more from this thinker     |     more from this text


Single Idea 21073

[filed under theme 25. Social Practice / E. Policies / 1. War / c. Combatants ]

Full Idea

The hiring of men to kill or be killed seems to mean using them as mere machines and insturments in the hands of someone else (the state), which cannot easily be reconciled with the rights of man in one's own person.

Gist of Idea

Hiring soldiers is to use them as instruments, ignoring their personal rights

Source

Immanuel Kant (Perpetual Peace [1795], 1.3)

Book Ref

Kant,Immanuel: 'Political Writings', ed/tr. Reiss,Hans [CUP 1996], p.9


A Reaction

Kant was not a pacificist, though this makes him sound like one. Some men go off to war with enthusiasm, and then regret it. Exploitation of rational beings may be the worst sin in Kant's Enlightenment world.


The 18 ideas with the same theme [role and ethics of the fighters]:

Princes should not justify a war to their subjects, and doing so would undermine the state [Vitoria]
People at home care far more than soldiers risking death about the outcome of wars [Montaigne]
I act justly if I follow my Prince in an apparently unjust war, and refusing to fight would be injustice [Hobbes]
Wars are between States, not people, and the individuals are enemies by accident [Rousseau]
Hiring soldiers is to use them as instruments, ignoring their personal rights [Kant]
The duties and moral status of loyal and obedient soldiers is the same in defence and aggression [Walzer]
We can't blame soldiers for anything they do which clearly promotes victory [Walzer]
Even aggressor soldiers are not criminals, so they have equal rights with their opponents [Walzer]
Rejecting Combatant Equality allows just soldiers to be harsher, even to the extreme [Walzer]
Kidnapped sailors and volunteers have different obligations to the passengers [Walzer]
If all combatants are seen as morally equal, that facilitates starting unjust wars [McMahan]
You don't become a legitimate target, just because you violently resist an unjust attack [McMahan]
Volunteer soldiers accept the risk of attack, but they don't agree to it, or to their deaths [McMahan]
Soldiers cannot know enough facts to evaluate the justice of their war [McMahan]
If being part of a big collective relieves soldiers of moral responsibility, why not the leaders too? [McMahan]
If soldiers can't refuse to fight in unjust wars, can they choose to fight in just wars? [McMahan]
Equality is both sides have permission, or both sides are justified, or one justified the other permitted [McMahan]
Fighting unjustly under duress does not justify it, or permit it, but it may excuse it [McMahan]