"If ever there was a holy war, it was that which saved our liberties and gave us independence." - Thomas Jefferson to John Wayles Eppes, 1813.
Jul 14
“Every difference of opinion is not a difference of principle”
~Thomas Jefferson
"If ever there was a holy war, it was that which saved our liberties and gave us independence." - Thomas Jefferson to John Wayles Eppes, 1813.
RSS feed
Thu, 08/28/2008 - 10:07pm
War has been an essential throughout history. One most justifiable causes of war is the advancement of freedom and democracy. The question then is how much war is justified for how much freedom. Life is the ultimate freedom and survival is of most importance. Therefore, it is a fallacy to argue against war only for the sake of peace. Without military power a society cannot survive. To go to war is a decision of the most grievous kind. War almost always includes casualties of the innocent, separation of families, and it leaves a most horrible memory to survivors that can last for decades.
How much is freedom worth? Many lives were spent in the jungles of Southeast Asia that brought no purchase of freedom for Vietnam. Even if it had, that had no impact on the United States. We should only be willing to use military power to protect freedom of ourselves and the liberty of those who would fight for is but just don’t have the strength to. One good example is the Persian Gulf War. Kuwait was robbed of its land by a dictator and our powerful military forces went to fight for the freedom of Kuwait.
-S. Hicks
Tue, 07/22/2008 - 6:03pm
War is certainly "the greatest scourge of mankind". Plague is also the scourge of mankind and while fighting for our own rights may seem justifiable where does freedom fighting end and terrorist attacks begin.
That was not very eloquent so allow me to be more succinct. If war is a scourge of mankind then so is plague. In Jefferson's time plague would probably be seen a the hand of God wiping clean the earth of sinners. So my question is...
At what point do we stop fighting for liberty and start playing God? Wiping away the governments we deem unworthy.
Fri, 07/18/2008 - 9:39am
Ah ha! Thanks to An American in Florida my fog has been lifted! Jefferson did not much approve of paper money, and definitely did not approve of banking institutions. This, my limited knowledge of history, permits me to know. A quote: "Paper is poverty, it is only the ghost of money, and not money itself."
So, his quote regarding old Congress' distribution of paper money (during the Revolutionary War I presume) was a justified or holy thing because the cause was just and holy, in contrast to the Federal Government's role in making paper money legal tender and the establishment of banks. Mr. J. found the latter similar to the dangers posed by a standing army and perhaps even greater a threat. I can't say history has proven him wrong...
Thu, 07/17/2008 - 2:06pm
I agree with your chosen quote.
Thu, 07/17/2008 - 11:43am
My pleasure! I'm a librarian/archivist. It is what I do!!
Thu, 07/17/2008 - 11:28am
Thank you for comment. I went to the quote and my perception is Mr. Jefferson referred to the "Old Congress('s)" object for its "paper emission" "was a holy one...for if ever there was a holy war it was that which saved our liberties and gave us independence." It seems that even paper money can have its "holy" purpose, if my perception is accurate. Thanks for sending me to the books. An American in Florida
Thu, 07/17/2008 - 11:25am
A Virginian: You, sir, have stated with elegance the point I was trying to make regarding context and expertise. These days, even a "working knowledge" of the founders is so rare that I think it qualifies as such.
Wed, 07/16/2008 - 3:33pm
How about a little context people? He was talking about paper money!
Tue, 07/15/2008 - 8:22pm
Perhaps one might say survival. Survival to live, or, survival of a way of life which affords the individual to be his own person. Sacred to the Judeo-Christian ethic is the right to life, therefore if one must kill to preserve one's (or another's) life it is a justifiable act. Some responders bring in the politics of today to justify their point of view, but self defense, in all times is justified -- and even, heroic and gallant. An American in Florida
Mon, 07/14/2008 - 11:33pm
A working knowledge of Jefferson and Jeffersonisms—if that be expertise—is precisely what is required to understand and appreciate the man and the limits of whatever measure of wisdom is to him attributed. Absent context, taken by sound bites, Jefferson can be quoted on all sides of every issue, which makes him useless.
At all events, war cannot be justified. To say that war is a proper response to aggression, begs the question of the justice of the aggression that instanced it. Those who would destroy the peace, first seek, and second find, justification. Justified aggression becomes justification for retaliatory aggression . . . and on, and on . . . until Hiroshima. Justified, mind you.
— A Virginian
Mon, 07/14/2008 - 9:08pm
If expertise on Jefferson was required to understand his writing, then his wisdom would be a gift bestowed on many and appreciated by few.
I find that a click on to the Jefferson links on the right column --->, an internet search, or a trip to the library would give ample context. We're given the date and origin.
God Bless America!!
A patriot in Arizona
Mon, 07/14/2008 - 7:57pm
The question posed by the post is "What constitutes just cause for war?" and beneath it we see a quote from Jefferson that seems to provide an answer. The continued trouble I have with these posts is that they provide no context. As I am not an expert on Jefferson, the quote is nearly useless. Particularly since, as the first poster noted indirectly, the founders were often contradictory.
I think the answer to this question is relatively simple: War is only justified as retaliation to an initiation of force by another nation or enemy. I suppose "force" can be a point of interpretation, however.
Mon, 07/14/2008 - 3:30pm
In the long debate (dating back to the Augustinian concept of a "just war") over what constitutes a just war, Jefferson added an interesting commentary with this quotation.
War may certainly be the "scourge of mankind," as the first commenter pointed out, yet as our second commentator noted, sometimes we must "fight for ...liberty." I certainly doubt Jefferson would have objected to American entry into the Second World War. Like his contemporary American Revolution, the Second World War provided many reasons for "holy war."
"The greatest scourge of mankind," however, certainly applies to those whose wars which the United States has entered with no sufficient justification for waging war (i.e. "faulty intelligence," or "just plain lies," as some will wish to characterize them).
--"Silence Nogood", a Virginia Patriot
Mon, 07/14/2008 - 2:28pm
Even if he did, he was someone who knew that sometimes a man needed to fight for his liberty. He may be trying to say that defending liberty may be the only good reason to start a war (not oil, certainly).
Mon, 07/14/2008 - 11:59am
Didn't Mr. Jefferson say "I abhor war and view it as the greatest scourge of mankind?"
Post new comment