The Just War Myth and the War in Afghanistan

The conclusion of two decades of American war in Afghanistan reminds us that war is rarely justified. A just war responds to aggression or defends human rights. Just wars should be fought for noble intentions. Just warriors should avoid deliberately harming noncombatants. Just warriors should not use torture or commit war crimes. And a just war should leave the world better off.

In Afghanistan, more than 150,000 people were killed. This includes Taliban fighters, Afghan government forces, and an estimated 47,000 civilians. Nearly 2,500 American soldiers were killed. Trillions were spent. Millions were displaced, including 2.6 million Afghan refugees.

It is not clear this was worth it, morally speaking.

This is not to say that the American soldiers who fought, bled, and died in “the war on terror” did anything wrong. Individual soldiers do not decide where to fight. In our democratic system, that decision is made by civilian leaders who are accountable to “we, the people.”

We asked our soldiers to fight in a war that was morally suspect from the beginning. We should apologize. In addition to saying “thank you for your service,” we should say, “I’m sorry.” And we must add, in addressing our veterans, “it is not your fault.”

Retrospective analysis is fraught with difficulties. But it was not clear from the beginning that an all-out invasion of Afghanistan was a proportional response to the attacks of September 11, 2001. The Taliban regime was not responsible for 9/11. It is true that Osama bin Ladin was hiding out in Afghanistan. But it was overkill to invade an entire country in order to root out terrorists. Critical voices argued, even in 2001, that a more targeted and proportional response would have been wiser.

It is also important to consider whether sustained and well-funded nonviolent alternatives to war could have been efficacious. What kinds of nonviolent terrorism prevention programs could have been funded with the trillions of dollars spent in Afghanistan?

The Taliban was (and is) undemocratic and repressive. It could be argued that removing the Taliban was justified in defense of human rights. But nation-building wars are much more difficult to justify and to win, as Afghanistan and Iraq show. As we’ve learned in both cases, the regimes we installed suffered from corruption as well as a lack of legitimacy and popular support.

From the beginning our intentions were mixed. Some wanted revenge for 9/11. Some wanted to “drain the swamp” harboring terrorists. Some wanted to create democracy. There were also strategic considerations involving Iran, Russia, Pakistan, and China, linked to the neoconservative desire to assert American supremacy around the globe.

Along the way, atrocities were committed. Lies were told. Goodwill was squandered. Contractors enriched themselves. And brave men and women lost limbs and lives.

In 2007, I offered a critical analysis of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, where I showed the problem of “the just war myth.” The just war myth evolves from wishful thinking about war. We want to believe that war can be easily justified. We want to believe that we are the good guys who win the wars we fight because of our moral superiority. Those are illusions.

We also want to believe that civilian and military leaders are wise and moral. We want to believe that our leaders know what they are doing, that they are concerned with morality, and that they are not merely playing politics with the lives of our soldiers.

Our trust in the probity and sagacity of our leaders is broken after years of polarization. This should undermine our faith in the just war myth. This does not mean one must affirm absolute pacifism. Rather, it means we should be more critical of war and more vigilant.

We, the people must say “never again” to ill-advised and unjust wars. We should be skeptical of militaristic rhetoric and simplistic narratives that divide the world into good guys and bad guys. We should question the idea that war can be an effective tool for promoting democracy. And we should educate ourselves about the importance of nonviolent alternatives to war.

This critical perspective is offered in solidarity with the soldiers who fought and died during the past 20 years. It is offered on behalf of the next generation of warriors who will be asked to bleed on our behalf. It is offered with compassionate concern for the men, women, and children who suffer the horrors of war.

January 16, 2021January 16, 2021

Erotic Untruth and the Violence of January 6

The January 6 attack on the US Capitol gives us a lesson in the futility of violence.

Human beings have a terrifying tendency to kill each other over horseshit (to use a technical term). Violence typically rests upon a delusion. The bigger the lie, the worse the violence.

Religious and ideological warfare are extreme cases. Terrorism and cult violence routinely occur: with Jonestown, Heaven’s Gate, Aum Shinrikyo, the Manson Family, in Waco with David Koresh, and so on. There is an analogy linking QAnon to al Qaeda.

Some of the Trump insurrectionists believed outrageous falsehoods: that Biden and Pelosi were communists; that Covid-19 was a sinister plot; that pedophiles, Satanists, and lizard people had infiltrated the government. This horseshit was accompanied by other more insidious lies: that the election had been stolen; and that the Congress and Vice-President could overturn the Electoral College.

A broth of bullshit was brewing when the President said, “Our country has been under siege for a long time.” He said, “If you don’t fight like Hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.” This rhetoric is eschatological and existential. It is not surprising that the pot boiled.

The rioters believed they were patriots leading a noble revolution. But they did not seem to think beyond the immediate outburst of violence. What was supposed to happen next? And why did they think they could get away with it?

Some have blamed the rioters’ obliviousness on the sense of impunity that comes from white supremacy. But at bottom this was a product of the delusion of violence.

Violence is mired in immediacy. It is reactive and episodic. Violence focuses the mind on the present moment. Violence promises simplicity, clarity, and consummation.

This promise is false, of course. But violence is not about truth. It is about power in the moment. It is an expression of anger and contempt. It is not strategic. It is emotional, exciting, and erotic.

Tangled webs of braggadocio and bullshit typically lead to violence. Closed networks reinforce delusion and breed a sense of superiority and impunity. Critical thought is destroyed by anger, fear, and the love of brothers-in-arms. When the delusions are eschatological, common sense is trampled underfoot.

We have known that violence is rooted in psycho-social dynamics since Cain killed Abel and Achilles sailed off to Troy. Freud described how hate and violence are perversely linked to love. Aggression against “the other” binds us together and gives us meaning.

It does not matter that our ideology is a lie. In fact, falsehood binds us tighter together in an erotic dance. When some “other” challenges our delusions, we strike out. When those delusions involve love and identity, the other becomes a menace who must be destroyed.

Religious violence has often worked this way. Sometimes religious violence involves tangible conflicts about land or resources. The Crusades had political and economic causes. But the faithful frequently fight in the name of the fabulous. The warriors themselves want glory, as well as penance and atonement. They want to be purged and healed, uplifted and inspired.

And so human beings continue to kill and die in defense of unprovable myths. The most dangerous myth of all is the myth that links violence to righteousness and redemption. Prior to Trump’s speech on January 6, Rudy Giuliani proposed “trial by combat.” This medieval nonsense holds that somehow the gods ensure that the righteous defeat the unholy.

But violence has nothing to do with morality. Good guys get killed as easily as bad. Violence occurs at the level of physical power. It decides nothing about truth, holiness, or moral worth.

The myth of violence is essentially pagan. It reflects a primitive theology. To view the world as a battlefield supervised by the gods is to ignore a more elevated notion of the divinity. If there is a God, wouldn’t He want us to reason together rather than to kill each other?

The solution to the problem of violence is as old as Jesus and Socrates. Jesus said the peacemakers were blessed. And Socrates encouraged us to ask critical questions about the horseshit that encourages violence. The truth is that violence is not reasonable. Nor is it loved by the gods.

December 12, 2015

Courage, common sense, and fortitude in times of terror

Scary times call for courage

Fresno Bee, December 12, 2015

These are terrifying times. Mass violence plays across our screens. Frightened people want reassurance. And fearmongers manipulate anxiety. But dread is no substitute for deliberation.

The world’s philosophical traditions teach us to temper trepidation. Here is some practical advice from the ancient philosophers. Acknowledge the inevitability of suffering. Don’t dread evil. Accept what is beyond your control. Avoid panic. Minimize violence. Overcome hate.

But panicked, violent and hateful proposals abound. Some call to ban Muslim visitors. Others want to carpet-bomb the Islamic State. Some encourage us to arm ourselves.

Bombs and bans won’t build a better world. For that we need courageous commitment to democratic and humane values. We also need to understand the nature of fear and its role in political and moral life.

Fear undermines mental health. It clouds judgment. And it feeds on itself. Scare mongering is useful as a rhetorical tool. But reactionary panic makes for bad policy and risks betraying central values.

Wisdom requires courage, justice and moderation. Moral decisions depend upon calm reflection. A key to wisdom and equanimity is careful consideration of the object of our fears. It turns out that we often fear the wrong things.

PHILOSOPHICAL FORTITUDE FREES US FROM REACTIONARY OUTRAGE AND ALLOWS US TO BUILD A BETTER WORLD, ONE FEARLESS STEP AT A TIME.

Consider the risk of mass violence. Since 1982 there have been 73 mass shootings in the United States, resulting in nearly 600 deaths. If we add in the fatalities from the terrorist attacks on 9/11 and other terror attacks on US citizens, we end up with fewer than 5,000 deaths from mass shooting and terrorism during the past 33 years.

Even one mass shooting is horrible. We should work to end these atrocities. But there is no reason to panic.

Other things are much more dangerous. There are around 16,000 homicides and 38,000 poisoning deaths every year. Approximately 2,000 people are killed annually by weather-related causes. More than 33,000 people are killed yearly in vehicular traffic.

We accept the risk of driving, while taking common sense precautions: drive carefully and buckle up. But no one is panicking about traffic deaths. No one is calling for background checks on vehicle ownership or radical changes in the speed limit. No one is calling for a ban on alcohol or drunken driving, even though drunken driving is much more deadly than terrorism. Drunken drivers kill 28 people every day – more than 10,000 people per year.

Some fears are magnified because we associate them with evil. Death by terrorism seems worse than death by drunken driving. Fear of evil seems more dreadful than fear of accidental death. But one wonders why that matters: When you are dead, you are dead.

Rhetoricians manipulate our fear of evil. They also manipulate our hopes and dreams. Hope is, in a sense, the opposite of fear. Hope can moderate fear. But unrealistic hope also clouds judgment. We hope that war, crime and atrocity will be abolished. We hope that politicians will behave themselves. We hope that rationality will prevail. We hope that evil will disappear. Or we hope that strangers will conform to our expectations.

BOMBS AND BANS WON’T BUILD A BETTER WORLD.

But history dashes these hopes. We should give up hope for a perfect, risk-free world. Evil people will always exist. Idiocy often overcomes common sense. Politicians routinely fail to impress. And diversity is a fact of life. We may wish things were otherwise. But wishing does not make it so.

Like fear, hope is a tool of demagogues that is used to hoodwink and manipulate. The danger of hope is that when idealistic hope crashes on the rocks of reality, despair sets in. Cynical hopelessness is as dangerous as ruthless idealism.

The key is moderation. Equanimity develops from understanding the nature of hope and fear. Fear is useful – when it is based on facts and prevented from becoming paranoia. Hope is also useful – when it is modest and limited in scope. Without moderation, however, hope and fear overwhelm good judgment.

A temperate mind is immune to the buffeting winds of fortune and the alluring buzz of political hot air. Wisdom teaches that evil is unavoidable, suffering is inevitable, panic is counterproductive, and good judgment is difficult and rare. Understanding this can liberate us from fear. Philosophical fortitude frees us from reactionary outrage and allows us to build a better world, one fearless step at a time.

Read more here: http://www.fresnobee.com/living/liv-columns-blogs/article49219050.html#storylink=cpy

November 27, 2015December 8, 2015

Misguided War on Liberal Arts

Candidates short-sighted war on liberal arts

Political attacks on philosophy prompt a philosopher to reply
Liberal arts education is a key to progress in troubled times
Citizens benefit from training in critical thinking and moral educatio

Fresno Bee, November 27, 2015

Last month, Jeb Bush suggested that a liberal arts degree was a waste of time. “That philosophy major thing,” he said, “that’s great, it’s important to have liberal arts … but realize, you’re going to be working at Chick-Fil-A.”

Marco Rubio made a similar point at a recent debate. He said we need “more welders and less philosophers.”

But in these troubled times, we need more philosophical reflection and less heated rhetoric, more careful analysis and fewer glib one-liners. A broad liberal arts education teaches us to think. Good thinking is essential for citizens of a free, self-governing democracy.

Consider the question of war against the Islamic State.Sen. Rubio describes this as a “clash of civilizations.” He said, “They do not hate us because we have military assets in the Middle East – they hate us because of our values. … They hate us because we have freedom of speech, because we have diversity in our religious beliefs. They hate us because we’re a tolerant society.”

Claims like these deserve critical scrutiny. Is this really a clash of civilizations? How can we know why someone hates us? And what should we do about it? To answer those questions, we need philosophers, historians and students of religion and culture.

The study of the world’s religions sheds light on the idea of a clash of civilizations. Muslims, Jews and Christians share common roots and a long history of intolerance and warfare. These traditions share an ideal of holy war, crusades and jihad. They also contain a common hope for peace, shalom or salaam. Understanding the similarities and differences among these traditions develops through broad historical, cultural and philosophical inquiry.

A liberal arts education also helps us understand the value of religious toleration. Secular systems of government evolved in recent centuries as a response to ongoing religious violence. Theocratic regimes are throwbacks, seemingly at odds with the general logic of historical progress.

But does history have a logic? And are we wise enough to figure out what to do next? Historians warn against such broad generalizations. Consider this: the Sykes-Picot agreement that divided the Middle East among European powers was hammered out 100 years ago. A century of European and American intervention has left us with a mess. Perhaps we are not as wise as we think we are.

Jeb Bush has urged an all-out war against the Islamic State. But in order to decide that war is justified, we need a substantial amount of philosophical reflection. We need to ponder – among other things – the justice of the cause, the question of proportionality, the issue of how noncombatants will fare and the plan for postbellum peace.

NO MATTER THE TRADE OR PROFESSION, WE NEED CITIZENS WHO UNDERSTAND THAT WAR, TERROR AND HATE DESTROY UNDERSTANDING AND KILL HOPE.

Understanding all of that requires training in ethics, political science and history. To make sure that our soldiers fight morally appropriate wars, we need better liberal arts education – not less of it.

Indeed, a liberal arts education is likely part of the long-run solution for the war on terrorism. The root cause of war and terrorism is, after all, bad philosophy. Extremism, demagoguery, ignorance and moral blindness are cured through education. The best cure for bad ideas is better ones.

A broad liberal arts education produces critical, virtuous and responsible citizens. Science grounds us in facts about geography, biology and the physical world. History provides context for understanding current events, while reminding us that progress can be made. Music, literature and poetry deliver transcendent joys that unite us despite our differences. The study of the world’s religions shows us that there are diverse paths to a meaningful life. Ethics teaches us to distinguish good from evil. And philosophical training reminds us to be curious, courageous, compassionate and modest about what we know.

Good education helps to create good people. In order for society to function, we need welders – fast food cooks, lawyers, and even politicians – who are honest, trustworthy and kind. No matter the trade or profession, we need citizens who understand that war, terror and hate destroy understanding and kill hope.

It is true that there are very few paying jobs for full-time philosophers. But welders, cooks, and politicians – indeed all citizens – benefit from philosophical insight and broad education. We need better thinking and more enlightened citizens – more liberal arts and less hot air.

Read more here: http://www.fresnobee.com/living/liv-columns-blogs/article46737230.html#storylink=cpy