Civil war... What did the words mean? Was there any such…
““Civil war... What did the words mean? Was there any such thing as 'foreign war'? Was not all warfare between men warfare between brothers? Wars could only be defined by their aims. There were no 'foreign' or 'civil' wars, only wars that were just or unjust. Until the great universal concord could be arrived at, warfare, at least when it was the battle between the urgent future and the dragging past, might be unavoidable. How could such a war be condemned? War is not shameful, nor the sword-thrust a stab in the back, except when it serves to kill right and progress, reason, civilization, and truth. When this is war's purpose it maeks no difference whether it is civil or foreign war - it is a crime. Outside the sacred cause for justice, what grounds has one kind of war for denigrating another? By what right does the sword of Washington despise the pike of Camille Desmoulins? Which is the greater - Leonidas fighting the foreign enemy or Timoleon slaying the tyrant who was his brother? One was a defender, the other a liberator. Are we to condemn every resort to arms that takes place within the citadel, without concerning ourselves with its aim? ””
About This Quote
This interpretation was drafted with AI assistance. It is one reading of the quote, not the author's own explanation.
The quote argues that war should be judged by its purpose, not its label; wars are just or unjust based on whether they serve progress and truth.
In simple terms: War is judged by its aim, not whether it is civil or foreign.
Assess the moral purpose of conflict.
Themes
Mood
Type
When to use this quote
- revolutionary movements
- civil conflicts
- foreign interventions
- political debates
Key Concepts
Questions to Reflect On
- What criteria determine a war's justice?
- How do we differentiate between defender and liberator?
War can be justified only when it protects progress and truth; otherwise it is criminal.