Content deleted Content added
You BOLDly Added it, I REVERTed it, now we can take it to the TALK page, per BRD. |
Undid revision 1235382836 by 208.87.236.180 (talk) restore paragraph with additional source that confirms Crowley is considered a political theorist |
||
Line 26:
[[Abraham Lincoln]] believed that assassinating a leader is morally justified when a people has suffered under a tyrant for an extended period of time and has exhausted all legal and peaceful means of ouster.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1289&context=cilj|title=Executive Order 12,333: The Permissibility of an American Assassination of a Foreign Leader|last=Johnson III|first=Boyd M.|date=Spring 1992|website=Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository |publisher=Cornell University Law School Research|access-date=July 27, 2019}}</ref> He saw tyrannicide as a necessary last resort to protect liberty and justice. Lincoln's views, shaped by the American Civil War, reflect the ethical debate on violent resistance against tyranny, emphasizing that removing a despot can be a moral imperative to restore democratic governance and human rights.<ref>{{cite book |last=White |first=Ronald C. A. |title=Lincoln: A Biography |publisher=Random House |year=2009}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Dirck |first=Brian R. |title=Lincoln and the Constitution |publisher=Southern Illinois University Press |year=2012}}</ref>
[[Aleister Crowley]], in the preface to ''[[The Book of the Law]]'' and in his 1941 broadside "[[Liber OZ]]", emphasized the right to rebel against tyranny. He argued for the individual's right to live by their own [[True Will|will]] and resist those who would thwart this right. During [[World War II]], Crowley's writings highlighted the need to oppose totalitarian regimes to protect individual freedoms. His philosophy, called [[Thelema]], asserts that individuals have inherent rights, including self-defense and personal freedom, even against oppressive rulers.<ref>{{cite book |last=Sutin |first=Lawrence |title=Do What Thou Wilt: A Life of Aleister Crowley |publisher=St. Martin's Press |year=2000}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Pasi |first=Marco |title=Aleister Crowley and the Temptation of Politics |publisher=Routledge |year=2014}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Bolton |first=K. R. |author-link=Kerry Bolton |display-authors=etal |year=2010 |title=Aleister Crowley As Political Theorist |place=New Zealand |publisher=Renaissance Press}}</ref>
[[University of Cambridge|Cambridge's]] David George has argued that [[terrorism]] is a form of tyranny of which tyrannicide is a negation.<ref>{{citation|title=Distinguishing Classical Tyrannicide from Modern Terrorism|journal=The Review of Politics|year=1988|volume=50|issue=3|pages=390–419|publisher=Cambridge University Press|doi=10.1017/S0034670500036317|last1=George|first1=David|s2cid=146523905 }}</ref> He posits that tyrannicide serves as a countermeasure to terrorism, which uses fear and violence to subjugate populations. In George's view, the assassination of tyrants can be an act of liberation, dismantling oppressive structures and restoring autonomy. This situates tyrannicide within a broader discourse on the ethics of political violence, suggesting it aims to eliminate tyranny and restore justice.<ref>{{cite book |last=George |first=David |title=The Ethics of Political Violence |publisher=Cambridge University Press |year=1995}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Coady |first=C. A. J. |title=Morality and Political Violence |publisher=Cambridge University Press |year=2008}}</ref>
|