Ironically I was just discussing this idea in the comments of the last post. Richard Fernandez links to an essay on the subject this afternoon. I was calling it Right of Conquest; this author prefers “Law of Victory.”
Its absence, we seem to agree, creates permanent conflict instead of an end to war.
3 comments:
If one stops and examines the concept of ownership in LOTR, one sees that Tolkien identifies many methods by which someone might legitimately own something, including territory. This would be one. He does not say better or worse, but clearly considers it legitimate.
I see the point he makes, but how can the problem be solved? Too many people & groups are invested in these claims, some of them for religious reasons.
In Islam, for example, no territory that has ever been under Islamic rule can be ceded to the infidel. Al Qaeda was still claiming Andalusia in 2001.
The solution lies in the fact that one does not need to prove it further. I consider the People’s Republic of China to be wholly illegitimate philosophically, as well as a genocidal and democidal state; but they aren’t worried about it.
Post a Comment