Thursday, January 10, 2013

Morality and War Revisited.

VERBATIM




There is some search activity going on focused on some pieces I wrote on morality and war some time ago.

As an unbeliever.

Those pieces are gone forever, and were erased soon after my conversion.

If you are interested on my views on morality and war, read this biography of General Thomas Jackson.  It is available for free at the RL Dabney archive.

It takes some effort to get accustomed to Dabney's style, but the effort is worth it (in this and in other works of his).

A bit of an example of Jackson's thoughts concerning conduct towards the invader:
The character of his thinking was illustrated by the declaration which he made upon assuming this command, that it was the true policy of the South to take no prisoners in this war. He affirmed that this would be in the end truest humanity, because it would shorten the contest, and prove economical of the blood of both parties; and that it was a measure urgently dictated by the interests of our cause, and clearly sustained by justice.
.....
This startling opinion he calmly sustained in conversation, many months after, by the following considerations, which he prefaced with the remark, that, inasmuch as the authorities of the Confederate States had seen fit to pursue the other policy, he had cheerfully acquiesced, and was as careful as other commanders to enjoin on his soldiers the giving of quarter and humane treatment to disarmed enemies.
.....
But he affirmed this war was, in its intent and inception, different from all civilized wars, and therefore should not be brought under their rules. It was not, like them, a strife for a point of honor, a diplomatic quarrel, a commercial advantage, a boundary, or a province; but an attempt on the part of the North against the very existence of the Southern States. It was founded in a denial to their people of the right of self-government, in virtue of which, solely, the Northern States themselves existed. Its intention was wholesale murder and piracy, the extermination of a whole people's national life. It was, in fact, but the " John Brown Raid " resumed and extended, with new accessories of horror, and, as the Commonwealth of Virginia had righteously put to death every one of those cut-throats upon the gallows, why were their comrades in the same crime to claim now a more honorable treatment? Such a war was an offense against humanity so monstrous, that it outlawed those who shared its guilt beyond the pale of forbearance. But as justice authorized their destruction, so wisdom and prudence demanded it, for it is always wisest to act upon principle, in preference to expediency.

Another example, given in the Dabney biography, was when brave federal cavalry unit made a run at his lines, and a fellow officer expressed sorrow over the fact that all but one of these brave men were gunned down or captured.  Jackson replied (and I paraphrase), "Shoot them all.  I do not wish them to be brave."

Another example.  The rapacious nature of the Federalist troops aroused Jackson's righteous indignation on more than one occasion.  This link is one.  See the Dabney biography for more.  A common theme throughout history is the brutality with which regimes try to put down challenges to their power.  See Syria.  And Sheridan.  And Sherman.

General Jackson was fighting for the very existence of his nation and people.

General Jackson was, it should be noted, scrupulous about respecting noncombatants and private property.  I wholeheartedly concur with this.  This is one aspect of his "black flag" policy that is not often mentioned.  Also significant is his obedience of his superiors' wishes, that the "black flag" policy not be employed.

The Federalists Grant, Sheridan, and Sherman, authorized by the tyrant Lincoln, were all too happy to burn, rape, steal, and murder their way across the South, punishing noncombatants and sending baggage trains laden with loot North at every turn.  Demonize the enemy, to include civilians, and it is easier to go down the road of satanic atrocity.  Anything goes... after all, they're all Secesh... right?

This is the way of Robspierre.  Of Marxists.  Of Tyrants.  I would want no part of any such rabble.

In no way do I believe that his oft-quoted "black flag" statement applied, in Jackson's mind, to anything other than Federalist soldiers (i.e. combatants, and invaders at that):
"I always thought that we should meet the Federal invaders on the outer verge of just right and defense, and raise at once the black flag, viz., 'No quarter to the violators of our homes and firesides.'"
War is hell.  In every case. 

It is the duty of the defender to protect his land and people by making the war more hellish on the invaders.  It is the duty of the soldier to end the threat as decisively as possible.  This should be done without, I would add, assuming the characteristics of Lincoln, Robespierre, Sheridan, Sherman, Grant, and Satan himself... 

This is, as Jackson said, the truest humanity.

No comments:

Post a Comment