DOCSLIB.ORG

How Should We Then Live in 2020?

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
How Should We Then Live in 2020? How Should We Then Live in 2020? Ron Miller June 7, 2020 Note: In 1976, theologian Francis Schaeffer wrote his magnum opus, “How Should We Then Live: The Rise and Decline of Western Thought and Culture,” and it became a guidepost for an entire generation of Christians on how to navigate in a rapidly changing world. Charles Colson and Nancy Pearcey wrote a follow up of sorts in 1999 entitled “How Now Shall We Live?,” also advising Christians on how they should negotiate the times in which they found themselves. With apologies to these wise and esteemed people, I felt the title is appropriate to the words I have to offer today. Many friends have asked me in the wake of the turmoil in our nation right now, "What can I do?" People want to do more than lament or post memes of support. Americans are people of action; it's practically encoded in their cultural DNA. While there are times for contemplation, at some point, we must act, and many of you feel that we’ve reached the point in the American story where our actions must speak louder than our words.. I'm humbled and honored that people would turn to me with that question, and I am working on a message to give at my church in response to it. As always, I will strive, with the help of the Holy Spirit, to build the message on the firm foundation of the Word of God. Some thoughts, however, that I want to leave with you now might be helpful as you try to sail these rough seas in which we find ourselves. Define your sphere of influence - What is your circle of friends, co-workers, and acquaintances? Who do you spend time with? Who do you influence with your words and actions? What does your social circle look like, real and virtual? The reason the answers to these questions are important is because if you try to take on the world, you will become quickly discouraged and eventually disengage. Making a difference globally starts with everyone making a difference in the place where the Lord has put them. Define your gifts and abilities - One of my favorite verses of Scripture is Ephesians 2:10 - "For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do." I picture in my mind's eye the Lord writing down the very tasks for which He is designing us, and then building us with everything we need to do the work He's identified for us. "You do you" is a dismissive phrase, but it is roughly descriptive of what I am advising here. Just as you should focus on your sphere of influence, you should concentrate on what your talents, education, experience and, for Christians, your spiritual gifts, allow you to do. If you're good at something, that's what you should do to help. Determine what you put first - I describe this as the central organizing principle around which you order your life. What is that for you? Christians would say it is Jesus, but is it? Examine what gets you unusually excited or angry. Look at your checkbook and see where your discretionary income goes. Look at how you spend your time. Humans are made to worship, and it doesn't matter if you're religious or not; "For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also" (Matthew 6:21). Paul called out the human condition when he said, "They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen" (Romans 1:25). An idol is not just a graven image; a person or persons, a place, a social circle, a tribe, a nation, even "good" things like church or family can be idols if they take precedence over Jesus Christ. Keeping Christ at the center means surrendering everything; "And whoever does not carry his cross and follow Me cannot be My disciple" (Luke 14:27). The good news is that giving everything to Him will come back to you with interest, for He is a Good Shepherd who wants only the best for his flock. Listen, then listen some more, and listen again before you speak - This is a big one. When it comes to contentious issues, most of us have strong opinions one way or another, and we go into conversations armed with our responses to what others have to say before they’ve even said it. If you’re formulating your answers in your mind while someone else is talking, what are the chances you’ve even heard what they are saying? Jesus’ brother James, tell us, “My dear brothers and sisters, take note of this: Everyone should be quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to become angry, because human anger does not produce the righteousness that God desires” (James 1:19-20). Active listening means not only hearing but receiving what others are saying and pondering it before you open your mouth to speak. When you do speak, it should be to 1) acknowledge their experience, because it’s not invalid just because you haven’t experienced it, 2) repeat what you heard to be sure you’re grasping it, and 3) ask for clarification if there’s something you didn’t get right or don’t understand. That’s how a true conversation begins. Defensiveness and deflection are guaranteed to throw up walls and prevent progress. “Seek first to understand, then to be understood,” as one of the late Stephen Covey’s 7 Habits of Highly Effective People tells us. And who doesn’t want to be a highly effective person? Don’t deflect - This is a common and unbecoming tactic that is reminiscent of Soviet propaganda techniques, a statement that probably wouldn’t resonate with people who weren’t in the intelligence business during the Cold War as I was. Here is what Russian activist Garry Kasparov had to say about the tactic of “whataboutism:” Soviet propaganda was also expert in "whataboutism," a term coined to describe how Soviet leaders would respond to criticism of Soviet massacres, forced deportations, and gulags with "What about how you Americans treated the Native Americans and the slaves?" or something similar. For the most part it was a transparent and shabby rhetorical trick of deflection and changing the topic. As Putin has revived so many Soviet methods and traditions, whataboutism is popular once again today thanks to Russia's cadres of trained Internet trolls. If someone tries to deflect from the illegal and immoral application of force by an agent of the state against black people by proclaiming, “What about black-on-black crime?,” that’s a deflection. When someone tries to highlight the criminal record or moral failings of a black victim of police brutality, that’s a deflection. They are trying to avoid the central question and are creating a false moral equivalence to paralyze you into inaction. My mother had a saying when I would try to deflect her from something I had done: “What does that have to do with the price of tea in China?” Mothers are so wise! I’ve got some things to say about the two specific types of deflection I’ve mentioned here, but I will save them for another article. Mankind has been deflecting since the Garden of Eden after Adam and Eve disobeyed God. When God confronted Adam, to whom he had given the responsibility to warn Eve about the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, but who stood there passively as she took the fruit and ate it, and consumed the fruit she gave him despite God’s command, “The man said, ‘The woman you put here with me—she gave me some fruit from the tree, and I ate it’” (Genesis 3:12). That’s cold - this was the “bone of [his] bones and flesh of [his] flesh” (Genesis 2:23), and he was quick to throw her under the bus to take the heat off of himself. That is the world’s first recorded instance of deflection. Don’t be like Adam. Be a peacemaker, not a peacekeeper - Jesus said in the Sermon on the Mount, “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God” (Matthew 5:9). Yet, later in the same Gospel, He warns his disciples, “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword” (Matthew 10:34). Wait a minute - what? There goes another one of those contradictions in the Bible, some of my unbelieving friends would say. As my pastor would say, however, when reading the Bible, it’s all about “context, context, context.” The Bible makes it clear how the Lord expects His disciples to conduct themselves in the world: You have heard that it was said, “Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.” But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. (Matthew 5:43-45) "Put your sword back in its place," Jesus said to him, "for all who draw the sword will die by the sword. (Matthew 26:52) Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everyone. If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Contractarian Analysis, Ethics, and Emerging Economies
    Journal of Markets & Morality 4, no. 1 (Spring 2001), 55-72 Copyright © 2001 Center for Economic Personalism Contractarian Analysis, Ethics, and Emerging Economies Timothy P. Roth Professor of Economics University of Texas at El Paso The transition from socialist to market economics is typically informed by outcomes-based social welfare theory (SWT). Institutionless, intentionally value- free SWT is ill-suited to this enterprise. The only evaluative standard to which it gives rise—efficiency—is indeterminate, and the theory is not accommodative of other dimensions of moral evaluation. By contrast, the contractarian enter- prise focuses on the role and importance of formal and informal institutions, including ethical norms. Given that individuals should be treated as moral equivalents, the project assigns lexical priority to rights and regards justice as impartiality. This explicitly normative, institutional approach permits analysis of potential conflicts between informal norms and prospective, formal rules of the games. Moreover, it underscores the instrumental and intrinsic value of rights in the transition process. Finally, the emphasis on impartiality—embodied in the generality principle—facilitates analysis of constitutional constraints on behav- ior that is inimical to the transition process. The Transition: The Consequentialist Approach It is clear that the transition from socialist to market economies has typi- cally been informed by received, consequentialist social welfare theory (here- after referred to as SWT).1 Because SWT is consequentialist, institutionless, and intentionally value-free it should come as no surprise that the standard reform prescription begins at the endpoint, an idealized market, phrasing everything in those terms, ignoring the crucial question of how reforms engage existing soci- ety.
    [Show full text]
  • ASD-Covert-Foreign-Money.Pdf
    overt C Foreign Covert Money Financial loopholes exploited by AUGUST 2020 authoritarians to fund political interference in democracies AUTHORS: Josh Rudolph and Thomas Morley © 2020 The Alliance for Securing Democracy Please direct inquiries to The Alliance for Securing Democracy at The German Marshall Fund of the United States 1700 18th Street, NW Washington, DC 20009 T 1 202 683 2650 E [email protected] This publication can be downloaded for free at https://securingdemocracy.gmfus.org/covert-foreign-money/. The views expressed in GMF publications and commentary are the views of the authors alone. Cover and map design: Kenny Nguyen Formatting design: Rachael Worthington Alliance for Securing Democracy The Alliance for Securing Democracy (ASD), a bipartisan initiative housed at the German Marshall Fund of the United States, develops comprehensive strategies to deter, defend against, and raise the costs on authoritarian efforts to undermine and interfere in democratic institutions. ASD brings together experts on disinformation, malign finance, emerging technologies, elections integrity, economic coercion, and cybersecurity, as well as regional experts, to collaborate across traditional stovepipes and develop cross-cutting frame- works. Authors Josh Rudolph Fellow for Malign Finance Thomas Morley Research Assistant Contents Executive Summary �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 1 Introduction and Methodology ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
    [Show full text]
  • Propaganda Revisited: a Look at Current Practice in Russia and Egypt"
    TRANSCRIPT "PROPAGANDA REVISITED: A LOOK AT CURRENT PRACTICE IN RUSSIA AND EGYPT" A Conversation With Rabab El Mahdi, Peter Pomerantsev, and Michael Weiss Moderator: Leonard Benardo ANNOUNCER: You are listening to a recording of the Open Society Foundations, working to build vibrant and tolerant democracies worldwide. Visit us at OpenSocietyFoundations.org. LEONARD BENARDO: We thought that we would have this brown bag as-- a conversation, rather than any formal presentations. And so I thought I would begin by maybe just turning first to-- to Michael and-- and Peter, and asking them very basically what is different today about propaganda as you read and interpret it, coming from the-- the-- the Russian context? Is there anything fundamentally different between disinformation today and disinformation from yesterday? PETER POMERANTSEV: Should I-- should I do my little thing first, then it'll be on tape? We-- we've been around the world doing-- I'm actually going to talk about something else today, because-- I think the argument’s moving on quite rapidly. I think that there's-- (UNINTEL)-- first what I want us to do is take a step back and see it within the context of Russia's grand strategy. So since around 2004, they've been-- their military thinking has been-- obsessed with the idea of asymmetrical. I mean, it's actually something they wrote about in the Soviet Times (?) already. But the idea of asymmetric war is essentially Russia is weaker than the West and can't TRANSCRIPT: PROPAGANDA REVISITED: A LOOK AT CURRENT PRACTICE IN RUSSIA AND EGYPT 2 take the West on militarily.
    [Show full text]
  • Edward Friedman's Reflections on the Revolution in China
    Edward Friedman’s Reflections on the Revolution in China Bruce Gilley, Portland State University The largest number of all drifted away, speechless and agog, until the years had passed and they could no longer remember having participated in the New Left and its several manias and fanaticisms…the kind of people who, in their respectable middle age today, would indignantly deny having ever been anything but ardent liberals. – Paul Berman, Power and the Idealists Updated: 22 September 2009 Edward Friedman’s views on China’s revolution have evolved from an enthusiastic embrace in his early decades to a disgusted rejection in his mature years. More recently, Friedman has sought to reclaim a positive view of revolutions, while continuing his critique of the China case. Friedman’s views thus track the full arc of normative views on revolutions: radical, conservative, and liberal. Reading Friedman on China’s revolution is to be reminded of how normative ideas and political realities are in constant conversation. It is also to be reminded of why the study of revolution cannot evade the case of China. The Radical Phase: 1965 to 1977 Friedman began his intellectual life as an admirer of the communist revolution in China. Like many in the Western academy, he saw Asian revolutions as progressive strikes against Western imperialism and exploitation. In 1966, Friedman wrote that Mao’s Hundred Flowers campaign of 1956 showed that China’s revolution was “an attempt to realize a liberalizing vision connecting increased freedoms with rapid progress, the vision of the united front, the promise of the new democracy.”1 The CCP had won legitimacy through “humane reforms creating the basis of a better society”.
    [Show full text]
  • War, Law &(And) Liberal Thought: the Use of Force in the Reagan Years
    War, Law &(and) Liberal Thought: The Use of Force in the Reagan Years [Article] Item Type Article; text Authors Fidler, David P. Citation 11 Ariz. J. Int'l & Comp. L. 45 (1994) Publisher The University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law (Tucson, AZ) Journal Arizona Journal of International and Comparative Law Rights Copyright © The Author(s) Download date 29/09/2021 16:28:25 Item License http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/ Version Final published version Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/659405 WAR, LAW & LIBERAL THOUGHT: THE USE OF FORCE IN THE REAGAN YEARS David P. Fidler* I. INTRODUCTION The Reagan administration has been severely criticized for the attitude it displayed towards international law on the use of force. Perhaps excluding the Vietnam years, no previous American administration has come under such heavy and repeated attack for its attitude concerning the role of international law in American foreign policy. More than a few actions have been criticized; many attacks explicitly accused the Reagan administration of treating the international legal rules on the use of force as unimportant. 1 The conventional view appears to be that the Reagan administration has been weighed in the balance of 2 international law and justice and found wanting. The first purpose of this article is to analyze critically the conventional wisdom about the Reagan administration's handling of the international law on the use of force. My analysis proceeds in two parts. First, I examine the conventional critique of the Reagan administration's handling of the use of force, as well as the tradition of liberal thought on international law - the liberal progressive tradition - that inspires that critique (Part I).
    [Show full text]
  • Capitalism Article
    THE IDEOLOGY OF CAPITALISM AND THE ALTERNATIVES I. INTRODUCTION Since the start of the global economic crisis in the summer of 2008, many voices, have been raised in favour of a “new” capitalism, a compassionate, regulated, honest incarnation of a somewhat tarnished product. These voices recognized some of the errors of the three neo-liberal decades, but were convinced that capitalism had to be preserved or disaster would ensue. If all that was meant was that a considerable degree of private enterprise would remain in a reformed world, these voices were indubitably correct. No one wants to return to the inefficiency, the brutality and the absurdity of Stalinism or to try to create a new form of command economy. The presence of a vibrant private sector is a feature also of democratic socialism or social democracy and not only of capitalism. Indeed, a regulated market economy is more typically described as social democratic than as capitalist. By its nature, pure capitalism cannot be open, totally transparent or compassionate. The reason for calling the future reformed society “new capitalism” rather than “new social- democracy” is the propaganda victory won by conservative think-tanks and ideologues since 1970. In the past many people, including some who did not like socialism, such as Schumpeter, were convinced of its inevitability. Now, even those instinctively hostile to capitalism have embraced the myth that only capitalism can produce growth and that no viable alternative exists. The constant repetition of this in our media led to a situation where many feared to be ridiculed if they demurred and people often fear ridicule more than repression.
    [Show full text]
  • Presidential Documents
    Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents Monday, March 15, 1999 Volume 35ÐNumber 10 Pages 377±418 1 VerDate 03-MAR-99 08:08 Mar 17, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 1249 Sfmt 1249 W:\DISC\P10MR4.000 txed02 PsN: txed02 Contents Addresses and Remarks Communications to CongressÐContinued See also Meetings With Foreign Leaders Iran, national emergency, message Airline passenger protection, radio remarks on transmitting notice on continuationÐ400 proposed legislationÐ398 National Endowment for the Arts, message Arkansas transmitting reportÐ390 Arrival in HopeÐ413 Trade policy agenda and trade agreements program report, message transmittingÐ390 Clinton Birthplace, dedication ceremony in HopeÐ413 Communications to Federal Agencies El Salvador, Legislative Assembly in San Korean Peninsula Energy Development SalvadorÐ391 Organization, memorandumÐ377 Guatemala Interviews With the News Media Arrival in Guatemala CityÐ395 Central America Summit in AntiguaÐ400, Exchange with reporters in Antigua, 401 GuatemalaÐ401 Peace efforts, roundtable discussion in Joint Statements Guatemala CityÐ395 Declaration of AntiguaÐ406 Honduras Community at the Soto Cano Air BaseÐ Letters and Messages 384 Saint Patrick's Day, messageÐ416 Hurricane Mitch reconstruction efforts, Meetings With Foreign Leaders roundtable discussion in TegucigalpaÐ 385 Belize, Prime Minister MusaÐ400, 401, 406 KosovoÐ401 Costa Rica, President RodriguezÐ400, 401, Nicaragua 406 Community in PosoltegaÐ378 Dominican Republic, President FernandezÐ Las Casitas Volcano mudslide survivors, 400, 401, 406 El Salvador, President Calderon SolÐ391, roundtable discussion in PosoltegaÐ380 400, 401, 406 Radio addressÐ377 Guatemala, President ArzuÐ395, 400, 401, Communications to Congress 406 Honduras, President FloresÐ384, 385, 400, Conventional Armed Forces in Europe 401, 406 Treaty, letter transmitting report on Nicaragua, President AlemanÐ378, 380, 400, complianceÐ383 401, 406 (Continued on the inside of the back cover.) Editor's Note: The President was in Texarkana, TX, on March 12, the closing date of this issue.
    [Show full text]
  • Political-Ideological Warfare in Integrated Strategy, and Its Basis in an Assessment of Soviet Reality1
    Political-Ideological Warfare in Integrated Strategy, and its Basis in an Assessment of Soviet Reality1 By John Lenczowski At the heart of the Reagan policy toward the USSR was a strategy to address squarely and ultimately eliminate the causes of tension between East and West. Despite little consensus in the American foreign policy establishment about these causes, the Reagan Administration proceeded from an unambiguous interpretation of what they were: nothing less than the nature of the Soviet regime. From this view, it followed that U.S. policy had to find a way to change that nature, and do so, if possible, without risking total war. Whereas in previous Administrations, U.S. policy toward Moscow was principally reactive and defensive, the Reagan strategy proceeded from a fundamentally offensively-oriented premise: the identification of the principal weaknesses of our adversary. To identify weaknesses required a proper understanding of the nature of the Soviet system -- again, a matter over which there was no consensus among experts in the field. Once these were identified, the Administration set forth a multifaceted strategy whose ultimate goal was to bring about regime change from within. Identifying the Sources of East-West Conflict The Reagan strategy was based on the premise that the source of the conflict between the two powers was neither the existence of nuclear weapons -- if it were, then we should also have had cold wars and arms control negotiations with other nuclear powers such as Britain, France, China, and Israel -- nor economic rivalry, nor any other material factor. Such elements were not causes of the conflict, they were its symptoms.
    [Show full text]
  • This Is Why Putin Is Targeting Three DHS Agents
    This Is Why Putin Is Targeting Three DHS Agents MICHAEL WEISS The Daily Beast, 08.14.18 Russia’s president is obsessed with the U.S. investigation into hundreds of millions in ill-gotten gains that have benefited his cronies—and very possibly him as well. Todd Hyman, a bullet-headed New Yorker with a stocky build, speaks with an affable outer borough accent and has spent the last 18 years working in various capacities for the federal government. He’s done a stint at the Department of Treasury’s IRS Criminal Investigation Division, and now he’s a special agent at the Department of Homeland Security, the law enforcement organization created by George W. Bush after 9/11 to ensure that U.S. soil remains secure against myriad imported threats. These include terrorism, chemical weapons, cyber-espionage, the trafficking of human beings, drugs, stolen works of art and artifacts, and—the offense that concerns us here—money laundering. So why is Vladimir Putin, the supremo of the Russian Federation, so interested in gumshoe Todd Hyman and a couple of his DHS colleagues? You’ll recall that last month at Putin’s grinning, soccer ball-tossing press conference with Donald Trump, the Russian president stated that he would gladly allow U.S. investigators access to the 12 Russian military intelligence operatives named by Robert Mueller in a highly detailed and damning indictment for hacking Democratic email servers. But Putin said he wanted reciprocity. He said he expected Trump to let Russian agents “question officials, including the officers of law enforcement and intelligence services of the United States whom we believe are—who have something to do with illegal actions on the territory of Russia.” That is, he wanted Trump to let him conduct a fishing expedition in the heart of the American security establishment.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Issue
    IMPRIMIS Because Ideas Have Consequences Hillsdale College Hillsdale, Michigan 49242 Volume 15, No. 3 March, 1986 POPULAR CULTURE AND THE "SUICIDE OF THE WEST" by Joseph Sobran Editor's Preview: This address is the last in a series reprinted from the Shavano Institute's conference, "Moral Equivalence: False Images of U.S. and Soviet Values," held in Washington, D.C. in May of 1985. One of theJorty-five participants, Joseph Sobran, _presents his charge that fascism, not "moral equivalence" is the straw man that popular culture has attacked for over a decade. Mr. Sobran notes that although public sentiment is critical of communism and refutes any alleged equiva­ lence between democratic and communist systems, movie­ makers and other purveyors of popular culture seldom yield to this, preferring to deplore Nazism and "its heirs in the West." For these individuals and for the liberal community, it is "safe" to deplore Hitler because it helps them to evade condemning communism, acknowledging its victims, and facing its full horror. Yet, says Mr. Sobran, communism has murdered several times as many people as Nazism. Ironically, Americans are more shocked by the excesses of Joseph McCarthy than Josef Stalin, and it is our popular culture which seeks to convince us that we would be hypocritical Cold War mentality. Most Hollywood movies with politi­ if we felt any other way. cal or heavy social themes have a left-wing slant. This is true even though the great majority of such movies have A few weeks ago I saw The Killing Fields-the first been box office flops, while the right-wing themes of movie in memory to depict communist atrocities.
    [Show full text]
  • Jeane Kirkpatrick and the End of the Cold War: Dictatorships, Democracy, and Human Rights Ilan Wurman Claremont Mckenna College
    Claremont Colleges Scholarship @ Claremont CMC Senior Theses CMC Student Scholarship 2009 Jeane Kirkpatrick and the End of the Cold War: Dictatorships, Democracy, and Human Rights Ilan Wurman Claremont McKenna College Recommended Citation Wurman, Ilan, "Jeane Kirkpatrick and the End of the Cold War: Dictatorships, Democracy, and Human Rights" (2009). CMC Senior Theses. Paper 226. http://scholarship.claremont.edu/cmc_theses/226 This Open Access Senior Thesis is brought to you by Scholarship@Claremont. It has been accepted for inclusion in this collection by an authorized administrator. For more information, please contact [email protected]. CLAREMONT McKENNA COLLEGE JEANE KIRKPATRICK AND THE END OF THE COLD WAR: DICTATORSHIPS, DEMOCRACY, AND HUMAN RIGHTS SUBMITTED TO PROFESSOR JOHN J. PITNEY JR. AND DEAN GREGORY HESS BY ILAN WURMAN FOR SENIOR THESIS FALL 2008 - SPRING 2009 APRIL 27, 2009 ii ii iii Table of Contents Acknowledgements……………………………………………………………………...……iv Introduction………………………………………………………………………….……......1 Part I: An Intellectual and Political History Chapter One: Cold War Consensus Shattered………..……………………………………....8 Chapter Two: Dictatorships and Double Standards………………………………………....33 Chapter Three: The Carter Years: Was Kirkpatrick Right?....................................................45 Part II: Kirkpatrick and the Reagan Administration Chapter Four: The Kirkpatrick and Reagan Doctrines..…………………….……………….69 Chapter Five: Putting Policy to Practice: Chile and El Salvador………...………………….89 Bibliography………………………………………………………………..…………...….118 Appendices…………………………………………………………………………………122 iii iv Acknowledgments I could not have written this thesis without the help of many people, and first and foremost without the help of my adviser and professor, John J. Pitney Jr. He guided me to a doable and exciting topic from my initial mumblings about Reagan and democratization. Without his help, this year-long endeavor would never have come to fruition.
    [Show full text]
  • War, Law & Liberal Thought: the Use of Force in the Reagan Years
    Maurer School of Law: Indiana University Digital Repository @ Maurer Law Articles by Maurer Faculty Faculty Scholarship 1994 War, Law & Liberal Thought: The seU of Force in the Reagan Years David P. Fidler Indiana University Maurer School of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/facpub Part of the International Law Commons, International Relations Commons, and the Military, War, and Peace Commons Recommended Citation Fidler, David P., "War, Law & Liberal Thought: The sU e of Force in the Reagan Years" (1994). Articles by Maurer Faculty. Paper 754. http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/facpub/754 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at Digital Repository @ Maurer Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Articles by Maurer Faculty by an authorized administrator of Digital Repository @ Maurer Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. WAR, LAW & LIBERAL THOUGHT: THE USE OF FORCE IN THE REAGAN YEARS David P. Fidler* I. INTRODUCTION The Reagan administration has been severely criticized for the attitude it displayed towards international law on the use of force. Perhaps excluding the Vietnam years, no previous American administration has come under such heavy and repeated attack for its attitude concerning the role of international law in American foreign policy. More than a few actions have been criticized; many attacks explicitly accused the Reagan administration of treating the international legal rules on the use of force as unimportant. 1 The conventional view appears to be that the Reagan administration has been weighed in the balance of 2 international law and justice and found wanting.
    [Show full text]