Here is a song by Leslie Fish explaining why the wish for total peace, if granted, would lead to tyranny. We all want peace, but not at the price of a one world government.
Is it wrong to long for a war to break out just to gratify one's personal wish to go to war? Well, it is if you start a war just to make that happen! It is if you conscript and/or tax others to serve in that war without their consent. But it's not wrong, if you are a privateer or a mercenary, and you offer your services to those who want them and would be willing to pay.
Who should pay for waging war? Those who want to wage war. That way we can put a cap on it. But it is not wrong for a young warrior to long to serve. It is not wrong for men and women who have that calling to pursue it.
In the video embedded below, I read from Nathan Alterman's poem "אמרה חרב הנצורים" --"Said the Sword of the Besieged". The poem is from the point of view of a sword being wielded in a hopeless last battle, in which the warrior is killed.
In the discussion that ensues after the reading, my father, Amnon Katz, says: "The sword's entire purpose is battle. And it is happy to fulfill its purpose. Even under these tragic circumstances. But we get the impression that also the one who wields the sword is privy to these values and to this experience, to the glory of this bitter and awful hour."
Is it wrong for a young man to long for battle? To sign up for voluntary military service? To hope for glory?
Both Aaron Burr and Alexander Hamilton served in the American Revolution. Both distinguished themselves. But Aaron Burr wanted always to be on the front lines, so when he was offered a desk job by George Washington, he turned it down. Hamilton was ambitious for advancement, so he took that job.
Both Jean Laffite and Aaron Burr served the US as volunteers. Neither of them did it for a "free" college education or for a salary. Laffite was never reimbursed for his contribution or for those things that were taken from him by force. For years, Aaron Burr was destitute after being persecuted by Jefferson, but as a veteran he was not entitled to a military pension. Finally, when Burr was very old, President Jackson granted him a small pension.
Is all war bad? Or only some wars? Is getting paid for war always bad? Shouldn't our soldiers be paid?
There are some Libertarians who seem to have serious problems with the idea that military service could be entered into in the hopes of going into battle or for pay. In the video embedded below. Austin Petersen and Larry Sharpe discuss a recent anti-military statement by the Vice Chair of the Libertarian Party.
Not all libertarians are anti-military or anti-war. "Did you agree to kill people for money?" Austin Petersen asks Larry Sharpe. Sharpe replied "War is evil. War is bad. ...Would I join now? No. I'm also not 17 years old anymore."
But is it wrong to be 17 years old and long to serve? I don't think so. Should soldiers expect always to be penniless and to go begging when they are in want?
Why do we honor our soldiers only when we see them as poor and without compensation for their service? Why do we think that they deserve less than teachers or doctors? Is it because we are uncomfortable with the work they do? Or is it because public funding for anything corrupts?
Let us honor our soldiers and work toward a free country where they can ply their trade with their heads held high and with compensation that is not dependent on taxation. We do not want a standing army, but we do need to have warriors who are well trained and ready to fight for us. If we repeal the Neutrality Act and the Logan Act, we can restore the freedom that volunteer soldiers like Aaron Burr fought for in the Revolutionary War!
Both Aaron Burr and Alexander Hamilton served in the American Revolution. Both distinguished themselves. But Aaron Burr wanted always to be on the front lines, so when he was offered a desk job by George Washington, he turned it down. Hamilton was ambitious for advancement, so he took that job.
Both Jean Laffite and Aaron Burr served the US as volunteers. Neither of them did it for a "free" college education or for a salary. Laffite was never reimbursed for his contribution or for those things that were taken from him by force. For years, Aaron Burr was destitute after being persecuted by Jefferson, but as a veteran he was not entitled to a military pension. Finally, when Burr was very old, President Jackson granted him a small pension.
Is all war bad? Or only some wars? Is getting paid for war always bad? Shouldn't our soldiers be paid?
There are some Libertarians who seem to have serious problems with the idea that military service could be entered into in the hopes of going into battle or for pay. In the video embedded below. Austin Petersen and Larry Sharpe discuss a recent anti-military statement by the Vice Chair of the Libertarian Party.
Not all libertarians are anti-military or anti-war. "Did you agree to kill people for money?" Austin Petersen asks Larry Sharpe. Sharpe replied "War is evil. War is bad. ...Would I join now? No. I'm also not 17 years old anymore."
But is it wrong to be 17 years old and long to serve? I don't think so. Should soldiers expect always to be penniless and to go begging when they are in want?
Why do we honor our soldiers only when we see them as poor and without compensation for their service? Why do we think that they deserve less than teachers or doctors? Is it because we are uncomfortable with the work they do? Or is it because public funding for anything corrupts?
Let us honor our soldiers and work toward a free country where they can ply their trade with their heads held high and with compensation that is not dependent on taxation. We do not want a standing army, but we do need to have warriors who are well trained and ready to fight for us. If we repeal the Neutrality Act and the Logan Act, we can restore the freedom that volunteer soldiers like Aaron Burr fought for in the Revolutionary War!
RELATED
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI am a pacifist, but just like being a vegan, I do not want to live in a world where everyone else has to do as I do. My cat is not a vegan for instance. I understand the need to fight for our freedom, and I support people who stand up for what is right, as long as I am not asked to do so. I have felt some wars are necessary and we need somewhat of a standing army, but I feel a start could just be to at least cut military spending. I liked what Gary Johnson said about just cutting 20%, and that actually is not all that different than Ronald Reagan when he cut a lot of military spending. When I was younger I was always taught, but the news haha, that Reagan was such a bad guy, but looking back, he seems quite reasonable. He was the first president to sign an executive order apologizing to the Japanese Americans interned, even though many never received payments. He actually seems more pro peace than a lot of Democrats of today who claim to be. Maybe it is not about total peace, but not doing things that prevoke our neighbors. Can we at east agree on that.
ReplyDeleteYes, definitely there is no reason to provoke our neighbors into going to war against us. I totally agree.
Delete