Comparative Just War Theory Assignment Sample

• Subject Name : Management

Just War, Pacifism, Just Peace, and Peacebuilding

Introduction to Comparative Just War Theory

In this paper, the purpose is to focus on the war theory and on the Pacifism, which is contradictory to each other when applying and understanding it. It is a way to understand a commitment to peace and to provide views to the war (Ngai, 2019, pp 373). War or the pacifism is the two contrasting views that can have a different resemblance to the verity of the viewpoints. A warlike situation can be understood in the condition pacifisms and can be understood applied with a perspective philosophy of deontological and consequentialist ethical workings (Pattison, 2020, pp 1).

By understanding the word “pacifism” it is a derived concept that advocates the peacemaking course of actions. It is also a defining way of the commitment to peace and to have a purpose. On the contrary, Just a war, is about the theory, to have a war and to forget the peace, it is like an eye to an eye, suffices the purposes (Rock, 2018, p 82).

Just War Theory and Pacifism

As per the philosophy, the meaning of the pacifism that provides a distinguishing approach. To overcome the issue of war by understanding it would be related to the generate commitment, to edge over the nonviolence that can be due to the narrower anti-war position. Pacifism is a word, that has been noted to be a "non-violent," that has been denoted by Jackson (Jackson, 2019, 59), which defines, the position, that would go beyond anti-war pacifism and it can be an opposite of the violence that can be caused to every form. Pacifism can also be defined and the way of dialects, that can be a cause to the justified violence and it can be based on the general Western just war tradition. While the meaning of the Pacifism is defined as the continuum ways of experiencing and assessing the goals of the morality of war, the same can be applied in the model of the Just in theory (Cahill, 2019, p 169). It is also an ongoing debate that can be judged over the role theory of the “contingent pacifism” or “just war pacifism” (Sterba 1998). Just a war theory does not approach, the consequences of the moral issue in the war, that can cause the disruption and even be an immorality issue like the "massive, systematic and can even cause the killing of human beings". The wars and the pacifism issue can also be a cause to the marginalized issue experiencing the “outcast tradition” (Gandhi, 2020, p 109). While the pacifism can be a cause to the principled rejection of war and with the killing, the same cannot be followed with the pacifism that can be a context to the pragmatic commitment that can be used with the peace. With the term of the "pacification", the same can be advocated as a way to suppress violence even if it within the territory (Hrynkow, 2019, pp 225). Due to the pacification of the problem, the violence can be a cause to the remedial measure of the war and it can cause a suitable means to bring a balance to the peace. With the Just a war theory, there is a view, that there can always be a cause to the friction and it can be due to the complications, that can advise to conduct only war and rejects any was to pacify things. The same can be held for the violence and it would be in a denial state of acceptance (Hutchings, 2019, pp 191). The other is the pacification, that can be caused to the reject violent means and it can help to intervene and work was to overcome ways to make it right. Due to the violence and the acceptance of the enemy, the victory would not justify the reasons.

Pacifism can be understood as the course of the discourse today and it can be a likely a cause to the commitments that can be based on the continuous continuum. The same can be propagated with the adherence to nonviolence that can be applied, over the more focused ways to apply the anti-wares (Jackson, 2019, pp 45).

Just war theory is that can be advocated to follow the tradition, of military ethics that would be based on the military leaders, theologians and to follow all the ways of the ethicists and policymakers. Due to the just in war, theory, it is a way to go to the war and to have the warlike approach. It can also split into the two groups that are to go to the war and to conduct a war. The first concerns are based on the mortality to go for the war and secondly it is the way to conduct the war. With the theory of the "Just in War," it is advocated to have the ways of the morality of post-war settlement along with following the reconstruction.

Just war theory is also often a terrible way that can follow the less likely ways to conduct and to follow the worst option. Any sort of the important responsibilities, having undesirable outcomes can also be followed with preventable atrocities may justify war (Lynch, 2017, pp 239).

Due to the just war theory, the same can be inclined over the stricter pacifist standard (that can advocate ways to handle the justifiable basis for war). It would be based on the permissive nationalist standard (that can oppose the wars of the nation's interests to be justifiable). Subsequently, there can based on the individuals that can be the basis of the guilty conscience that needs to fight. The theory advocates how there can be a "just war tradition", that can handle the ways of the applied wars and it can work across the ages. It can also be examined with the writing of the various philosophers and to handle the warfare. Contrary to this, just war tradition, there can also be pacifism rejects war that can mean to be an acceptable basis of obtaining peace. Pacifists would advocate the ideas of the military. Due to the responsibilities, the support political along with having social systems can advocate the war types taxes (Ngai, 2019, pp 373).

Kantian and Consequentialist Approaches to War and Peace

The Kantian theory advocates that there can be any sort of peace and there can be a pace that can end the hospitalities. It is also the first principle, that can advocate the peace and to match with the “secret reservation that can serve the material for future war” (Lynch, 2017, pp 239). Subsequently, there can be the theory that advocates the “pacifists” who would support the Kant and make it work with the modus vivendi that can be used with the utmost impotence or exhaustion. It is not a peace, as it would be hostility to the intent remains. And pacifists would relate to the deterrence and detente are that would not be in relation to the peace and there can also be a high increase that can be a cause to the threat that can be caused to the escalating violence. Consequentialist is about the views to do things which are rightful and to do it for the fair and just. The theory is to make it work abruptly and to kill human persons, that can be a cause to kill human persons and there can war that can violate the war status of persons. An example, soldiers are viewed as interchangeable cogs in the war machine. The consequentialist theory is based on the action that can be concluded, that can also be a cause to good or bad and there can be based on the outcome (Lynch, 2017, pp 239). The theory also mentions, to do what is good harm and there can be a benefit that can represent to the brings benefits that harm and the good, that can cause to the benefit, The theory would be advocated the “herd mentality” of militarism, and there can be abed on the militaristic patriotism that can lead to the “loathsome nonsense". The theory of the Kantasim, if also the that can hold an idea based on the respects and advocate over the cause to the ideas that can also ways to conform the military virtues that can be impacting the obedience to authority.

Deontological prohibitions would be also a hold that cans consequent to the absolute and there can also be ways to handle the consequentialist prohibitions that can be used to the war and be based on the contingent. The theory of the consequentialist pacifism can be concluded to the theory of the rule-utilitarianism. It is a utilitarian, pacifist and it would be based on the war rule that can be based on the violence that can be based on the happens in the greatest number.

Conclusion on Comparative Just War Theory

It is concluded, Pacifism is about the commitment in peace and to devise n war opposition that can be related to the peace along with the war opposition to the war. To provide a diverse there can also be diverse beliefs and commitments that can be followed with the pacifism. Both the Just in theory and the pacifisms can be based on the contrasting views and there can be a moral abhorrence which can cause the wars. It is the criteria that can create the just war tradition act that can provide the resorting to arms that can be represented to the morally permissible. Consecutively the Just war theories or to use the pacifism would also be advocated the distinguish basis to the justifiable and unjustifiable and to form the armed forces".

References for Comparative Just War Theory

Cahill, Lisa Sowle. "Just War, Pacifism, Just Peace, and Peacebuilding." Theological Studies 80, no. 1 (2019): 169-185.

Gandhi, Mohandas K. "Religious Pacifism." Works Righteousness: Material Practice in Ethical Theory (2020): 109.

Holmes, Robert L. Pacifism: A Philosophy of Nonviolence. Bloomsbury Publishing, 2016.

Hrynkow, Christopher. "Lisa Sowle Cahill. Blessed Are the Peacemakers: Pacifism, Just War, and Peacebuilding." (2019): 225-227.

Hutchings, Kimberly. "From just war theory to ethico-political pacifism." Critical Studies on Security 7, no. 3 (2019): 191-198.

Jackson, Richard. "A Pacifist Critique of Just War Theory." Comparative Just War Theory: An Introduction to International Perspectives (2019): 45-59.

Lynch, Cecelia. "The Niebuhr Brothers’ Debate and the Ethics of Just War vs. Pacifism: Progressivism and the Social Gospel." In Progressivism and US Foreign Policy between the World Wars, pp. 221-239. Palgrave Macmillan, New York, 2017.

Ngai, Ting Chun. "Was Iraq War a “Just War” or Just a War? An Analysis from the Perspectives of Just War Theory." Open Journal of Political Science 9, no. 2 (2019): 373-382.

Pattison, James. "Opportunity Costs Pacifism." Law and Philosophy (2020): 1.

Rock, Stephen R. "From Just War to Nuclear Pacifism: The Evolution of US Christian Thinking about War in the Nuclear Age, 1946–1989." Social Sciences 7, no. 6 (2018): 82.

Remember, at the center of any academic work, lies clarity and evidence. Should you need further assistance, do look up to our Management Assignment Help