When Might Force Be Justified? Exploring the Limits of Peaceful Resistance

By Matthew Hayward

In our commitment to liberty and justice, we often advocate for peaceful solutions: educating, voting, and engaging in discourse. However, history and philosophy teach us that force, as a defensive last resort, becomes justifiable and necessary under certain dire circumstances. This piece explores these circumstances and delves deeper into one of today's looming threats to freedom: Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs).

1. The Fundamental Right to Self-Defense

Philosophically, the right to self-defense is a fundamental human entitlement. This right asserts that individuals inherently possess the ability to protect themselves, their liberty, and their property from imminent harm. Natural law recognizes this principle, arguing that our rights are derived from human nature and in many legal frameworks worldwide.

2. Protection from Tyranny

Throughout history, the shadow of tyranny has often precipitated moments of decisive resistance. From storming the Bastille, signaling the French populace's breaking point against feudal oppression, to the American Revolution, ignited by unjust taxes and lack of representation, societies have reached tipping points that necessitated a stand for autonomy and justice.

Today, we stand on the cusp of a digital frontier where, as I mentioned in a previous piece, "The Totalitarian Imprint of the CBDC, A Revolution of Control," represents a similar potential for overreach. While advanced under the guise of efficiency, these technologies threaten to erode privacy and empower unprecedented levels of government surveillance and control. Just as past generations recognized the onset of tyranny and took necessary actions, the philosophy of self-defense against modern forms of digital control could justify a more assertive form of resistance. This narrative draws a direct line from the palpable struggles of our forebears to the digital battlegrounds we may face today, underscoring the perennial vigilance required to safeguard our fundamental freedoms.

3. The Slippery Slope of Control and Surveillance

The justification for vigilance and possibly resistance intensifies as technological advancements threaten privacy and facilitate governmental overreach. While CBDCs themselves do not directly equate to historical atrocities, their potential to enable a scope of financial surveillance echoes the early stages of scenarios that historically led to severe human rights abuses.

Technologies that enhance government power to monitor and control financial transactions can start a trajectory similar to past events where control was a precursor to disaster. For a deeper historical perspective, I invite you to read my analysis in"The Dangers of Control: Lessons from History," which illustrates how excessive control has led to catastrophic outcomes like genocides and mass suppressions. This historical context underscores the importance of safeguarding against the misuse of CBDCs.

Linking these lessons to the principles of just war theory, which emphasizes necessity, proportionality, and last resort, we see that pre-emptive checks against the misuse of technologies like CBDCs are critical. By maintaining strict oversight and limits on such technologies, we aim to prevent any escalation that could lead to severe abuses of power.

Discussion: Navigating the Path Between Vigilance and Fear

As we consider the implications of new financial technologies like CBDCs, which I have critiqued for their potential to empower authoritarian control as detailed in my blog post "CBDCs: Will Rise From the Ashes," we must remain vigilant. The challenge lies in preparing to defend our freedoms without succumbing to undue fear or preemptive aggression.

The discourse on when force might be justified is complex and fraught with ethical, legal, and philosophical dilemmas. As we navigate these discussions, particularly in the context of emerging technologies like CBDCs, our focus must remain on safeguarding our liberties without undermining the foundational principles of peace and dialogue. However, as detailed in my post "The Heavy Toll of Reclaiming Freedom," once freedoms are lost, the road to recovery is arduous and fraught with peril. This serves as a stark reminder of the importance of vigilance and proactive engagement in the face of power encroachment. For further reading on how quickly societal pressures can escalate to a violent confrontation, refer to my series "The Tipping Point: When Civil Disobedience Teeters on the Brink of Violent Resistance."

The historical and contemporary examples suggest that the price of reclaiming freedoms, once lost, is often steep, marked by societal upheaval or conflict. Therefore, let us engage in these discussions with the seriousness they deserve, reflecting on our historical lessons and philosophical teachings to ensure a free and just society. Let us fight now with our voices, votes, and relentless pursuit of truth and justice. We must resist the allure of apathy and the false comfort of societal withdrawal. Staying informed, engaged, and ready to act against encroachments on our freedoms is not just a duty but a necessity. Let us fight now so we do not have to fight later with more than just words. Join the Dialogue I invite you to reflect, debate, and share your perspectives on these complex issues. How do we protect and preserve our freedoms against emerging threats like CBDCs?