FILE – This Saturday Aug. 12, 2017 file photo, an armed militia member stands guard at a white nationalist rally in Charlottesville, Va. A social media platform can be compelled to divulge account information belonging to a woman who anonymously chatted online about plans for last summer’s deadly white nationalist rally in Charlottesville, Va., a federal magistrate judge ruled Monday, Aug. 6, 2018. U.S. Magistrate Judge Joseph Spero’s 28-page order says the woman’s First Amendment rights to anonymous speech don’t outweigh the importance of disclosing her identity to plaintiffs’ attorneys suing over the rally’s violence. (AP Photo/Steve Helber, File)
As we approach the November elections, the likelihood of the current low-intensity conflict between actual Americans and the left heating up into something more seems to be increasing. As I pointed out in an earlier diary, if the left loses, they’ll double down on the violent “resistance” they were pushing in 2016. If the left wins, they intend to destroy the republic and literally enslave the citizenry. In a reversal of the classic kids’ game: heads I lose, tails they win.

So if things go hot, or if we reach a point where the only recourse is actual physical opposition to tyranny–aside from surrender–would such a conflict fall under the definition of a “just” war?

Thomas Aquinas had three rules for determining if a war is just: First, the war must be waged at the command of a rightful sovereign. Second, the war must be waged for just cause, on account of some wrong the attacked have committed. Third, those fighting must have the correct intent: to promote good and to avoid evil. Lets break these down.

The first question is the trickiest to answer. I’ve had a number of discussions with Christian friends about what they would do if civilization breaks down. Do we turn the other cheek, which Christ commanded individuals to do when attacked? Do we support the idea that governments are instituted among men by God, and thus fighting for them is our duty? What do we make of the Founders, deeply religious men by-and-large who “rebelled” and who created the country that was rewarded with 200+ years of success?

There are any number of arguments on both sides of this, but my take is that in a constitutional republic, to quote Louis XIV, <i>L’etat c’est moi</i>. In our democracy, the people are the ultimate authority, not a king, but we can echo that statement from 1791: We are the state. Which means that if the country dissolves into a civil war, and if we must fight, we are fighting for ourselves, the rightful sovereigns of the republic.

The second question is easier to answer. Preventing the destruction of our homes, the brainwashing of our children, the destruction of our civilization can’t help but be a just cause. As far as the acts which the “attacked” committed, you’ve only to watch ten minutes of the national news to see the violence that those who are no longer our countrymen are enacting against the innocent. The rioting, fire-setting, beatings… those are the kinds of acts that are wrong on so many levels it beggars the imagination.

The last question is the easiest of all to answer. To promote good and avoid evil. Those who are our likely opponents in a coming conflict are as evil as any denizen of the Pit. To quote an old Book:

For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened.  Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things.

Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, 25 because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.

For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.

And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31 foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. Though they know God’s righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.

Again, I hope that we can avoid an actual conflict. I pray that sanity will prevail and that the country will not be torn apart by a second “Late Unpleasantness.” But if it comes to that, we need to know that what we’re fighting for is a just cause.