Unilateral Disarmament: A Bad Moral Analogy

Last updated on: August 27, 2018 at 6:55 am by John Mark N. Reynolds

Unilateral Disarmament: A Bad Moral Analogy 2018-08-27T06:55:41-04:00 John Mark N. Reynolds

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Atomic Cloud over Japan

“Times are bad. Times are so bad that to stop this particular evil, we will have to do things we wish we did not have to do. We do not like it, but we cannot unilaterally disarm in the face of this particular enemy.” Just this once, because the enemy is so bad, we must do evil and hope good will come.

I have now lived long enough to have heard this about several different foes. The best cases for this policy deal with real unusual threats. The Soviet Union was an extensional threat to liberty and used brutal means to oppress people. Yet some of our actions in fighting the Soviet Union, such as arming extremists in Muslim countries continue to plague the world.

One reason I have always hesitated about the justification of doing a bad thing, so good may come is that we know we will do evil and only hope we do more good. Arm the enemy of your enemy, even if he would normally be an enemy, and you certainly will have empowered a bad man. Did you have to do this? We cannot be sure.

We can be sure we gave the Soviet Union aid to survive Hitler. Did we have to do so? Did we allow the brutal mass murderer Stalin to stay in power longer? Isn’t it at least plausible that we could have defeated Hitler without doing so?

This is not to be naive about the “righteousness” of the Allied cause. Our own moral blindness as the Western allies gives me a second concern about doing things we know are wrong to win.

There is no nation righteous, no not one. Colonial Britain and America (with our system of segregation) had much internal work to do to be just. However, the twisted moral monstrosity of a regime like Hitler’s Germany, Stalin’s Soviet Union, or Mao’s China had the Allies’ vices with few of her virtues. The Soviet Union was an empire of oppressed nations no less than the United Kingdom, but also committed intentional mass murder internally at horrific levels.

However, the moral failings of any nation, including our own, is a second reason to oppose knowingly dropping our moral standards. Why? Every nation has horrible ethical blindspots. If we intentionally give up a restraint, or cease to do something moral we do or start doing bad things we have not done, then we multiply our errors. If we are not careful, the greatest good will cease to be the best of the flawed choices humans always must make.

This is a moral caution for any human organization. Take a college as an example. The institution will do bad things without even knowing they are doing so. If the school cuts ethical corners intentionally to make money to survive, they may cease to be tolerable! I have set in meetings where the leaders knowingly trashed education for many online students, so the institution could use the money to help onsite students.

The argument was that the “world had changed” and we would have to give out mediocre education to many, so the few could learn. Whatever our flaws were, they remained, but now we were knowingly deciding to do something that not a few years before we proudly rejected. If they are so bad that we must drop the (perhaps few) virtues we do have to in order to win, then we may become as bad as what we are resisting! What are the virtues we are protecting?

Suppose, however, we go ahead and do it and remain (on the whole) morally more decent than our foe. Suppose again that we do win- unlike the Christian colleges that go online for profits only to have sold their birthright to discover that the pottage/profits, like the education, is an illusion. How do we know we will be capable of returning to the old morality?

Winning by doing bad may badly change us. We might not care any more about the old rules. Imagine a nation that hated lies and expected their leaders to tell them the truth. They know their leaders do stretch the truth, but they do not like it and would oppose any leader they discovered who planned to lie. Now postulate that this people became internally divided such that both groups believed the other was a mortal threat to the moral life of the nation. What if the group that believes it is losing gives up on truth or truth telling to win? If they win, how do they know that they can return to a love of the truth?

Again, we must live in the world as it is. Sometimes our choices are all bad and we choose the greatest good, but we must never then justify or participate in the evil of that regime. We can cheer the good without participating in the bad or coming to sound as if the bad is not so bad after all.

Fourth, we might become used to corner cutting to stop “them” and manufacture enemies to justify anything we think we need to do. The Soviet Union is not morally equivalent to the US Democratic Party. If you think it is, you do not know much about the Soviet Union. It is hard to hold the line morally and always tempting to bend the rules. The very “success” of the first compromise tempts us mightily to compromise more.

Perhaps, we must cut corners to beat Hitler, but are we prepared to beat the Nazis and then not make every war World War II?

Finally, the advice has been deeply disastrous at least as often as it has worked. Germans thought nothing could be worse than the Red Shirts in Stalin’s Russia and so backed the Brown Shirts. They ended up with two moral monstrosities and German conservative Christians were now responsible for one of them! The anti-Communists (the Whites) facing Lenin and Trotsky (the Reds), true moral monsters, in Russia whipped up the worst features of Russia as (seemingly) necessary tools to stop the Red Terror. The White Terror tainted the cause of anti-Communism and failed. To stop the French Reign of Terror by creating Napoleon did not save France and harmed all of Europe.

Too often the advice is caused by a failure of imagination or will. We have been corrupted already by other compromises, previous failures, and cutting corners seems our only way out. If we go to this solution too quickly, too easily, we risk stunting the solution that could have given us a victory without compromise and the costs that must come from such compromises.

My own life has shown me that doing the right thing is hard and often I have done the wrong thing. Unilateral disarmament comes not when we refuse to use the enemies’ tools to win, but when we throw away our best tool: the little bit of justice we have. Lincoln was right: right is might. We always doubt it, but glory, hallelujah His truth is always marching on. Times are so bad that we know we are almost surely worse than we know, so we will do all we know and never less than we know so we can live to make men holy as He died to make men free.

Politics

Previous Post

August 24, 2018

A Martyred Republican Speaks on Saving a Republic

Next Post

August 25, 2018 Hero, Patriot: Warts and All He Was a Great American

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Apologetics Art Culture Education On Books On Education Philosophy Politics Pop Culture Spiritual Reflections Uncategorized

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 July 2025 June 2025 September 2024 July 2024 June 2024 December 2023 June 2023 September 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

I worked with a trowel in one hand and a weapon in the other, ready to build and fight. Who am I?

Select your answer to see how you score.

The servants The Priests The builders The Tribe of Judah

Books by This Author John Mark Reynolds

See All Titles »