Alle teksten werden gepubliceerd in Blauwdruk, ons driemaandelijkse magazine. Klik hier om de edities in hun geheel door te nemen.

13-02-2008: RUG AAN RUG: WAR AND THE NON-INITIATION OF VIOLENCE

Chris Demeyere: "A defence of humanitarian intervention"

I am sometimes described as a right-wing hawk by people. And maybe I am. I have a very specific view on war and conflict. It is one of the reasons why until recently I would not refer to myself as a libertarian without putting it in brackets or naming some exceptions. But that has changed. I now call myself a libertarian, because I realise there is no absolute definition, simply common ground. As far as war is concerned, I came to a realisation; the realisation that my view is not and never was un-libertarian.

I was in favor of the war in Afghanistan, and the war in Iraq. Or rather, I was in favor of A war in Afghanistan and Iraq. Not because of revenge, because the main people hit by the war had done nothing wrong, and revenge is rarely of any value. Not because of WMD’s, because I think the U.S. would never have sent their soldiers in Iraq if there was any risk that they would be exposed to WMD’s and thus probably knew there were none. I was in favor of a war in Afghanistan to remove an oppressive, dictatorial regime that violated all Lockean basic rights with as only morality an outdated interpretation of a book that is about 1400 years old. I was in favor of a war in Iraq (not against Iraq) to remove a socialist dictator that committed genocide, tortured and murdered any opposition, real or fictive, and sucked his people dry to live in luxury. Removing the Taliban and Saddam Hussein from power was a goal in itself. Although I will readily admit that the U.S. screwed most of it up by not having any idea what to do after the war in an artificial country they should in fact just break in three pieces if they expect to see peace there.

But that worldview was in conflict with one of the most important principles in the libertarian view on society. The principle of the non-initiation of violence. It is a very common sense principle that states that… well, you can actually tell exactly what it means by reading the words. It says that nobody has the right to initiate violence to another person. This naturally means that once violence was initiated, that person is in the wrong and the victim or any other person has the right to stop the violence, even if that means they have to use violence themselves. On top of that, war requires a government, and that government must have an army and train and equip it with taxpayer money. How do you combine those?

Actually, you don’t have to. It suddenly hit me that a war to remove a dictator is not an initiation of violence, but a reaction to an initiation of violence. The oppression and the terror itself were the initiation of violence. Dethroning the oppressor was a normal and proportionate reaction to the initial violence. From a libertarian viewpoint, dethroning Saddam and the Taliban was a good thing, without having to agree with all the methods, the consequences or even the reasoning behind it.

It seems I have re-discovered Grotius’ notion of the “just war” in a world where war is by nature unjust, and with quite a different meaning. War can be justified, but is not by nature justified. We need to look at every situation. Removing an oppressor is defendable since he initiated the violence, and there is no reason why the reaction should be only the privilege of the victims. Ludwig von Mises took “Tu ne cede malis” as his motto, a Latin phrase from Virgilius meaning “You will not allow evil (to happen)” and he did so because he believed that allowing evil is something no decent man should do.

I have defined liberty as a right I claim for myself and every other individual, and when another person’s liberty is attacked, all of liberty is under siege.

Simon Van Wambeke: "A critique of humanitarian intervention"

“If you want the government to intervene domestically you’re a liberal, if you want the government to intervene abroad you’re a conservative, if you want the government to intervene both domestically and abroad you’re a moderate, and if you don’t want the government to intervene either domestically or abroad you’re an extremist.“ Joseph Sobran

There is something odd about Chris’ take on war and libertarianism. He states correctly that “… nobody has the right to initiate violence to another person. This naturally means that once violence was initiated, that person is in the wrong and the victim or any other person has the right to stop the violence, even if that means they have to use violence themselves”. Nevertheless, when applying this rule of thumb of libertarianism , Chris makes one mistake and strangely neglects a lot of things.

The common mistake he makes is to imply that robbery is not an initiation of violence: “war requires a government, and that government must have an army and train and equip it with taxpayer money.” It does not seem to occur to Chris that taxation is nothing more than robbery by the State and therefore an initiation of violence. So far Chris’ defence of war making on libertarian grounds. Chris would probably argue in his defence that he is a libertarian minarchist, not a libertarian anarchist, but the contradiction remains; one can not favour the non-aggression axiom in one sentence and taxation in the next.

A second problem is Chris’ neglect of the means by which modern wars are waged. He only considers the ends, toppling dictators, but nowhere does he address how these ends are achieved. Though the way wars are waged is not unimportant when it involves amongst others -in the Iraqi case- the killing of more than one million Iraqis and almost four thousand Americans , the distortion of the American economy , the loss of liberty for the American people , the growth of terrorism, the neglect of the constitution and a lot more tragic things. The only means to wage war Chris does mention is taxation (which he doesn’t consider a problem): for the American people this amounts to forking over a trillion dollar per year to finance the Empire (with more than 700 bases around the globe).

Now let us go into all the other factors Chris doesn’t address (because he thinks the end justifies the means or because he considers these factors negligible?). Primarily, the massive killing of innocent people, which is no mere accident as warmongers like to state. “When U.S. forces employ aerial and artillery bombardment — with huge high-explosive bombs, large rockets and shells, including cluster munitions — as their principal technique of waging war, especially in densely inhabited areas, they know with absolute certainty that many innocent people will be killed. To proceed with such bombardment, therefore, is to choose to inflict these deaths.” , states Robert Higgs. I would like to see whether or not Chris defends these murders. Maybe he would, arguing by the “doctrine of double effect” that killing some innocent Iraqis is defendable when it is necessary to topple a cruel dictator like Saddam Hussein. Nevertheless, this doctrine contains two other conditions which must be fulfilled: the innocent dead must be proportionate to the lives saved and the attack itself -to topple Saddam- must be justifiable. These conditions are not met since at the time no one could know how many Iraqis would die and if the Iraqi people would be better off after the toppling of Saddam. When we continue with the economic consequences, there is not only the massive cost in (future) taxation plus the inflation created by monetizing the debt, but also the opportunity cost of using resources for war instead of civilian purposes. As Seymour Melman writes: “Since 1951, the budget of the Department of Defence each year exceeds the net profits of all U.S. corporations. So, in finance capital terms, that means that the management of that budget controls the largest single block of finance capital resources.” Or Thomas Woods: “According to the U.S. Department of Defence, during the four decades from 1947 through 1987 it used (in 1982 dollars) $7.62 trillion in capital resources. In 1985, the Department of Commerce estimated the value of the nation’s plant and equipment, and infrastructure, at just over $7.29 trillion. In other words, the amount spent over that period could have doubled the American capital stock or modernized and replaced its existing stock.” On top of this, like any of the other parasitic components of government, the Pentagon only demands more and more, minimizing its expenditures by stating military spending divided by GDP (although a rising GDP obviously does not require more defence). Strangely, a lot of conservatives, who are trenchant critics of socialism, at least in theory, in practice fail to see or appreciate the consequences of their drunken-sailor spending when it comes to the military.

Let us proceed to the loss of liberty in wartime. During every crisis, people care more about security than liberty. Politicians smelling the fear of the populace, start taking liberty under the guise of delivering security. Every state thrives on crisis; no wonder Randolph Bourne said that “war is the health of the State”. The war on Terror is no exception of course, as judge Andrew Napolitano argues: “The Bush Administration has systematically attacked and diminished virtually every freedom and right guaranteed by the Constitution: freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, freedom of association, the right to privacy, the right not to self incriminate, the right to counsel, the right to speedy trials, the right to fair trials, the right to avoid cruel and unusual punishment, even the right to be set free after acquittal!”

The last thing I will be dealing with (the negative consequences of an aggressive foreign policy are endless, so we have to stop somewhere) is unintended consequences. When occupying other countries, one has to acknowledge that he might not be welcomed by the populace. In Iraq for example, five years into the war, 60% see attacks on US-led forces as justified . The growth of terrorism is another deplorable unintended consequence. Robert Pape, author of Dying to Win, who collected the first complete database of every suicide-terrorist attack around the world from 1980 to early 2004, says “The central fact is that overwhelmingly suicide-terrorist attacks are not driven by religion as much as they are by a clear strategic objective: to compel modern democracies to withdraw military forces from the territory that the terrorists view as their homeland” . Before the invasion in Iraq Al-Qaeda was not present, now it is full of those terrorists.

As a conclusion, it is safe to say that modern warfare is incompatible with libertarianism-even if we only consider the taxation necessary for it- and has lots of deplorable consequences for those who care about freedom. Chris will therefore have to choose: rightwing-hawk or libertarian peacenik.

Gepubliceerd door LVSV Leuven op 13-02-2008

OVERZICHT GEPUBLICEERDE TEKSTEN

DATUM	AUTEUR	TITEL
31-01-2010	Nick Roskams	Creatieve destructie en economisch optimisme	Lees
16-05-2009	Vincent De Roeck	We are all socialists now!	Lees
16-05-2009	Jan Reyntjens	Pleidooi voor een versoepelde wapenwet	Lees
16-05-2009	Jens Moens	De geheelonthouders hebben gelijk...	Lees
16-05-2009	Vincent De Roeck	The Wealth of Nations	Lees
15-05-2009	Simon Van Wambeke	Waarom centraal bankieren crisissen veroorzaakt	Lees
15-05-2009	Vincent De Roeck	Een geschiedenis van de anti-rokersbeweging	Lees
15-05-2009	Philippe Caeymaex	De buitenlandse vertegenwoordiging van deelstaten	Lees
15-05-2009	Kevin Wielockx	De Fortis-aandeelhouders werden onteigend!	Lees
15-05-2009	Vincent De Roeck	Interview met Annemie Neyts en Graham Watson	Lees
14-05-2009	Gloria Alvarez	Bastiat's candlemakers and modern protectionism	Lees
14-05-2009	Vincent De Roeck	The War Between the State and the Family	Lees
14-05-2009	Johan Van Woensel	Activeer de werklozen via het OCMW!	Lees
14-05-2009	Vincent De Roeck	Het liberalisme door een LVSV-bril	Lees
21-12-2008	Vincent De Roeck	Sic transit gloria mundi	Lees
21-12-2008	Johan Van Woensel	Over monarchie en prostitutie	Lees
21-12-2008	Jürgen Vandewalle	Charles Taylor en het einde van de grote verhalen	Lees
20-12-2008	Désirée Senden	Mag een staat onteigenen?	Lees
19-12-2008	Joris Vanlessen	Interview met Pieter Cleppe van Open Europe	Lees
02-11-2008	Vincent De Roeck	Monopolies bestrijden is een economische farce	Lees
02-11-2008	Koen Deconinck	Liberalisme en anarchisme	Lees
01-11-2008	Jens Moens	Milieuproblematiek	Lees
01-11-2008	Norman Barry	Bastiat and the Law	Lees
31-10-2008	Vincent De Roeck	België en de Europese Unie: better off out!	Lees
31-10-2008	Denis Van den Weghe	The rise and fall of Viktor Bout	Lees
30-10-2008	Vincent De Roeck	Het Rijnlandmodel is dood	Lees
30-10-2008	Philippe Caeymaex	Naar een efficiënt België	Lees
30-10-2008	Chris Demeyere	Hoog tijd om het apothekersmonopolie af te schaffen!	Lees
28-10-2008	Christophe Charpentier	Big markets, small governments	Lees
24-10-2008	Vincent De Roeck	The Guide to Reform	Lees
24-10-2008	Jens Moens	Energy, the Master Resource	Lees
23-10-2008	Herman De Croo	Pleidooi voor een nieuw kiessysteem	Lees
23-10-2008	Patricia Ceysens	Vlaamse bedrijven winnen goud in China	Lees
15-10-2008	Vincent De Roeck	Oh ye of little faith!	Lees
12-10-2008	Matthias Storme	De vrijheid van meningsuiting	Lees
28-09-2008	Johan Van Woensel	Hervorm de sociale huisvesting!	Lees
30-05-2008	Vincent De Roeck	Het recht op vrij wapenbezit: from my cold dead hands!	Lees
29-05-2008	Xavier Meulders	Wat heeft de overheid met ons geld gedaan?	Lees
29-05-2008	Jeroen Benning	The centralisation of power in the European Union	Lees
29-05-2008	Philippe Caeymaex	De nucleaire sfinx van Teheran	Lees
29-05-2008	Vincent De Roeck	Rusland na Poetin: de witte raaf en de beer	Lees
28-05-2008	Chris Demeyere	Tibet en de Dalai Lama	Lees
27-05-2008	Xavier Meulders	De klauwen van de Duitse adelaar	Lees
27-05-2008	Jasper Pillen	De val van de Berlijnse muur deed de communistische vijand verdwijnen	Lees
27-05-2008	Chris Demeyere	Lasten omlaag = koopkracht omhoog	Lees
27-05-2008	Xavier Meulders	De waanzin van het moderne dadaïsme	Lees
26-05-2008	Chris Demeyere	Zimbabwe: exit Mugabe?	Lees
26-05-2008	Jeroen Benning	Free speech and the release of Fitna	Lees
26-05-2008	Chris Demeyere	25,000 euro voor Ishtar	Lees
20-04-2008	Vincent De Roeck	De toekomst is mooi, de toekomst is liberaal	Lees
17-04-2008	Jens Moens	De geliberaliseerde energiemarkt	Lees
08-04-2008	David Vercouteren	Anarchisme is anti-liberaal	Lees
07-04-2008	Simon Van Wambeke	Anarchisme: de logica zelve?	Lees
15-03-2008	Vincent De Roeck	Belgische VN-ambassadeurs, tijd om op te krassen!	Lees
14-03-2008	Christophe Charpentier	Klant is koning	Lees
14-02-2008	Vincent De Roeck	Pactio Olisipiensis Censenda Est	Lees
14-02-2008	Xavier Meulders	Waarom Keynes een moslim was	Lees
14-02-2008	Chris Demeyere	Caroline Gennez en de afschaffing van de zorgverzekering	Lees
13-02-2008	LVSV Leuven	Rug aan Rug: war and the non-initiation of violence	Lees
13-02-2008	Vincent De Roeck	De libertarische grondwet	Lees
12-02-2008	Xavier Meulders	Naar een wereldheerschappij van de Civitas Diaboli	Lees
12-02-2008	Vincent De Roeck	De high society	Lees
11-02-2008	Chris Demeyere	Musharraf, een door het Westen getolereerd dictator	Lees
10-02-2008	Nick Roskams	Recensie "1984" van George Orwell	Lees
10-02-2008	Chris Demeyere	Johoho, copyright law and the digital age	Lees
24-12-2007	Vincent De Roeck	Europese liberale jongeren komen samen in Stockholm	Lees
24-12-2007	Arnaud Houdmont	Belgium's last chapter: to be or not to be?	Lees
23-12-2007	Vincent De Roeck	LVSV te gast op de Golden Umbrella Awards	Lees
23-12-2007	LVSV Leuven	Rug aan Rug: het hoofddoekendebat	Lees
23-12-2007	Denis Van den Weghe	Het IFLRY-congres in Sarajevo	Lees
01-11-2007	Vincent De Roeck	De Europese Unie kostte België 711 miljoen euro in 2006	Lees
01-11-2007	Jens Moens	Arm Vlaanderen	Lees
01-11-2007	Vincent De Roeck	Het ware gelaat van de Belgische democratie	Lees
01-11-2007	Bart Dobbels	De dood van de juwelier	Lees
31-10-2007	Vincent De Roeck	The Euro brought Belgium on the edge of the abyss	Lees
31-10-2007	Bart Dobbels	Plagiaat aan de universiteit	Lees
30-10-2007	Vincent De Roeck	The European communist heritage triumphed once again	Lees
30-10-2007	David Vercouteren	Het hoger onderwijs : mijn gedacht	Lees
30-10-2007	Chris Demeyere	Zelfbeschikking voor Brussel	Lees
30-10-2007	Simon Van Wambeke	Frank Van Dun	Lees
30-10-2007	Vincent De Roeck	De duivelsverzen van Angela Merkel	Lees
29-10-2007	Philippe Caeymaex	La Belgique sera federale ou elle ne sera pas	Lees
29-10-2007	Simon Van Wambeke	Ron Paul	Lees
22-05-2007	Vincent De Roeck	Mijn Europa bestaat nog niet	Lees
22-05-2007	Simon Van Wambeke	Belasting is roof	Lees
21-05-2007	Vincent De Roeck	Een standbeeld voor Mao	Lees
21-05-2007	Jasper Pillen	Zelfs een meedogenloos dictator verdient een eerlijk proces.	Lees
21-05-2007	Sebastiaan Pot	Over de zin van het privatiseren van de gevangenissen	Lees
20-05-2007	Vincent De Roeck	Flahaut en het Waalse legioen	Lees
20-05-2007	Yves Broecke	Waar naartoe met Europa ?	Lees
20-05-2007	Chris Demeyere	De opwarming van de Aarde. Is de mens wel de oorzaak ?	Lees
19-05-2007	Vincent De Roeck	Pinochet onder de zoden	Lees
18-05-2007	Brandaan Mombaers	Liberalism, fascism and the right of the strongest	Lees
18-05-2007	Xavier Meulders	Vlaamse onafhankelijkheid: een liberale strijd	Lees
18-05-2007	Simon Van Wambeke	Een gevaarlijk politicus	Lees
18-05-2007	Yves Broecke	Schaf de publiek gestuurde en gefinancierde sociale zekerheid af	Lees
18-05-2007	Vincent De Roeck	Halfslachtig België: piraterij en privacy	Lees
07-11-2006	Yves Broecke	Stop de publieke financiering van ontwikkelingshulp	Lees
07-11-2006	Vincent De Roeck	De erfenis van 11 september	Lees
07-11-2006	Sebastiaan Pot	De nakende hervorming van de assisenprocedure: een gemiste kans	Lees
07-11-2006	Willem Coppenolle	Minder overheid, minder extreem-rechts	Lees
07-11-2006	Chris Demeyere	Somalië, of de wanhopige illusie van anarcho-kapitalisten	Lees
07-11-2006	Jasper Pillen	Liberalisme is niet gelijk aan Vlaams-nationalisme	Lees
07-11-2006	Simon Van Wambeke	De verzorgingsstaat	Lees
07-11-2006	Jasper Pillen	Uitdagingen voor het Belgische lidmaatschap van de UN Security Council	Lees
07-11-2006	Lucas Decuypere	Economische bemoeizucht	Lees
07-11-2006	Vincent De Roeck	De grootste roof uit de geschiedenis	Lees
21-12-2004	Kristof Willekens	Rug aan rug: contra Monarchie	Lees
21-12-2004	Willem Coppenolle	De hervorming van de gevangenisstraf	Lees
21-12-2004	Chris Demeyere	Boekbespreking: De moord op Caesar	Lees
21-12-2004	Willem Coppenolle	Toen de prinsen nog spraken	Lees
20-12-2004	Pieter Cleppe	De vrije meningsuiting als basis van de menselijke beschaving	Lees
20-12-2004	Jasper Pillen	Rug aan rug: pro Monarchie	Lees
20-12-2004	Lucas Decuypere	Senatus Populusque Belgicus: de Senato Belgico	Lees
20-12-2004	Chris Demeyere	Cultuursubsidies? Neen bedankt!	Lees
20-12-2004	Sebastiaan Pot	Over het inkomensafhankelijk maken van de verkeersboetes	Lees
20-12-2004	Charles de Thibault de Boesinghe	We leven niet in een parlementaire democratie	Lees
20-12-2004	Evert Gruyaert	Gijzeling van het sociaal stabiel ondernemingsklimaat	Lees
20-12-2004	Nicolas Raemdonck	De Europese Unie of het superioriteitscomplex van het Westen	Lees
20-12-2004	Katleen Bury	Le Chant des Wallons	Lees
20-12-2004	Brandaan Mombaers	Vitriool: Geen verrechtsing van de VLD, aub!	Lees
12-11-2004	Chris Demeyere	Fair Trade: de weg naar een eerlijker wereld is kapitalisme in een vrije markt	Lees
12-11-2004	Brandaan Mombaers	De Europese Grondwet vs. Politiek Secretariaat	Lees
12-11-2004	Brandaan Mombaers	Vitriool: Over salonliberalen	Lees
11-11-2004	Nicolas Raemdonck	Racisten gediscrimineerd	Lees
11-11-2004	Charles de Thibault de Boesinghe	Kiezen tussen Europa en Vlaanderen? Bevoegheidsverdeling en democratie.	Lees
11-11-2004	Bram Machtelinckx	Zin of onzin van een openbare omroep	Lees
11-11-2004	Evert Gruyaert	"Ja, ik verdiende 22,3 miljoen euro op 3 jaar, EN DAN?!"	Lees
11-11-2004	Kristof Willekens	Eerst de mensenrechten, dan de religie? De godsdiensten van de 21ste eeuw zullen humanistisch of liberaal moeten zijn	Lees
11-11-2004	Pieter Cleppe	Amerikaanse presidenten: groei en crisis van de economie	Lees
01-03-2004	Pieter Cleppe	De migratieproblematiek: een alternatieve oplossing	Lees
01-03-2004	Chris Demeyere	Iedereen een beetje militant	Lees
01-03-2004	Bram Machtelinckx	Kennis als hefboom tot welvaart en welzijn	Lees
01-12-2003	Servaas Vannoote	De grenzen van Europa	Lees
01-12-2003	Pieter Cleppe	Europese defensie met en zonder een leger	Lees
01-12-2003	Chris Demeyere	Naar een Europees privaatrecht	Lees
01-12-2003	Pieter Cleppe	Red onze welvaartstaat. Hervorm de welvaartstaat.	Lees
01-10-2003	Nicolas Bollion	Vergrijzing	Lees
01-10-2003	LVSV-Leuven	Dixit	Lees
01-10-2003	Chris Demeyere	De hi?rarchische positie van de rede en het post-redelijke mensbeeld	Lees
01-10-2003	Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.	Confusion and Clarity in Cancun	Lees
01-03-2003	Pieter Cleppe	Gemeentelijk stemrecht voor niet-EU-burgers: achter de slogans	Lees
01-03-2003	Pieter Cleppe	Drugs	Lees
01-12-2002	LVSV Leuven	Enkele stellingen	Lees
01-10-2002	Pieter Cleppe	We?re gonna hunt ?em down, smoke them outta their holez and bring ?em to justice!	Lees
01-03-2002	Pieter Cleppe	Het onderwijs en de consument	Lees
01-03-2002	Pieter Cleppe	Wat is er mis met links en rechts??	Lees
02-01-2002	LVSV Leuven	Geschiedenis van LVSV Leuven	Lees
02-01-2002	Pieter Cleppe	Sic semper tyrannis!	Lees
02-01-2002	Hugo Lamon	LVSV Leuven in 1984-85	Lees
02-01-2002	Frank Beckx	Liberaal denken, ongebonden en vrij	Lees
02-01-2002	Axel Delvoie	Hand in hand...	Lees
01-12-2001	Pieter Cleppe	Richtingen binnen het liberalisme	Lees
01-10-2001	Pieter Cleppe	Amerika: terugtrekken!	Lees
01-03-2001	Axel Delvoie	Naar een liberale partij	Lees
01-03-2001	LVSV-Leuven	Dixit	Lees
00-00-0000			Lees
00-00-0000			Lees