University of Virginia,
said that a messy personal life can raise questions about a candidate’s
stability, judgment and ability to govern. Then again, some presidents
with hidden, unorthodox lives managed to run the country quite well — Franklin Delano Roosevelt, for instance.

In
Mr. Giuliani’s case, his personal history is bound to matter, Mr.
Sabato predicted: “Multiple marriages and multiple divorces with
unhappy families still presents a problem to both parties, especially
the Republican party. It’s not divorce, it’s the nature of the divorce.”

      I tend to be one of those people who think that a politician’s personal life is not particularly important for judging his or her professional competence.  When I assess Giuliani, I think about his policy positions, not his family life.   His imperious executive leadership style would also figure in my calculations.  I do not want him to be president, but that has little to do with this family life.

      For a modern-day Confucian, however, questions of marital fidelity and family obligations would be very relevant.  Political leadership is, for Confucius, a matter of exemplary ethical behavior.  The morally good should lead, and they should lead by the example of their moral goodness.  The first and foremost duties for all people are those associated with the daily cultivation of our closest loving relationships, usually defined in terms of family.  Good leaders must first be good children to their parents, good parents to their children, good spouses to their spouses, and good friends to their friends.  If these intimate relationships are sacrificed for other purposes, then the person doing that sort of sacrificing is not good and should not lead:

Lord Chi K’ang asked Confucius about government, and Confucius said: "Utter rectitude is utter government.  If you let rectitude lead the people, how could anyone fail to be rectified?" (7.17)

The Master said: "A ruler who has rectified himself never gives orders, and all goes well.  A ruler who has not rectified himself gives orders, and the people never follow them." (13.6)

      For a Confucian, being a political leader is not a just dessert for the morally good person.  Rather it is the best means for attaining efficient and good government.  When the good rule, others learn how to be good in their own lives, and, thus, there is less need for the whole apparatus of government.  Who needs an unwieldy bureaucracy when everyone – or, at least, a politically significant portion of the population – is living morally good lives by following the righteous leader? 

      Confucianism is thus a small government political philosophy.  Its resonance with American conservatism is obvious.  But to American conservatives a modern Confucian would say: divorce and adultery matter.  If you want to get to the small government/good government ideal, you have to walk the ethical walk, and not just talk the ethical talk.  Take a seat Mr. Giuliani. 

The Master said: "In their dealings with all beneath Heaven, the noble-minded do not themselves favor some things and oppose others.  They form judgments according to Duty." (4.10)