On the subject of a Civil War II or Re-Revolution, it occurs
to me that I should lay down some ground rules if you want to be on our side,
in the case that non-violent resistance does not work.
One very simple moral principle is that children before the
age of reason are intrinsically innocent. So that means at the very least none
younger than high-school age, and therefore no shooting up any place where
pre-teens may reasonably be expected.
Another logical consequence is that bombs are inherently
immoral, because you do not know who may be hit by them. I suppose the moral
calculus is more complicated for actual bombardiers in a theater of war, but
that is not what we’re talking about. So don’t.
And if I have to explain to you why torture is unacceptable,
then you should just go and be a leftist. I’m sure that they’ll welcome you
with open arms. But here we follow Jesus.
After that, things get fuzzier. But only necessary wars are
just. If you coulda maintained your autonomy elsewise, then you shoulda done
that instead.
So if non-violent resistance can recover self-rule, then
none of the rest even matters. But I figured that I should lay it all out explicitly just in case, since half of all people are even dumber than the median.
Yeah, it's inevitable that we'll get a lot of well-intentioned but immature and/or stupid actors in this "thing." It's gonna be messy.
ReplyDeleteNormally non sociopaths wouldn't need a handbook for their own nature. So, really for potential sociopaths?
ReplyDeleteAs for torture, it in some places overlaps with the scale of violence that is corporeal punishment.
So, yes, you'll have to explain why you find torture intrinsically immoral. While mercy is in-line with what is shown to us by God, mercy in both cases is only appropriate with repentance, so you can't claim that one must be absolutely merciful to someone just because one has power over them. Forgiveness cannot be received without the admission of sin.
Perhaps I'm looking at this the wrong way?
@AA:
ReplyDeleteOkay, point taken about the title.
"A Few of the Necessary (But Not Sufficient) Prohibitions for Social Acceptance by Normal People"
"A Slapdash Application of Just War Theory to 4G/Revolutionary War"
"How to Not Be Evil: A Primer"
As for torture, that is interesting to look at it as on a spectrum with corporeal punishment. But the place where they would overlap is by definition still within the realm of punishment, which implies that they're under your authority. So that would not apply to insurgents attacking their enemies.
And for people within your authority, you should be able to tell the difference between making sure he still feels it in the morning (like Singapore), and making it horrific (like Daesh). Maiming, mutilation, and disabling are clear, bright lines.
If you want to look at it as justified authority or not, society's opinion has no bearing on justice. Authority can be seen either as a function of human power or divine providence. If it is seen as a function of human power then the insurgent should surrender in the first place. If it is by divine providence then the insurgent may well be the authority.
ReplyDeleteAs for making it hurt versus maiming, I agree that ideally no or minimal damage is caused by punishment that is intended only for the individual being punished. If however the punishment is intended primarily for the edification of others, the opposite is required.
Better dissuaded than punished, better pained than maimed, better hamstrung than dead, better one dead enemy than many allies.
Weakness necessitates extremity while strength allows for mercy. No matter how we might wish, we are not always strong. Measures are no lines, only justice is, and mercy where it can be afforded.
For the first point, society's opinion absolutely matters for the moral level of war.
ReplyDeleteFor the second point, punishment for the edification of others would mostly teach them that you're a horrible person.
I actually disagree with "better hamstrung than dead." An individual might prefer it, but I would not like to live in a society that even considered the choice. If what they did was really that bad, then just hang them, take them out of the gene pool, and be done with it.
And for the final point, I think it is good for us to be like the wolf in John C. Wright's "Moth & Cobweb" series, that always sees his enemy as surrounded, because there are wolves all over the world. You can't necessarily become a wolf by thinking and acting like one, but it does unfortunately work that way for rabbits.
The "moral" level of war you speak of has nothing to do with justice, Kemosabe. Is authority determined by man or God?
ReplyDeleteFor the second point, while there are many other examples, what is: execution. Horrible person? They don't get to pass ultimate judgement on me any more than I do on them. I'm already a horrible racist nationalist cis white male-chauvinist homophobe transphobe anti-semite according to some people, and it would diminish me to care beyond punishing them for those deceits when I get the opportunity.
The hamstrung example is based on actual war. It's already not a single society if there's a reason for it. Hamstringing is to make is so that someone can't run, and thus, broadly speaking, can't participate in combat without paying with their lives. No raids, no skirmishes, no hit and run.
As for the wolf example, it's not a matter of perception. It's a matter of mercy versus vanity. Teleologically so. If you provide a mercy you could not afford and it comes back to bite, that was never you being merciful, that was you being vain. Truth requires just that. If someone is *actually* weak they should act like it.
I'm satisfied that we understand each other's positions, and you've given me some food for thought to chew on. Thanks!
DeleteThank you for the discussion as well!
DeleteThoughtful consideration of such unthinkable possibilities might just do justice by way of preparation for helter skelter.
ReplyDeleteAmong some friends of like mind, I shared that I was ABSOLUTELY sure what I was willing to die for; but that I was not at all sure what I was willing to KILL for.
Don't worry, they assured me; you'll know -- WHEN THE TIME COMES.
I like that. Kinda reassuring. Reminds we to walk by faith, trust the Holy Ghost; not by sight, even IR at most.
And, adding your input will multiply my force of will. Thanks, and God bless.
Hmm, torture is effective.
ReplyDeleteAs the truth seeking tool for the counter-inteligence as well as the means of punishing the vicked. Hanging an abortionist with 100+ kids on hist list seems to be an empty gesture.
A TheKurgan once said: the most humane way to go is to be burned at the stake. Thet way the burnee has the time to reflec on his sins and ask the God for mercy.