Discourse
Arguments will now be presented that philosophically justify the act of terrorism in the right instance. I am going to start by applying the Just War Principles to both case studies.
Beginning with the Nelson Mandela case study, it is unclear as to whether the ANC is a legitimate authority to execute acts of violence towards a governing body. It could be argued that the ANC was a legitimate authority since in the end the party was unbanned and then elected into government in 1994 winning 60% of votes for seats in the new National assembly . However, the ANC was banned and Umkhonto we Sizwe was formed which was an illegal underground version of the ANC , subsequently there was not a legitimate authority waging war on apartheid and already is arguably unjustifiable on this model of political ethics. It is also clear that Umkhonto we Sizwe carried out terrorist attacks on non-military …show more content…
It is arguable that if Umkhonto we Sizwe had not deliberately used this violence, their political movement for equality may not have been heard and there have been increased intolerance of people of different races not only in South Africa but across the globe today. It could be argued that this would mean more racial discrimination, prejudice and perhaps even hate crimes.
Virtue Theory and its component that is the doctrine of the mean; the focus will be on the cardinal virtue of courage. The focus is on phronesis, the use of practicality in a situation that maximises the virtue that is derived from an event . The first case that will be scrutinised using Virtue Theory is Operation Valkyrie. To begin with, a logical way to look at this is like so:
1- Hitler is causing suffering and prejudice across Europe
2- Hitler is doing this in pursuit of a fascist
Arguments will now be presented that philosophically justify the act of terrorism in the right instance. I am going to start by applying the Just War Principles to both case studies.
Beginning with the Nelson Mandela case study, it is unclear as to whether the ANC is a legitimate authority to execute acts of violence towards a governing body. It could be argued that the ANC was a legitimate authority since in the end the party was unbanned and then elected into government in 1994 winning 60% of votes for seats in the new National assembly . However, the ANC was banned and Umkhonto we Sizwe was formed which was an illegal underground version of the ANC , subsequently there was not a legitimate authority waging war on apartheid and already is arguably unjustifiable on this model of political ethics. It is also clear that Umkhonto we Sizwe carried out terrorist attacks on non-military …show more content…
It is arguable that if Umkhonto we Sizwe had not deliberately used this violence, their political movement for equality may not have been heard and there have been increased intolerance of people of different races not only in South Africa but across the globe today. It could be argued that this would mean more racial discrimination, prejudice and perhaps even hate crimes.
Virtue Theory and its component that is the doctrine of the mean; the focus will be on the cardinal virtue of courage. The focus is on phronesis, the use of practicality in a situation that maximises the virtue that is derived from an event . The first case that will be scrutinised using Virtue Theory is Operation Valkyrie. To begin with, a logical way to look at this is like so:
1- Hitler is causing suffering and prejudice across Europe
2- Hitler is doing this in pursuit of a fascist