After Dustin’s lecture on War Theory, one scene from The Lion King kept replaying in my head and I felt it necessary to share this
thought process I used for myself to clarify war theory. After talking about
the three justices necessary for war--jus ad bellum, jus in bello, and jus post
bellum--I wanted to apply the three justices to the following clip…
Okay, so first we have jus ad bellum—justice to war. Simba first
must have just cause and proper authority. He is the rightful heir to Pride
Rock and accordingly, has the support of the pride of lions. Because of this,
Simba’s public confrontation of Scar can be determined a moral declaration of
war because he, acting as a state as he has the support of a state, can morally
declare war. Further, Scar, by hurting others of the community by keeping the lions
in a place with no food and disrupting the natural cycle of life, has thus given just cause for a challenge. Simba must come to the
defense of his pride. Entering into war, the authority figure also must have
the right intention. Simba does not hope for anything but to benefit his
family. He also uses fighting as a last
resort: he does not kill at first and instead tells Scar that he is banished offering
another option besides being killed. Simba also enters into this fight having
already weighed his probability of success and if the universal good gained
outweighed the evils of war. Consequently, he enters into war with Scar and the
hyenas because he has a strong probability of success with many followers of
the rightful ruler. And of course the proportionality: war with Scar does
outweigh the evil of Scar’s death because everyone will benefit and live.
Then there’s jus in bello (justice in war) that Simba
follows with the application of discrimination. He avoids killing civilians and distinguishes
between soldiers and civilians. He does not attempt to fight the hyenas although
they carried out Scar’s doings and he attacks Scar alone. Even the soldiers of lions ignore the hyenas
until they attack first (which indicates a labeling of themselves as soldiers).
And finally, jus post bellum (justice after war). After the
fight, in which Simba is triumphant, Simba needs to decide a proportional
punishment. Scar’s punishment is ultimately death because he killed Mufasa and
hurt the overall pride by starvation. He also makes sure to discriminate between
leaders and civilians. As a result, only Scar is punished.
 |
| Source: http://www.collegefashion.net/inspiration/fashion-inspiration-walt-disneys-the-lion-king/ |
Consequently, Simba becomes a great advocate for the War
Theory Walzer presents. But can really a lion accurately demonstrate a theory intended for modern use by human constructed government forms? Or does this really make it a universal? Does it only apply the United States (who also made this movie)? Might other governments reject it? I know it seems like I'm asking a lot more questions than I'm answering but I feel that by applying these principles to Disney you're left with questions that target the universality of Walzer's theories since the movie promotes a moral pathway for children but through an American bias.
Also, can you apply the Lion King to any other theories we’ve
talked about so far? Or do you even think that Disney is an appropriate medium
to apply to War Theory as it is a kids animation film?
I don’t think the fact that the Lion King is about anthropomorphic animals delegitimizes any philosophical aspects it might contain. Walzer definitely means his Just War theory to be universal. I think the fact that he considers not just America but other countries like Italy and Germany in the examples he gives shows that it’s not meant to be applied on a conditional basis. It’s either right or it’s wrong, and some governments might indeed decide that it’s wrong, but Walzer’s obviously means to assert that his Just War theory is correct, and that it is the way war should be handled in all cases. Additionally, Lion King was heavily influenced by Hamlet (I believe, I am not familiar with Hamlet, but I’ve read this multiple times in a variety of places, and it definitely seems like something that could be true), so I don’t think it’s surprising that it deals with themes that are not relevant to children. Furthermore, I don’t think it’s inappropriate for it to do that. I think the best kids films are often the ones that appeal to adults as well, and although political philosophy is maybe not directly what makes the Lion King appealing to the old as well as the young, the aspects of it that cause the philosophical elements to be there probably are. It also doesn’t hurt that it’s just an awesome movie with great music.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Duncan on what he said in his comment. I think that The Lion King is a great example of a very complex idea (Just War Theory, etc.) that has been simplified. I think it's completely appropriate to realize this, even though it's a disney film with a primary audience of children. But, there are many cases in which Disney wrote movies and their scripts with motives other than to entertain children. There are a lot of people who think movies like The Little Mermaid or Aladdin have messages in them that are politically controversial. So, it's important to note that movies or scenes can always have an impact on their audience (of any age).
ReplyDeleteThat being said, I agree with Duncan, that Walzer most likely intended his Just War Theory to apply to all countries and all wars that are fought. I'm sure some countries (or at least thinkers within countries) disagree with his Just War Theory, but I suppose Disney is an independent entity that is permitted to express it's subtle opinions in its movie. Additionally, The Lion King is most definitely influenced by Shakespeare's Hamlet, which in and of itself, proves that Disney wasn't just trying to entertain us with awesome special effects and wonderful music.
The Lion King was and continues to be one of my favorite classic movies. Also you asked the question of whether a Lion could carry out Just War Theory. With the Lion King being closely linked to the story of Sundiata, the Prince from Mali maybe the use of an animal shows how Just War theory is applicable to all nations and governments.I believe the producers at DIsney used the complex idea of "Just War Theory" to put a more youthful and imaginative spin on complex ideas as they tend to do with many of their motion animated pictures. Furthermore, I think you did a good job breaking down the individual components of jus ad bellum, jus in bello, and jus post bellum with specific examples from the movie.
ReplyDeleteWhen you ask whether other governments would reject the notion of Just War theory, I believe the answer is yes. In this case and many other cases following the theories protocol leads to triumphant victory. Yet, different circumstances might call for different procedures. Many nations hold grudges against one another and might be willing to undercut their morals and this theory to guarantee the win.
I am so excited by this blog post. I've always found Disney movies to hold deeper truths than what is on the surface, but I don't think I would have ever made this connection. I also think your analysis of jus ad bello, jus in bello and jus post bellum are really insightful. I think this simply story really does accurately depict the complicated ideas of justice before, during, and after war. I do believe, just as Duncan and Brandon said, that Walzer meant for his Just War Theory to apply to multiple countries and become a universal practice. Also, it is obvious countries have, throughout history, rejected this policy. An example of this is the United States during the war with Vietnam. American soldiers killed thousands of civilians in an effort to get at the guerrilla soldiers. This obviously doesn't follow Walzer's views on jus in bello. Also, Disney is a totally applicable medium to describe these tough moral issues. It not only brings in the adults to these potentially annoying children's movies, as Duncan said, but also teaches children at a very young age these ideals without the children really aware of what it is they are learning. I'm not saying Disney's goal was to teach children Just War theory, but it does give children a 'role model' so to speak.
ReplyDelete