They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
I recently went to see the movie Lord of War about an international weapon's dealer, Yuri Orlov (Nicholas Cage). He sells weapons to anyone no matter what purpose the guns are going to be put used for. He does not see himself as to blame for the deaths that his guns cause since he does not put a gun to anyone's head and force them to kill another person. Furthermore since if he does not sell them the gun they will get from someone else therefore he might as well be the one making a profit from this.
This movie got me to thinking about this sort of situation. It seems at first glance that to supply weapons to a people oppressed under an evil government which uses force to enforce and sustain its power is a way to free them from the evil. However, then the question arises what is to take the place of this government. Since often it is a small group of freedom fighters that have over thrown the government and who believe that they have the best interests of the nation at heart then it is logical for them to take control. But it is easier to go on as you have started rather than change to the new circumstances. As they started with military force the easiest way to keep the old government supporters down and enforce your government is to use force. "Every faction in Africa calls themselves by these noble names--Liberation this, Patriotic that, Democratic Republic of something-or-other... I guess they can't own up to what they usually are: a federation of worse oppressors than the last bunch of oppressors. Often, the most barbaric atrocities occur when both combatants proclaim themselves freedom-fighters."
Strange (or may be not) as it seems the best possible solution is that which Jesus and the early church proposed. Pacifism and submission have changed the world more truly than guns ever could. A crucified Christ has conquered more of the world than a conquering messiah ever could. From what I understand the church did not fight against the Romans yet through patient suffering and love of their enemies they grew to envelop the empire and the Western world.
I recently went to see the movie Lord of War about an international weapon's dealer, Yuri Orlov (Nicholas Cage). He sells weapons to anyone no matter what purpose the guns are going to be put used for. He does not see himself as to blame for the deaths that his guns cause since he does not put a gun to anyone's head and force them to kill another person. Furthermore since if he does not sell them the gun they will get from someone else therefore he might as well be the one making a profit from this.
This movie got me to thinking about this sort of situation. It seems at first glance that to supply weapons to a people oppressed under an evil government which uses force to enforce and sustain its power is a way to free them from the evil. However, then the question arises what is to take the place of this government. Since often it is a small group of freedom fighters that have over thrown the government and who believe that they have the best interests of the nation at heart then it is logical for them to take control. But it is easier to go on as you have started rather than change to the new circumstances. As they started with military force the easiest way to keep the old government supporters down and enforce your government is to use force. "Every faction in Africa calls themselves by these noble names--Liberation this, Patriotic that, Democratic Republic of something-or-other... I guess they can't own up to what they usually are: a federation of worse oppressors than the last bunch of oppressors. Often, the most barbaric atrocities occur when both combatants proclaim themselves freedom-fighters."
Strange (or may be not) as it seems the best possible solution is that which Jesus and the early church proposed. Pacifism and submission have changed the world more truly than guns ever could. A crucified Christ has conquered more of the world than a conquering messiah ever could. From what I understand the church did not fight against the Romans yet through patient suffering and love of their enemies they grew to envelop the empire and the Western world.
