2025-06-16

Might is Right

PXL_20250611_130557244 You'll likely be pleased to know that I'm not going to defend my headline too hard. But let's see how far I can get.

Attempts to understand "right" or "justice" - see how whiffly I am being about exactly what I'm talking about - go waay back. In The Republic we find that old fascist Plato pretending to search for a theory of Justice; he is of course not searching, he is just presenting a preamble to lead us to his pet theory; to do that he has to eliminate likely contenders1. He puts the idea that "might is right" into Thrasymachus's mouth; because he has no meaningful arguments aginst the idea, he just makes T an unpleasant angry character and really, that's the level of intellectual argument you'll find there.

As we all know, I dislike rights-based language. In moving from a "state of nature" where you have the right of private justice - i.e., you can hit people if you think they have wronged you - you abandon this right, in exchange for the state promising public justice; you do not really have a "right to life"; instead, the state promises to hit people who try to kill you. Which is to say, the state promises to use the overwhelming - in comparison to any private citizen - might available to it in order to ensure your "rights".

But international relations are not far from the state of nature, perhaps more so now that the USAnians are going a bit mad. So if two countries - for example Iran and Israel - decide to have a fight, the true arbiter is might. Naturally enough useless pols1, whose only currency is useless words, disagree; we have for example our own Dear Leader saying The reports of these strikes are concerning and we urge all parties to step back and reduce tensions urgently. Escalation serves no one in the region. Stability in the Middle East must be the priority and we are engaging partners to de-escalate. Now is the time for restraint. But there's no information content there; this is just what they say, reflexively, unthinkingly, every time. They are word-people; they would like the world to be one that privileges the talents of word-people. That their advice is harmful is of no concern to them.

In the private sphere, we have surrendered our right to private justice to the state and should not use violence. But this should not confuse us into assuming this is true everywhere. And if there is to be war, it is better that it be short.

Notes


1. In fact he doesn't even manage this. As Popper points out, Plato doesn't include "equality before the law", not because he hasn't thought of it, but because he has no good arguments against.


Refs


No comments: