Wednesday, 17 August 2011
The Fallacy of "Just War Theory"
There is no such thing as 'just war'. The victims of war are mostly civilians and war is intended to destroy that which nature and man build. A hollow endeavor to differentiate between morally justifiable (and/or humane) wars versus those that are elective, can be avoided and are carried out with intent to destroy and exert hegemony, just war theory is a farce that politicians and morally bankrupt academics, journalists and priests have devised to justify mass destruction and mass murder.
World War I, for example was 'elective or war of choice', while WWII was unavoidable, the argument goes. The idea here is that in WWI all sides more or less wanted a conflict and thus had the moral burden of starting the war, no matter what the US, France and England decided at the end of the war about blaming Germany alone for starting the war. By the same token, the 'Wars of Imperialism' were also wars of choice where a militarily powerful nation attacked smaller countries in order to impose hegemony. Without consideration for the victims of war and imperialism, the hegemonic powers tried to justify their destructive quest on the basis that they were 'civilizing' the non-white population.
WWII by contrast was apparently an 'unavoidable war', the good war, as far as apologists of 'just war theory' are concerned, because its goal was to stop evil that existed in Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy and Imperial Japan. Morally, people could feel good about WWII because it stopped a greater evil from spreading. Would it have been morally acceptable to do nothing against the Axis? Of course not. Popular resistance against the Axis would have resulted in the eventual demise of the regimes, and perhaps in far less destruction than conventional war.
Thucydides was right that the Melians did the honorable thing during the "dialogue" with imperialist Athens that tried to convince the Melians why war against Sparta was the only option - the other option was death and slavery. War is by nature evil, and even the so-called 'necessary war' (or "Good War", as Studs Terkel labeled it) against the Axis falls in the same category, no matter what justifications and practical considerations go into 'defense apologias'. People become lost in the adventure and enthusiasm for power, so mesmerized that destruction is merely part of the game (war) and that is all that matters. Such people are morally bankrupt, dead inside, nothing to offer the world, so they seek to destroy, because they lack any creative potential intended to contribute to humanity.
The fallacy of 'Just War Theory' is that some wars can be justified.The reality is that the end result in just and unjust wars is the same. WWII had more than twice the victims that the unjust WWI had. 'Just war theory' conceals a belligerent will bent on satisfying the irrational quest for power and hegemony; it is a sick mind and a dead soul that tries to justify war as 'just'.