more on this theme
|
more from this text
Single Idea 23574
[filed under theme 25. Social Practice / E. Policies / 1. War / c. Combatants
]
Full Idea
The duties of individual soldiers …are precisely the same in wars of aggression and wars of defence. …The moral status of soldiers on both sides is very much the same; they are led to fight by their loyalty and their lawful obedience.
Gist of Idea
The duties and moral status of loyal and obedient soldiers is the same in defence and aggression
Source
Michael Walzer (Just and Unjust Wars [1977], 08)
Book Ref
Walzer,Michael: 'Just and Unjust Wars' [Penguin 1984], p.127
A Reaction
He excludes war crimes. This is the thesis which Jeff McMahan objects to. It would be very odd to think that mafiosi and the legitimate police were morally equal, because the former are loyal. We should all try hard to avoid supporting unjust causes.
The
28 ideas
from Michael Walzer
23564
|
Deep ethical theory is very controversial, but we have to live with higher ethical practice
[Walzer]
|
23593
|
Jus ad bellum and Jus in bello are independent; unjust wars can be fought in a just way
[Walzer]
|
23568
|
If whole states possess rights, there can be social relations between states
[Walzer]
|
23567
|
Even non-violent intrusive acts between states count as aggression, if they justify resistance
[Walzer]
|
23570
|
The only good reason for fighting is in defence of rights
[Walzer]
|
23571
|
States can rightly pre-empt real and serious threats
[Walzer]
|
23572
|
Just wars are self-defence, or a rightful intercession in another's troubles
[Walzer]
|
23573
|
For moral reasons, a just war must be a limited war
[Walzer]
|
23577
|
Napoleon said 'I don't care about the deaths of a million men'
[Walzer]
|
23574
|
The duties and moral status of loyal and obedient soldiers is the same in defence and aggression
[Walzer]
|
23575
|
We can't blame soldiers for anything they do which clearly promotes victory
[Walzer]
|
23614
|
Even aggressor soldiers are not criminals, so they have equal rights with their opponents
[Walzer]
|
23578
|
Double Effect needs a double intention - to achieve the good, and minimise the evil
[Walzer]
|
23579
|
Soldiers will only protect civilians if they feel safe from them
[Walzer]
|
23580
|
States need not endure attacks passively, and successful reprisals are legitimate
[Walzer]
|
23581
|
The aim of reprisals is to enforce the rules of war
[Walzer]
|
23582
|
Reprisal is defensible, as an alternative to war
[Walzer]
|
23584
|
Rejecting Combatant Equality allows just soldiers to be harsher, even to the extreme
[Walzer]
|
23586
|
What matters in war is unacceptable targets, not unacceptable weapons
[Walzer]
|
23588
|
With nuclear weapons we have a permanent supreme emergency (which is unstable)
[Walzer]
|
23587
|
Nuclear bombs are not for normal war; they undermine the 'just war', with a new morality
[Walzer]
|
23589
|
Kidnapped sailors and volunteers have different obligations to the passengers
[Walzer]
|
23590
|
Criminal responsibility can be fully assigned to each member of a group
[Walzer]
|
23592
|
We can only lead war towards peace if we firmly enforce the rules of war
[Walzer]
|
23591
|
If the oppressor is cruel, nonviolence is either surrender, or a mere gesture
[Walzer]
|
20595
|
You can't distribute goods from behind a veil, because their social meaning is unclear
[Walzer, by Tuckness/Wolf]
|
20592
|
Complex equality restricts equalities from spilling over, like money influencing politics and law
[Walzer, by Tuckness/Wolf]
|
20549
|
Equality is complex, with different spheres of equality where different principles apply
[Walzer, by Swift]
|