Hello
Let's say that a certain part of North Korea revolted and tried to become independent (started a war of independence). Let's say that the rebels supported capitalism and the reason for the revolt was that they were tired of communism. Should this then be supported, even if it was clear that many, possibly millions, of civilians would be killed? How much support would a war of independence require to be legal? Since, a war will hurt everyone in the region, and if 99 % of the population agrees, still they have no right to do things that might lead to that the 1 % opponent's property will be damaged (right to property)? Well, I guess property doesn't exist for most of people in North korea, but still.
Do the rebels have the right of doing things that might actually kill civilians or damage civilian property? For example planting bombs in important buildings in Pyongyang (guerilla warfare).
I hope I have been clear enough. It would be interesting to get a libertarian perspective on this.
/John G
Movements such as your hypothetical movement for independence would be self-defense oriented. If libertarianism applied, they can only kill people or damage property in self-defense of their life, liberty, or property, and since communism violates these principles it could be justified to fight against the aggressors. but realistically, all is fair in war.
I've stopped "supporting" wars a long time ago: if someone wants to take the side of the insurgents they can do out of their own will. Many Dutch and Germans flocked to join the Boers during their second war with Britain and many young Britons and French went to Finland during their war with the Soviet Union (though they were instructed by their own ambassadors to keep away from the frontlines, as Christopher Lee, the most famous of these volunteers, said). These individuals went there out of their own free will and paid with their own blood and money so they are OK in my book.
On the issue of "collateral damages" Mao Tse-Tung said that guerrilla is like a fish swimming in the sea (my leftist past coming to haunt me): this sea is of course the civilian population at large. Guerrillas have all the interests in keeping good relationships with the people, not stealing their flocks, not burning down their houses, not raping their women... movements which failed to learn this lesson (Sendero Luminoso, ironically a self-proclaimed Maoist movement, is a good example) were doomed from the beginning.
On the issue of secession I always mantain that there's no need for violence, grown men and women can talk it over without resorting to hayforks and blunderblusses like human beings. Problem is the Nation-State doesn't like secession, not one bit: just look at any European penal code. For example in Italy any "attempt at breaking the Unity of the State" is punishable with twenty years of jail minimum. Enough said.
Yes, it's time for the Dr Goebbels show!
Kakugo:Problem is the Nation-State doesn't like secession, not one bit: just look at any European penal code. For example in Italy any "attempt at breaking the Unity of the State" is punishable with twenty years of jail minimum. Enough said.
Wow. I guess the Lega Nord has an uphill fight.
What every other nation in the world should do: NOTHING!!!
What some busy body imperialist nations like the USA would do: Destroy and cause mayhem.
Jefferson did not even follow his own advice in dealing with prates: "Peace, commerce and honest friendship with all nations; entangling alliances with none."
Ludwig von Mises Institute | 518 West Magnolia Avenue | Auburn, Alabama 36832-4528
Phone: 334.321.2100 · Fax: 334.321.2119
contact@Mises.org | webmaster | AOL-IM MainMises
Mises.org sitemap