Bad news buddy. Ethics are politics. If anything politics is the warfare for the implementation of ethics. You can’t be ethical yet unwilling to enforce your ethics, and the only way to do that is to engage in politics. That’s just the only way to influence the behavior of other human beings.

The worse part is that tech culture has failed to understand that all and any technology is part of the conflict to define politics. Whether you like it or not. Anything that involves a person besides yourself is political, because humans are political animals.

Maybe denotatively. But, while politics always involves ethical questions, not all ethics are politics; at least not by all meanings of politics. I’m not trying to argue, because I get what you’re saying, but I do think it is possible to categorize them at least slightly differently. Otherwise, we wouldn’t need both words.

Politics typically has to do with power, and specifically via governance. Ethics can easily have to do with how I feel something should be valued even if not by political force.

If I say I’m not going to do something that isn’t otherwise required of me because of my ethical stance, I need not engage in politics to protect that. Others may do so to force me, but that is adding politics to an existing question only in the domain of ethics until challenged. Anyway, I think you’re right. I’m just clarifying what I meant.

Hm I would disagree. Ethics is something introvertive while politics is the extroversive. So you can do ethics without politics but not politics without ethics

I think you might mean “partisan” rather than political. Ethics is always political.