When is violence justified?
All human morality and ethics can be summed up by the way we answer this one simple question: When is violence justified?
It's a simple question, and it deserves a simple answer, but you'll rarely get one. Instead most people avoid the root of the question by regurgitating second hand rhetoric which blurs and obfuscates the truth.All human morality and ethics can be summed up by the way we answer this one simple question: When is violence justified?
It's a simple question, and it deserves a simple answer, but you'll rarely get one. Instead most people avoid the root of the question by regurgitating second hand rhetoric which blurs and obfuscates the truth.
There is only one sane answer to the question of when violence is justified, and it can be summarized in a single sentence:
The only morally acceptable context for violence is defense.
That answer is often referred to as the non-aggression principle. It's a fancy name for an obvious and simple truth, but simple truths carry the most devastating implications when applied to the real world.
How do your political views hold up when measured against the non-aggression principle? Do you promote policies that require enforcement by armed thugs? Do you assume that since your position is morally superior it should be forced onto those who do not which to cooperate? It is when we ask these kinds of questions that we begin to expose the design flaw in our current society.
In engineering when a design flaw is discovered in a machine or device every effort is made to remedy that flaw as quickly as possible, however when a design flaw is found in the morals and ethics of human society the average person responds by defending and justifying the status quo instinctively. This defensiveness is understandable in a way. Coming to terms with the fact that we are responsible for the violence and oppression which is performed on our behalf is not flattering to the ego; in fact for many people it threatens their very identity. This is especially the case when dealing with those who view themselves as crusaders for a higher cause. Exposing the violence required to implement their policies spoils their illusions of grandeur, and paints a very unsavory image.
Being confronted with the non-aggression principle is the ultimate red pill / blue pill moment. Take the blue pill and you will push it out of your mind and your political views will stay the same. You won't have to make any uncomfortable adjustments in your life, and that nasty realization that violence is being performed on your behalf will fade like a bad dream. Take the red pill and all bets are off.