Can defensive political violence be justified?

[OPSSG]

Edit: Nothing contained herein should be confused as me giving legal advice to anyone.

If you are legally qualified person, you should understand the legal rules of self-defence and necessity. The concepts are explained in the LAW forum.

Edit: Comment deleted

I find it interesting that you prefer to simply stop a discussion instead of refuting the arguments I present. Your approach makes it seem like you don't have any valid counter-arguments.

Edit: Comment deleted

It is unlikely that anything I say will change your mind.

 

[Andreas Winsnes]

After I wrote my thesis, I got offered a job teaching philosophy of law at the Faculty of Law, University of Oslo, Norway. I have also written about the legal rules of self-defence and necessity in the most respected, conservative newspaper in my country:

Mer målrettet overvåking- Meninger - Kronikker - Aftenposten.no

Grand Danois can understand Norwegian since he is Danish, so he can read the article.

As I see it you have a defective understanding of the legal rule of self-defence.

Then I will sincerely appreciate it if you can correct this misunderstanding, especially since I might one day take the job at the University of Oslo and consequently mislead the students there. I don't want that.

Have to go now, but I will respond later if you choose to continue the debate. Thanks!

 

[OPSSG]

Edit: Nothing contained herein should be confused as me giving legal advice to anyone.

...After the attack has stopped, the use of force in self-defence must also stop.

Edit: Comment Deleted

Then I will sincerely appreciate it if you can correct this misunderstanding, especially since I might one day take the job at the University of Oslo and consequently mislead the students there. I don't want that.

Have to go now, but I will respond later if you choose to continue the debate. Thanks!

Edit: Comment Deleted

Please have a look at this article on "The Law Relating to Self Defence" by Eric Baskind for a British common law perspective, as a starting point for further study. Try to understand the common law approach and the balance it tries to strike before dismissing it.

With that I would like to conclude my remarks to you.

 

[kato]

which reminds me of my dreadful time doing political work in the students' union and parliament at my university.

Where was that? Because around the student assembly people i know, it's usually the anarchosyndicalist groups that are going strong with the theory, not the leftists per se (which are pretty much only represented by SDS and the JuSos nowadays) - even if people, especially from the conservative side, tend to lump them all together; there is a distinct difference. Even among the leftist groups around, you'll mostly find trotskists and perhaps a few maoists here and there, not that many classic marxists (though they do exist). That's presuming it's a student assembly that hasn't been taken over by a traditional chapter of the AntiImp or AntiD chapters (know a couple of those too).

Oh and can we please leave the legacy political philosophers where they belong- on dusty shelves.

Aww, but they're so much fun. Ever read any Mikhail Bakunin? He did state a lot of what you're saying there in his criticism of marxism.

 

[Falstaff]

[

Where was that? Because around the student assembly people i know, it's usually the anarchosyndicalist groups that are going strong with the theory, not the leftists per se (which are pretty much only represented by SDS and the JuSos nowadays) - even if people, especially from the conservative side, tend to lump them all together; there is a distinct difference. Even among the leftist groups around, you'll mostly find trotskists and perhaps a few maoists here and there, not that many classic marxists (though they do exist). That's presuming it's a student assembly that hasn't been taken over by a traditional chapter of the AntiImp or AntiD chapters (know a couple of those too).

As this is too detailed and presumably a littlebit OT I'll PM you.

Aww, but they're so much fun. Ever read any Mikhail Bakunin? He did state a lot of what you're saying there in his criticism of marxism.

You gotta be kidding me. See, after only 2 years of studying philosophy and english I decided to press on with mechanical engineering as I couldn't stand reading this stuff... Never read Bakunin though.

 

[Andreas Winsnes]

We have different legal training and there may be significant differences in our legal training and legal traditions, so our starting point for analysis maybe very different.

Please have a look at this article on "The Law Relating to Self Defence" by Eric Baskind for a British common law perspective, as a starting point for further study. Try to understand the common law approach and the balance it tries to strike before dismissing it.

I have read the article and the main difference, as I can see it, is that Norwegian law allows so-called preventive self-defence. I write about this here

I have talked to several professors of law regarding defensive political violence, but the problem is that they have so far not presented arguments which refute its main principles. That is why I have started this debate to get more counter-arguments on the table. Such an approach is in full compliance with the discourse ethics of Habermas.