Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Patriotism, War, and the Limits of Permissible Partiality

  • Published:
The Journal of Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper examines whether patriotism and other forms of group partiality can be justified and what are the moral limits on actions performed to benefit countries and other groups. In particular, I ask whether partiality toward one’s country (or other groups) can justify attacking enemy civilians to achieve victory or other political goals. Using a rule utilitarian approach, I then (a) defend the legitimacy of “moderate” patriotic partiality but (b) argue that noncombatant immunity imposes an absolute constraint on what may be done to promote the interests of a country or other group involved in warfare or other forms of violent conflict.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Kleinig (2007), For discussion of the definition of “patriotism,” see Nathanson (1993, Chapter 3).

  2. Keller (2007, Chapter 1).

  3. Nagel (1991, pp. 3–5).

  4. Aleksandar Pavković raises the same issue but takes a different approach to them in Pavković ( 2007 ).

  5. On racial loyalty, see Gomberg (2002), pp. 105–112 and Nathanson (2002), pp. 113–119).

  6. Pavković (2002, pp. 58–71).

  7. Pavković ( 2002, p. 59).

  8. Pavković ( 2002, p. 60).

  9. Pavković ( 2002, pp. 62, 66).

  10. Pavković ( 2002, p. 66).

  11. Pavković ( 2002, p. 67).

  12. Pavković ( 2002, p. 61).

  13. Pavković (2002, p. 71).

  14. Brandt (1974, p. 32). In Nathanson (Forthcoming), I argue that this claim is inconsistent with Brandt’s overall rule utilitarian position.

  15. Downes (2008, pp. 136–137).

  16. MacIntyre (2002); Singer (2002), I criticize MacIntyre’s views in Nathanson (1989) and criticize cosmopolitan views in Nathanson (2007).

  17. For a different but overlapping approach, see Erskine (2000).

  18. Walzer’s makes his case for noncombatant immunity in Walzer (1977, Chapter 8); he defends the supreme emergency exception in Chapter 16. For a discussion of Walzer’s view, see Nathanson (2006).

  19. Nagel (1991, p. 4).

  20. For a good discussion of these tensions, see Benvenisti (2006).

  21. For evidence of widespread support for noncombatant immunity, see the results of surveys done in many countries in International Committee of the Red Cross (2000).

  22. The phrase comes from Anderson (1983).

  23. Brandt (1974, p. 26).

  24. In this section, I draw on Nathanson (2007, pp. 88–90). My argument is indebted to Goodin (1988/89).

  25. The following argument for noncombatant immunity is developed more fully in Nathanson (Forthcoming).

  26. Wells (1996).

  27. World War I was not free of anti-civilian strategies. For discussion of the use of blockades, see Downes (2008, Chapter 3).

  28. Gert (1998, pp. 236–237).

  29. Coady (2002, p.17). On the Japanese attacks on China, Coady cites Chang (1998).

  30. For a description and ethical analysis of the Allied bombing of cities in World War II, see Grayling (2006).

  31. Walzer (1997, pp. 258–260).

  32. For a discussion of fallibility and poor judgment in war, see Iklé (1991).

  33. Primoratz explains this concept in Primoratz (2006, pp. 34–35).

  34. Coady (2002, p. 20).

  35. Primoratz (2007).

  36. Primoratz (2007, p. 57).

  37. Primoratz defends the view that Palestinians have faced this type of moral disaster in Primoratz (2006, pp. 35–38). He denies, however, that Palestinian terrorism has been morally justified, claiming that their terrorism did not (and does not) have a reasonable chance of success.

References

  • Anderson, B. 1983. Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benvenisti, E. 2006. Human dignity in combat: The duty to spare enemy civilians. Israel Law Review 39: 81–109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brandt, R. 1974. Utilitarianism and the rules of war. In War and moral responsibility, ed. M. Cohen, et al. Princeton University Press: Princeton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang, I. 1998. The rape of Nanking: The forgotten holocaust of World War II. Penguin: New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coady, T. 2002. Terrorism, just war and supreme emergency. In Terrorism and justice, ed. T. Coady, and M. O’Keefe. Melbourne: University of Melbourne Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Downes, A. 2008. The targeting of civilians in war. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erskine, T. 2000. Embedded cosmopolitanism and the case of war: Restraint, discrimination and overlapping communities. Global Society 14: 569–590.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gert, B. 1998. Morality: It nature and justification. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gomberg, P. 2002. Patriotism is like racism. In Patriotism, ed. I. Primoratz. Amherst: Humanity Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodin, R. 1988/89. What is so special about our fellow countrymen? Ethics 98: 663–686.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grayling, A.C. 2006. Among the dead cities: The history and moral legacy of the WWII bombing of civilians in Germany and Japan. New York: Walker.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iklé, Fred. 1991. Every war must end. New York: Columbia University Press. Revised Edition.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Committee of the Red Cross. (2000). The people on war (Geneva: ICRC); <www.icrc.org>.

  • Keller, S. 2007. The limits of loyalty. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kleinig, J. 2007. Patriotic loyalty. In Patriotism: Philosophical and political perspectives, ed. Igor. Primoratz, and Aleksandar. Pavković, 37–54. Aldershot: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacIntyre, A. 2002. Is patriotism a virtue? In Patriotism, ed. I. Primoratz, 43–58. Amherst: Humanity Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nagel, T. 1991. Equality and partiality. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nathanson, S. 1993. Patriotism, morality, and peace. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nathanson, S. 1989. In defense of ‘moderate patriotism’. Ethics 99: 535–552.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nathanson, S. 2002. Is patriotism like racism? In Patriotism, ed. I. Primoratz. Amherst: Humanity Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nathanson, S. 2006. Terrorism, supreme emergency, and noncombatant immunity. Iyyun 55: 3–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nathanson, S. 2007. Is cosmopolitan anti-patriotism a virtue? In Patriotism, ed. I. Primoratz, and A. Pavković. Aldershot: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nathanson, S. Forthcoming. Terrorism and the ethics of war. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Pavković, A. 2002. Towards liberation: Terrorism from a liberation ideology perspective. In Terrorism and justice, ed. T. Coady, and M. O’Keefe, 58–71. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pavković, A. 2007. Killing for one’s country. In Patriotism, ed. I. Primoratz, and A. Pavković, 219–234. Aldershot: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Primoratz, I. 2006. Terrorism in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Iyyun 55: 63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Primoratz, I. 2007. Civilian immunity in war: Its grounds, scope, and weight. In Civilian immunity in war, ed. I. Primoratz. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, P. 2002. One world. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walzer, M. 1977. Just and unjust wars. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wells, D. 1996. Casualties of War. In An encyclopedia of war and ethics, ed. D. Wells, 55–56. Westport: Greenwood Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

My thanks are due to Igor Primoratz for helpful comments on a draft of this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stephen Nathanson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Nathanson, S. Patriotism, War, and the Limits of Permissible Partiality. J Ethics 13, 401–422 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10892-009-9065-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10892-009-9065-z

Keywords

Navigation