|
Tyrannicide is the killing or assassination of a tyrant or unjust ruler, usually for the common good,〔Jaucourt, Louis, chevalier de. "Tyrannicide." The Encyclopedia of Diderot & d'Alembert Collaborative Translation Project. Translated by Thomas Zemanek. Ann Arbor: Michigan Publishing, University of Michigan Library, 2009. http://hdl.handle.net/2027/spo.did2222.0001.682. Originally published as "Tyrannicide," Encyclopédie ou Dictionnaire raisonné des sciences, des arts et des métiers, 16:785 (Paris, 1765).〕 and usually by one of the tyrant's subjects. The term also denotes those who kill a tyrant (e.g., Harmodius and Aristogeiton, who are called 'the tyrannicides'). ==Political theory== Tyrannicide can also be a political theory, and as such dates from antiquity. Support for tyrannicide can be found in Plutarch's ''Lives'', Cicero's ''De Officiis'', and Seneca's ''Hercules Furens''. Plato describes a violent tyrant as the opposite of a good and "true king" in the ''Statesman'',〔 and while Aristotle in the ''Politics'' sees it as opposed to all other beneficial forms of government, he also described tyrannicide mainly as an act by those wishing to gain personally from the tyrant's death, while those who act without hope of personal gain and only to make a name for themselves are rare.〔Aristotle, ''Politics'' X〕 Various Christian philosophers and theologians also wrote about tyrannicide. In Thomas Aquinas's commentary on the ''Sentences'' of Peter Lombard, Aquinas gave a defense not only of disobedience to an unjust authority, using as an example Christian martyrs in the Roman Empire, but also of "one who liberates his country by killing a tyrant."〔For Aquinas, "when what is ordered by an authority is opposed to the object for which that authority was constituted ... not only is there no obligation to obey the authority, but one is obliged to disobey it, as did the holy martyrs who suffered death rather than obey the impious commands of tyrants." One may even be "praised and rewarded" for being the "one who liberates his country by killing a tyrant." Commentary on the Sentences of Peter Lombard, trans. J.G. Dawson (Oxford, 1959), 44, 2 in O’Donovan, p. 329-30.〕 The Monarchomachs in particular developed a theory of tyrannicide, with Juan de Mariana describing their views in the 1598 work ''De rege et regis institutione,'' in which he wrote, the philosophers and theologians agree, that the prince who seizes the state with force and arms, and with no legal right, no public, civic approval, may be killed by anyone and deprived of his life..."〔 The Jesuistic casuistry developed a similar theory, criticized by Blaise Pascal in the ''Provincial Letters''.〔Ganns, H. G. (''"The Jesuits and Tyrannicide,"'' ) The American Catholic Quarterly Review, Vol. XXVII, 1902.〕 Before them, the scholastic philosopher John of Salisbury also legitimised tyrannicide, under specific conditions, in the ''Policraticus'', circa 1159. His theory was derived from his idea of the state as a political organism in which all the members cooperate actively in the realization of the common utility and justice. He held that when the ruler of this body politic behaves tyrannically, failing to perform his characteristic responsibilities, the other limbs and organs are bound by their duty to the public welfare and God to correct and, ultimately, to slay the tyrant. In 1408 the theologian Jean Petit used biblical examples to justify tyrannicide following the murder of Louis I, Duke of Orleans by Petit's patron John the Fearless, Duke of Burgundy. Petit's thesis was extensively discussed and eventually condemned by the church. ''A Shone Treatise of Politike Power'', written by John Ponet in 1556, argued that the people are custodians of natural and divine law, and that if governors and kings violated their trust, then they forfeited their power, whether they relinquished their positions voluntarily or whether they had to be removed forcefully. ''The Tenure of Kings and Magistrates'' by John Milton in 1649 also described the history of tyrannicide, and a defense of it when appropriate. Cambridge's David George has also argued that terrorism is a form of tyranny of which tyrannicide is a negation. Libertarian Nick Roberts argues, "Top-level assassination hurts only volunteers — the willing tyrants. It leaves the innocent alive. If rulers choose to rule and to go to war, their lives become forfeit because they are acting coercively towards their subjects and intended conquests. As a 'natural rights' libertarian, I do not consider that the Hitlers, the Kennedys, the Gaddafis or the Attilas have any right to mercy. Those who plan and order the deaths of millions deserve to die. After all, who else is there to blame?" 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. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Tyrannicide」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|