The Hazards of Criticizing Lincoln’s War
'When the conduct of war is depicted as essentially a force for good, citizens who criticize wars risk incurring the wrath of their own governments'
‘When the conduct of war is depicted as essentially a force for good, citizens who criticize wars risk incurring the wrath of their own governments’
(Wanjiru Njoya, Mises Wire) - It is trite to observe that the ideal of free speech applies not only to those with whom we agree, but also—even more so—to those with whom we disagree. Free speech is always important in defending liberty, but it becomes even more so when debating the justice of war. The causes of war are inevitably contested, and it would be impossible to avoid the evils of aggressive wars if critical voices against war are silenced.
One of the main concerns in debates surrounding war is that supporters of war are often quick to accuse their political opponents of being unpatriotic or even traitors. They then silence their opponents under the guise of maintaining national unity.
Warmongers invariably cloak their acts of aggression in the language of righteousness—and, unless one is a pacifist, what principled objection could there be to a righteous war?
The Orwellian slogan “War is Peace” illustrates how doublethink allows aggressive states to wage endless wars while calling it “peace.” Opposing war is then seen as thwarting efforts to promote global peace. For example, President Trump described his strikes against Iran as “a good thing for all parties concerned and a very good thing for the world.” He added…