<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
From Augustine to the Taliban, it's clear that revolutionary
violence is defensive violence - deeply regrettable, even if
necessary - requiring putting aside the unrealistic optimism of
absolute pacifism. But it's not a path to be chosen when others are
available - and it's all too easy to say that there are no others.
E.g., was the violence of 1775 or 1861 in this country necessary
defensive violence? Probably not. Was it necessary in the 20th
century for blacks in the South or workers in the Midwest to arm
themselves? Probably. <br>
<br>
"A just war exists when a people tries to ward off the threat of
coercive domination by another people, or to overthrow an
already-existing domination. A war is unjust, on the other hand,
when a people try to impose domination on another people, or try to
retain an already existing coercive rule over them." [Murray
Rothbard] It's clear, e.g., where justice lies in the Mideast, from
Palestine to Pakistan - or at least where it doesn't.<br>
<br>
On 1/11/11 7:58 PM, E.Wayne Johnson wrote:<br>
<span style="white-space: pre;">> ...Violent resistance against
such an enemy is not just futile, it's absurd.<br>
> </span><br>
<br>
</body>
</html>