Michael Walzer on Just War Theory | Big Think

Michael Walzer on Just War Theory
New videos DAILY: bigth.ink/youtube
Join Big Think Edge for exclusive videos: bigth.ink/Edge
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some of the troubles that we have had in Iraq after '03 come from the loss of confidence of trust that we produced by our behavior in '91, Walzer says.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MICHAEL WALZER:
Michael Walzer is one of America's leading political philosophers. He is a professor emeritus at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, New Jersey and editor of Dissent, a left-wing quarterly of politics and culture. He has written on a wide range of topics, including just and unjust wars, nationalism, ethnicity, economic justice, social criticism, radicalism, tolerance, and political obligation. He is also a contributing editor to The New Republic and a member of the editorial board of Philosophy & Public Affairs. To date he has written 27 books and has published over 300 articles, essays, and book reviews. He is a member of several philosophical organizations including the American Philosophical Society.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TRANSCRIPT:
Michael Walzer: Well going in this was a classic case of a just war. There was an active aggression invasion of a country, the invasion of a member of the U.N, and we organize the coalition to resist and throw back the invasion and then we stopped. In classic Just War Theory that’s what you are supposed to do. You are supposed to defeat the aggression and repel it and then stop. You don’t march...you don’t have to overthrow the aggressive government; that’s for the people to do if they want to do it, and we stopped. But then we incited a rebellion inside Iraq leading people to expect, since we had an army right there, that we would help the rebels, and then we didn’t. And there was mass murder. Saddam, who had been unable to fight against the coalition army was perfectly capable of fighting against then slaughtering his own people, and he did on a very large scale in the south and later in the north … so, yes, we behaved very badly and some of the troubles that we've had in Iraq after ’03 come from the loss of confidence of trust that we produced by our behavior in ‘91.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ABOUT BIG THINK:
Smarter Faster™
Big Think is the leading source of expert-driven, actionable, educational content -- with thousands of videos, featuring experts ranging from Bill Clinton to Bill Nye, we help you get smarter, faster. S​ubscribe to learn from top minds like these daily. Get actionable lessons from the world’s greatest thinkers & doers. Our experts are either disrupting or leading their respective fields. ​We aim to help you explore the big ideas and core skills that define knowledge in the 21st century, so you can apply them to the questions and challenges in your own life.
Other Frequent contributors include Michio Kaku & Neil DeGrasse Tyson.
Michio Kaku Playlist: bigth.ink/kaku
Bill Nye Playlist: bigth.ink/BillNye
Neil DeGrasse Tyson Playlist: bigth.ink/deGrasseTyson
Read more at Bigthink.com for a multitude of articles just as informative and satisfying as our videos. New articles posted daily on a range of intellectual topics.
Join Big Think Edge, to gain access to a world-class learning platform focused on building the soft skills essential to 21st century success. It features insight from many of the most celebrated and intelligent individuals in the world today. Topics on the platform are focused on: emotional intelligence, digital fluency, health and wellness, critical thinking, creativity, communication, career development, lifelong learning, management, problem solving & self-motivation.
BIG THINK EDGE: bigth.ink/Edge
If you're interested in licensing this or any other Big Think clip for commercial or private use, contact our licensing partner, Executive Interviews: bigth.ink/licensing
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Follow Big Think here:
📰BigThink.com: bigth.ink
🧔Facebook: bigth.ink/facebook
🐦Twitter: bigth.ink/twitter
📸Instagram: bigth.ink/Instragram
📹KZbin: bigth.ink/youtube
✉ E-mail: [e-mail]

[@bigthink]

Want to get Smarter, Faster? Subscribe for DAILY videos: bigth.ink/GetSmarter

[@georgec.richard6430]

Lovely Video! Apologies for chiming in, I would appreciate your initial thoughts. Have you heard about - Setackson Dumbstruck Scheme (probably on Google)? It is a smashing one off guide for understanding how to give women amazing orgasims minus the headache. Ive heard some incredible things about it and my friend after a lifetime of fighting got great results with it.

[@allison5923]

Here from homework LOL

[@visiongt3944]

I hate this writer for his book; his english is old and confusing and I'm gonna get a D coz of him 😤

[@thegamingfire597]

Sad

[@onewayticket2148]

Same

[@nehcterGXU]

Here to review huhuhu

[@riantloxya4422]

😢so sad

[@SonoftheLivingGod7]

I'd love to talk to this man for a few hours. He's Interesting.

[@HierophanticRose]

In eastern traditions, there is more of an objective concept of war that many people from those regions seems to have made peace and even embraced without the promise of eased conscience or dignified manner. There's an idea that there are two kinds of war, war for surviving and war for thriving. And sometimes one's war for thriving is another's war for surviving

[@miretchin]

Great stuff

[@feliciacovington699]

In some cases, war is very necessary. Wars often achieve things that would not have necessarily happened if it had not been for the war. I do not condone violence, but I am saying that it's necessary at times. Often times, people only understand the language of war and violence. So, thats the language we must speak to them in.

[@TheUrbanZone]

I disagree with some of his work but I think he would have been a great professor to take.

[@JLDreamer289]

Agreed!

[@MGsven]

@DBDMotorsports i know, thats my point

[@lexsite]

These are essentially basic concepts a students of public international law learns. Oppenheimer has authored a treatise on it.

[@Treblaine]

@DomeSwag Well the problem with that is treating THE ENTIRE of the Second World War as a single iteration isn't accurate as different states join iteratively. The Prisoner's dilemma is not so rigid, especially using probability over pure cost. You could just as easily say there is no real prisoner's dilemma by looking at the way suspects are actually treated by the legal system such as additional evidence and not depending entirely on stool-pigeons. The lesson of trust remains.

[@yoyoyoy500]

"War is the last resort of the incompetent"-Isaac Asimov,Foundation

[@cdle007]

A ludicrous statement said by an overrated writer that did not know anything about reality, just fantasy.

[@twomp5613]

@@cdle007 based

[@SecularMentat]

@Hillhermit Pre-emptive self defense? (This is where The best defense is a good offense) Idea comes from as well. Attack when, or before your enemy attacks to take the brunt out of their attack on you, it has worked well historically. I do agree though, of all 'unecessary harm' claims thats the one that makes the most sense for necessary harm.

[@CrimeaRiver]

Well spoken, Organ Freeman!

[@Treblaine]

@DomeSwag I'd say there is: the reward is Peace the risk is WAR! Say Freedonia and Freeland dispute over something like resources: 1-they trust and cooperate, do OK sharing finite resources. 2--Freedonia betrays Freeland in a sudden attack, an easy victory for Freedonia with spoils of war and the WORST fate for Freeland 3--Both Freedonia and Freeland suspect each other and go to war, long war of attrition, both suffer worse than cooperating but neither as badly as Freeland in option 2.

[@alilapointe1]

indeed

[@ShlttyBill]

That would be two eyes for two eyes. An eye for an eye leaves the world monocular.

[@ryanrgarza]

Sometimes you have to take the lesser of two evils. Yes. The opposing side believes that as well. Only one of the sides is right though.

[@sollertiskhan3254]

Nope. Only one side wins. And the side that wins will be assumed to be right in history

[@jakejohnson6763]

There’s rarely a “right and wrong” side. Things just aren’t black and white, everything ends up being gray and muddy.

[@ryanrgarza]

@@jakejohnson6763 I agree with you now. I clicked the notifications button on youtube after three years. My opinion has changed. Right and wrong are muddy.

[@iamorganfreeman]

Organ Freeman, i see what you did there

[@SequentiallyCompact]

Just war is a philosophical theory debated by students and professors of philosophy. It is not a soundbite.

[@exby]

@bloodyvamp77 indeed but how is @answerOfstupids a bad person? is that a legitimate accusal based on a single statement? It's the same generalization...

[@troooooper100]

@iamorganfreeman No, It saves four more if done justifiably under main law. And grantees much more peaceful future.

[@OhBoyILoveTomatoes]

Doin homework from my Global Politics class pray for me

[@rmat9023]

240p in 2011? ok

[@BLADEfan753]

i feel bad for you

[@robban94h]

alright man

[@Adski91]

Meanwhile millions died in Rwanda because we wanted peace. Is genocide now just a "problem" of peace?

[@Treblaine]

War is a prisoner's dilemma.

[@user-dj7zv7gd1l]

Just War Theory

[@DCCDavid]

No, that would make the world half blind.

[@asfafffww88]

Everything can be justified.

[@VX-cy4du]

If youre a subjectivist

[@iamorganfreeman]

@answerOfstupids "an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind"

[@chiffmonkey]

Is there not a significant counter argument that war isn't the only way to resolve such issues? I mean, where the hell is the pacifying weapons development budget? Nowhere to be seen.

[@trsmitty5793]

Yes, there are many philosophers who speak of the Philosophy of Love, and Philosophy of Politics.

[@MaisieDaisyUpsadaisy]

chiffmonkey These "pacifists", though, tend not to be listened to.

[@TheUkaners]

@ApocAlypse6275 "Any alliance whose purpose is not the intention to wage war is senseless and useless."-Adolf Hitler

[@PeterD2S]

So men aren't civilians?

[@troooooper100]

@Mr702Gamer What your saying is right, but what your claiming is wrong. I never said that. I said what army has done is nothing but kill. Rebellions, civilians, and counter forces all in name of supposed terrorism. We all know where the next most wanted terrorist might have its hq hidden just gotta look at the stats of which developing country has more oil. Very simple.

[@scottsmith4178]

Just War theory is an extra-Biblical concoction contrived to contravene the commands of Christ (Matthew 5:38-39, 43-44). When an American is asked who won World War II, the answer is invariably "We did." It is never "God did." We give ourselves glory for saving the world, but does God deserve any glory, and if so, how much? If Christians had not participated in the killing and destruction of that (or any) war, where would that leave God and His creation? In other words, what would God do if ALL Christians obeyed Christ by loving their enemies and not resisting evil persons, rather than killing them? Would He be furious with us and refuse to help us? Would He be powerless to stop the servants of Satan from taking over the world, powerless to carry out the Second Coming, and ultimately, powerless to avoid the loss of His creation? If so, Satan would be delighted for us to obey Christ so faithfully. But many examples in the Bible demonstrate God’s ability and willingness to destroy transgressors without human assistance. If He’s not powerless, He doesn’t needChristians to disobey Christ to save His creation. If He doesn’t need us to disobey Christ, why should we? Can we not trust God for an outcome that is acceptable to Him? It's His world, after all, not ours. Let Him take responsibility for the consequences of our obedience. Let Him decide who will populate and rule His world (Nazis, communists, Islamists or maybe people who aren’t so scary) and whether your race and culture will survive. If God isn’t willing for your enemies to rule, they won't. In the first three centuries, the Church came closest to realizing the ideal of loving enemies - a rejection of violence that did not result in calamity for God (but apparently did for Satan). He doesn’t seem to be too anxious about it since He wants us to repay evil with good (war is repaying evil with evil, but no accommodation is made for a "necessary evil" [Rom 3:8]). Does that guarantee our personal safety - that we won’t partake in the sufferings of Christ? No. But if you’re willing to die for something Jesus never promoted - political freedoms - you should be willing to die for what was important to him - the kingdom of God, which exists across cultures. In pursuit of perfect love, let go of your fears and fall into the hands of God, trusting Him to decide whether to allow our enemies to send us on to heaven, or enslave us, or neither. If enslaved, refer to 1 Peter 2:18-21 and pray for your human master to become a brother. This is what's expected of followers of the Prince of Peace. He said, “If anyone comes to me and does not hate…even his own life - he cannot be my disciple.” (Luke 14:26) www.kingdomofgodflag.info/thoughtsonpeace.html

[@PartyChicken407]

I was hoping for answers not questions I already asked myself. Big think : you need to go more in depth on this one.

[@reddstammers3998]

gabe Roberts has horrid BO please spread this message

[@MGsven]

why young men, where did gender equality go? :P

[@TheZairae]

He looks like Howard Zinn with a big nose.

[@lorantmena9935]

That is not Peace my friend. Peace is an absolute & universal language.

[@BLADEfan753]

it is also justified for world domination...lol

[@user-on2ys9jr6t]

Child molestation? your move.

[@aevans03]

I don't understand why people don't see this theory as evil

[@nightstreetWalker]

Funny how now in 2023 it sounds wrong to include "women" as non-combatants.

[@Mohamed-bm6yk]

Christians: the prophet mohamed was a Warlord Me: read

[@MeekErinovski]

Ya'll Godd-deeeem hippiess - Waar if fa Men argghh : O

[@eliebouroufail7107]

No war is just and jesus on the cross is the proof

[@qigong1001]

Well, that was a waste of a few minutes. Oops! Just wasted another half a minute on this comment.

[@alexsiryj]

Just war is bullshit.

[@alexsiryj]

I fell into a kind of psychological trap where I thought EVERYTHING I did was justified and permitted me to do whatever I liked and look where I ended up: nearly killed, impoverished, facing judgement before the people I supposedly loved, and a case of severe severe mental disorder.

[@exby]

what a hypocrite @volound and your words aren't generalizing or what?

[@heatherdavie]

This is a great idea, unfortunately ISIS & Al Qaeda don't believe in these rules, it is a pity hatred can not be stamped out. The world would be a much better place without politics & religion.

[@casusbelli9225]

A warmongering hypocrite.

[@KCatalano88]

He spent that whole time talking and he barely said a single thing.

[@micaeltatro]

there is no reason for war, infact Christ commands us to live our enemies and pray for those who PERSECUTE us

[@Meekseek]

+michael tatro the psychopaths running this planet including the Pope & his nwo do not give a damn fig about humanity, war is their answer to everything. There is a war going on over your head it's called geoengineering and it's a military deployment and we're being loaded up with metal nano particles, same with gmo same with vaccines they are all tools of war.

[@hannahsears8851]

+michael tatro While this is true, in the Old Testament in the Bible, God commanded Israel into battle multiple times. On several occasions God wiped out or threatened to wipe out civilizations e.g Tarsus, Noah's Ark, Jericho.

[@dsnooz]

+Hannah Sears let me point out one major thing you overlooked: he said "as Christians..." Christianity, obviously, is the belief that Christ is the messiah. When Jesus was questioned about Jewish law by lawyers, he summed up the whole law and prophets (Old Testament) by saying love your neighbor and love God.

[@NoName-lq7kt]

JEW

[@Ornithology654]

Anti semite