Citation

Fiala A. Am. J. Econ. Sociol. 2009; 68(1): 77-99.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2009, John Wiley and Sons)

DOI

10.1111/j.1536-7150.2008.00616.x

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

This paper examines the ideal of the democratic peace and the recent misuse of this ideal in the war on terrorism. It argues against the idea that aggressive military force can be employed to bring about the ideal of the democratic peace. By looking at John Stuart Mill's utilitarian justification of benevolent despotism for “barbarians,” it examines how idealism can lead to a defense of aggressive intervention. And it considers how idealistic zeal can lead to violations of just war principles, as in the case of Hiroshima. It concludes by arguing that Kant's deontological approach is better. Kant provides us with a reason to hope that as democracy spreads, peace will spread as well. But Kant also prohibits us from using force to actualize this ideal.