Is it acceptable to kill tyrants after a revolution in a trial even if one opposes the death penalty in most other cases? Michael Walzer has suggested that it is permissable to execute a tyrant- even if one does not beleive in the death penalty- in the magazine Dissent. I at Bits of News have respectfully disagreed with Professor Walzer.
The quotation in my title above is from a pamphlet written by Edward Sexby in the late 1650s about killing Oliver Cromwell because of Cromwell's tyranny, Cromwell was one of the signatories to the death warrent of Charles I in 1649 and Sexby had served as an officer in Cromwell's army. The irony I hope is interesting.
June 07, 2007
Killing no Murder
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
It is interesting that Sexby - having been on the parliamentary side in the civil war - was keen to justify an excecution of Cromwell. Perhaps he was someone who, like the Vicar of Bray, swayed from side to side depending which one was winning ;)
Anyhow, in regard to the substantive question, I do see questions as to what to do with tyrants are funadamentally _political_ ones and not _judicial_ ones. As such, i do not think it is possible to give a 'fair trial' to former rulers of a state. A political decision thus has to be made by the new rulers as to what to do. And I personally can see why they execute the previous ruler. It is the last act of the old order and hopefully closes the book on the brutality of that period.
I don't agree that the death penalty is wrong.
But! if you think that the death penalty is wrong, then it should be always wrong.
Post a Comment