The Nature of Government

(Originally written July 20, 2006 in Book 3)

The Nature of Government
Ayn Rand

Linehan - with all the disagreements I have with Rand, our differences on the role of government seem to differ in only a minor way.

A government holds the exclusive power to enforce certain rules of social conduct.

Man needs government because a social environment is most conducive to the acquisition of knowledge.

Knowledge and trade are two great values gained through society.

Not all societies afford this, only rational, productive, independent men in a rational, productive and free society afford trade and knowledge.

Man's rights are only violated by physical force.

A government is to keep physical force from being implemented in social contracts or arrangements.

But, even though initiating physical force is a moral evil, retaliation with physical force is a moral imperative.

Retaliatory force requires objective evidence for it to be used. Otherwise retaliation is merely a lynch mob.

"A government is the means of placing the retaliatory use of physical force under objective control" (Rand, 109).

The difference between individuals and government is that individuals may do anything except what is forbidden by law, whereas a government can only do what it is legally permitted to do.

A government derives its power from the covenant of the people.

The proper function of the government fall into three broad categories:
1) The police
2) The armed forces
3) The law courts

Class notes on War & Pacifism

(Originally Written May 2, 2006 in 3 Subject Book)

Contemporary Issues in Philosophy

Pacifists are cordially invited

1. War & Scripture: is there a "Biblical" view in a singular sense?

A. OT - Ancient Israel
B. NT - John the Baptist, Jesus, Luke, Peter, Paul
C. Church History - Pacifism & Just War Theory
D. Luther - two kingdoms

2. Application of Just War Theory

A. Conscription
B. Issues related to Terrorism
1. The State of nature (Pre-law morality)
2. Innocence: how much involvement?
3. International Law
4. God, Israel, Osama bin Laden, Jerry Fallwell
5. Human rights and the laws of war, or law enforcement vs. war
-derogation
-absolute non-derogable rights

Just War v. Pacifism

(Originally written April 25, 2006 in 3 Subject)

Contemporary Issues of Philosophy

The morality of War

As a Christian do you feel war is right?

1. Violence
2. Obeying the government (Titus 3:1, Romans 13:3-5)

Rae:

War in the Old Testament

-Securing Israel's boundaries (2 Samuel 5:17-25)
-National Defense (1 Kings 20)
-Offensive Attacks (Joshua 6-12)
-Total Annihilation (Deuteronomy 25:17-19, 1 Samuel 15:1-3)

Does God's sanctioning of Israel's military action justify modern warfare?

-God chose Canaan for His people
-Canaan was very vulnerable to attack
-This vulnerability led to a necessary reliance on God
-Disobedience often resulted in war

The Spirit of Pacifism

-The Sermon on the Mount
-Forbidding resistance to evil
-Loving your enemies
-Jesus blesses the peacemakers
-Submitting to persecutors
-Submitting to the government, even that of Rome

However, there is no Biblical record of soldiers who had converted leaving the military for Pacifistic views

Major views:

Pacifism - Direct participation in war is completely wrong, indirect participation is sometimes wrong

Just war theory - participation in war is morally acceptable under certain criteria

Major Biblical support for Pacifism

-Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:38-48)
-Paul's teachings on non-violence (Romans 12:19-21)
-Peter's doctrine of non-resistance (1 Peter 2:18-24)

Nonviolence vs. non-participation
-Pacifists fall into various levels of pacifism
-All fighting though is considered wrong in every level of pacifism
-Participation in work supporting conflict is and is not acceptable depending on the level of pacifism

Criticism of Pacifism
-If a murderer is in your home with you and your family do you let your family be murdered? Do you fight back and try to subdue the attacker? Do you try to save your family?
-What is the definition of violence?
-Duty to the state argument (Romans 13:1-7, the state 'wields the sword' to keep order and peace). Does our duty to the state outweigh our personal disposition towards violence?

Just War Theory

7 Traditional Criteria:
1) War must be prompted by a just cause
2) War must have a just intention
3) War must be engaged as a last resort
4) The war in question must be initiated by a formal declaration by properly constituted authorities
5) The war in question must be characterized by limited objections (not total annihilation or wholesale destruction)
6) The war must be conducted with appropriate means (force must be proportional to the threat)
7) The war must respect noncombatant immunity

Robert Fullinwider article:

-We should focus more on innocence when assessing validity of violence (terrorism).
-There is a division between combatants and non-combatants, those this distinction is a difficult one to determine in some circumstances.
-We must rethink our definition of terrorism.
-International law brings some order to international affairs.
-Private judgment of a state undermines international law.
-One must be able to justify their actions in a manner that is satisfactory.