I always hear that a 'moral society' is not easily dominated.. can someone elaborate on that for me?

[oneview]

Originally Posted by jane doe

....

oneview, can you define your phrase "cold blooded reality". Are you referencing it to an opposite status or a similiar status?

Has to do with - the outside world around.
Being, what one is confronted with, by other interests around,
as one goes along - its' own "merry way".

The - extreme interests - of any established world about:
that one - incorporates - in itself - to see the - light of day - instead.

Has nothing to do with - one - will - make the world, more suitable.
It appears to be - the outlook - from early on in life.

Even though one can - seemingly - live out ones' life - with no real "ado" -
confrontation abounds - and would have to be - dealt with - by anyone.
As one strives to accomplish the "seemingly impossible".

[HagarHorrible]

With good morals, one must also have accountability, responsibility and discipline.

As you state the example of a corrupt politician, if the constituency does not hold the person accountable to those immoral acts, he can stay in that position unless some body remove the person by force.

The again, if the person has allies with very strong weapons/technologies to over-power the community, then they will get dominated. Our biggest problem in human-kind has been that the majority of people does not "get" the right morality/responsibility/accountability/disciple when we reach a certain age. Our society would not be this way, if hypothetically every human "gets it" when they are 18 years old.
We all grow and learn fairly differently such that in our early years, we are very gullible to all sorts of wrong influences. Thanks goodness the majority of people are not violent!.