From: Mike Lorrey (mlorrey@datamann.com)
Date: Fri Apr 05 2002 - 09:27:34 MST
"Robert J. Bradbury" wrote:
>
> Kids with Bombs
> http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/05/opinion/05KRIS.html?pagewanted=print&position=top
>
> I'd be interested in the libertarian take on the arguments.
> Precisely when is it reasonable to strap bombs ones body
> and kill non-military personnel to eliminate the "oppressors"?
It isn't. The Palestinians rationalizations for this are similar to bin
Laden's rationalizations for the WTC attacks: Since all Israelis serve
in the military at some time in life, then all Israelis are lawful
combatants for their entire lives.
Bin Laden said the 911 attacks were lawful because all Americans pay
taxes to the government which oppresses the rest of the world.
The Libertarian take is that the only reasonable use of force is against
those *individuals* who are specifically initiating force against you,
and organizations which do so as specific policy of the organization.
You then run into the problem of distinguishing intiation of force with
weapons versus initiation of force with paperwork, writs, permits, and
bulldozers. The primary justification I can see for Palestinian actions
is when they target Israeli settlements activities, the razing of
Palestinian communities and homes in order to build Israeli settlements.
Aren't these actions an 'initiation of force' that libertarians should
oppose? Of course.
If you accept that such bureaucratic attacks are wrong, you are then
left with a debate as to when exactly is the expiration date on
injustice. The Jews once owned Palestine and were forcibly ejected by
the Muslims, Romans, Crusaders, etc. If the Israeli actions of 1948 are
wrong, why are the Muslim actions of the middle ages not wrong?
>
> After all, aren't the Palestinians simply trying to create an independent
> state where they can have "self-direction" (principle 6) and just
> opposing "authoritarian social control" that prevents a "open"
> society (principle 5)?
As someone else said, there is no such thing as a 'right to a state'.
Moreover, they are hardly opposing authoritarian social control, since
the Palestinian Authority could hardly be less democratic.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:13:15 MST