Second Half of Video, I Made Parallel Observations.

Christine Niles on Recent Events and Others · C. S. Lewis and Anscombe agreed on this · Second Half of Video, I Made Parallel Observations.

Ukraine, Palestine, Iran and Just War
Shameless Popery | 26 June 2025
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZOPPj_hQQE

19:26 "the state has ... you don't have that permission"

Correct about the violent response after the aggression is already over.

While a man is being aggressed, he has the right to defend himself, possibly according to the law of God (and St. Thomas makes a natural law argument this is so) and certainly, even if the law of God didn't grant it per se, it grants the right to avail oneself of self defense laws in place ... "according to the laws of the emperors" as the specific Church father said.

Note, if you have heard a certain story about me, not sure you have, not sure you haven't, on the occasion, I was NOT seeking vengeance for an aggression already in the past, I was just learning from the past what kind of aggression it was, and what my chances were to get things straightened out legally, and was then in my mind justified in self defense on a renewed occasion of aggression.

20:49 You have a miniature enumeration of institutions here that are included in "every human institution" ...

Psychiatry doesn't fit the bill.

CPS don't fit the bill.

School compulsion doesn't fit the bill.

21:08 And also, if the civil authority encroaches on the rights of someone other than God to determine things, like the adult person himself (under the laws) or the parents, that other than God is also not obliged to give up his rights.

So, if the civil authority tells a man he needs to see a shrink or a parent she needs to give up custody or send a son to a boarding school, resisting either of them in any way available is perfectly licit.

27:37 Not just against someone trying to kill, but also against someone trying to maim or enslave.

But thanks for admitting there is a right to self defense.

31:19 C. S. Lewis disagreed on number 3, which it seems in his time was being introduced by Catholic Theologians (his words, he could have been simply unaware of earlier Catholic theologians).

And as he was from Ireland, he had a fairly good reason to do so. He considered this one impossible to know.

Easter Rising of 1916, in and of itself, had no prospects of success. In Dublin, 1000 to 1500 persons at most took arms against England.

Nevertheless, as we know with hindsight, the Easter Rising was highly successful. It triggered a repression that showed the administration was simply paranoid about Irish nationalists.

Pádraic Pearse did more damage to the union from his gallows than he did with his rifle. As we know, Éire is its own state, not under the English Crown, no longer in the Commonwealth.

Pádraic Pearse couldn't do it on his own, he just had massive help from Lloyd George. Among other things, targetting Sinn Féin which at the start of affairs was hoping for a Double Monarchy, giving Ireland a status parallel to that of Hungary. And absurdly enough targetting Sinn Féin as German agents.

So, CSL (I forget which context) had a point that point 3 cannot be a criterium, since it is unknowable. Unknowable things can't serve as criteria.

35:48 Vivat Cascia!

My own three state solution with shared territory would have involved Jerusalem as under international jurisdiction, because important to all three states.

The Christian, the Jewish and the Muslim ones.

With shared territory ... as you may recall from a certain chapter in LotR, specifically FotR, there is no frontier between men and hobbits in Bree, but each side stays mainly to itself.

With three separate jurisdiction (operating all from the river to the sea), in the case of a conflict between two states or citizens of two states, one could and should ask the third to broker.

38:27 For instance, if someone (a belligerent) is hiding under a hospital, it would obviously not be right to bomb the hospital?

38:45 "they did in fact succeed" ... not very easy to know prior to Al Alamein and the German loss of Stalingrad.

Are you saying the invaded countries were waging unjust war any time between September 1939 and 1943?

Hence, CSL's point. A reasonable prospect of success would seem to be a non-criterium. Unlike, obviously, the part criterium you mentioned, namely having a criterium for when one has won. War on terror, war on drugs, war on immigration are too amorphous, because what one is fighting is not one given army.

41:36 And if the one engaging in just war commits war crimes, the war that was originally unjust may become a just war of defense against such war crimes.

That's pretty straight from City of God.

46:14 Contrary to Rosmini, he made an excellent case against a One World State.