War is always ugly but sometimes inevitable. Neither its justification nor condemnation should be decided from the gut!

Being against violence does not make for a beautiful soul (Aristotle)

If we consider war as a continuation of political activity by other means, it never arises out of nowhere. Every war has a history that led to it. The topic of war is complex and delicate, and assessing its justification or inevitability in specific instances is even more so.

The general public often views war as the worst of all evils. The prevailing opinion is that the side that starts a war is inherently wrong and evil, while the side that resists is right and good. But as history and rational reflection show us, this is not necessarily true. If it were so easy to distinguish between right and wrong in war, many instances would reveal the United States and its Western allies as the aggressors. If the question of war could be answered based purely on emotion, we would never need to discuss the "Just War" theory, which has occupied philosophers from Augustine and Thomas Aquinas to Michael Walzer and others, including myself. I devoted my doctoral thesis (and the book based on it) to the morality and immorality of violence (and non-violence) on both individual, collective, and politico-military levels.

The evaluation of war and its political-ethical implications can be approached from two essential perspectives. First, what triggered the war, and what prompted political leaders or governing bodies to go to war? What is the causa iusta—the just reason, as the primary consideration of the principle of ius ad bellum (right to war)—that justifies or seems to justify waging war?

The challenge in assessing this crucial aspect is that the justification for the use of force—no matter when it occurs—is always subjective, based on the intentions of political leaders or decision-making bodies. To assess this adequately, observers—whether individuals, political administrations, or international bodies—must rise to a meta-level of thought, striving to judge the events leading to the dispute as objectively and impartially as possible. Unfortunately, this rarely happens, as pacifist and political-ideological emotions often cloud judgment. The United Nations, which should ideally play this role, seldom succeeds in maintaining this objective and impartial perspective.

Two essential criteria of transcendental moral philosophy (independent of experience and comprehensible by reason alone) for ius ad bellum are necessity and inevitability. War must always be a last resort, necessary and inevitable as the only option for resolving a conflict. While this is relatively obvious in cases of clear defense, it becomes more complicated in cases of preemption or prevention. A pre-emptive war represents a proactive breach of the peace, aimed at addressing an imminent threat or gaining a strategic advantage before an inevitable armed conflict. Pre-emptive war may be justified if all alternatives to the use of force have been exhausted, or if immediate military intervention is needed to prevent a much larger threat. Examples of pre-emptive military strikes include Israel's Six-Day War in 1967 and the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq. In the latter case, the assumption that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) was used as a justification for war, though this proved to be inaccurate.

The ius in bello (law in war) is the second aspect of warfare to be evaluated. Do the warring parties and their military forces abide by the laws of war, such as the Geneva Conventions? Do they wage wars based on universal human principles that must not be endangered or abandoned, even in armed conflict? Do the warring parties distinguish between combatants and non-combatants? Are military targets the focus, with efforts made to minimize collateral damage? Are prisoners of war and wounded enemy soldiers treated in accordance with the Geneva Protocols, and are war crimes avoided?

While both sides appear to violate the ius in bello in the ongoing Ukraine war, only alleged Russian war crimes are widely reported in the West. For example, there is no mention of Ukrainian troops using civilians as human shields, choosing defensive positions in residential areas, or arming non-combatants in violation of martial law, actions that organized crime exploits to wreak havoc, while the blame is shifted to Russian forces. Furthermore, there is no mention of the restraint Putin has imposed on his armed forces, with a focus on military objectives. The West misinterprets this as incompetence on the part of Russian troops.

To understand the causalities that led to the war and provide criteria for its potential resolution, we must focus on the question of ius ad bellum—the reasons and motives for starting a war that lie within the hands of political leaders.

The Responsibility for this War in Ukraine is on the West's Side

---

Disclaimer: I am a friend of Europe and the US, but not necessarily of their ruling political class or policy decisions. None of my criticism is intended to be malicious or adversarial. It is only meant to enlighten the discourse, broaden perspectives, and improve political relations and decisions.

---

Although Western political elites and their media unanimously condemn President Putin's decision to recognize the breakaway regions of Donetsk (DPR) and Lugansk (LPR) in eastern Ukraine as autonomous people's republics, Putin's strategic maneuver can be seen as one of last resort.

Donetsk and Lugansk separated from Kiev following the Western-backed Maidan coup of 2014. They did not tolerate the deposition of the incumbent President Yanukovych and the installation of Poroshenko, whom they perceived as a puppet of Washington and Berlin. Poroshenko’s policies opened Ukraine to the political, military, and economic influence of the US and the West. Since then, the Ukrainian leadership has rejected—disregarding the Minsk I and II agreements—meaningful discussions on the status of its eastern territories, even resorting to a civil war-like conflict in an attempt to forcibly reintegrate the republics.

In 2014, following the Maidan revolution, it became immediately clear that Putin would not passively accept Ukraine's potential NATO membership, which could result in the expulsion of Russia from its Black Sea ports in Crimea. For the first time, Putin was confronted with an anti-Russian regime in Kiev. This prompted the annexation of Crimea and support for the separatists in Donbass, who opposed Ukraine’s transformation into a NATO base. The predominantly Russian population in these areas also resisted the Ukrainian regime's efforts to eliminate Russian traditions, language, and culture.

The annexation of Crimea and support for the eastern territories should have been predictable had the US and Europe taken the time to consider Russia's legitimate strategic interests and conducted an overdue, intelligent evaluation of the region’s security dynamics. How would the United States react, for instance, if Mexico allied with Russia and Putin stationed massive troops along the southern border?

Western political elites have not made a single meaningful effort to address Russia's legitimate security concerns. Instead, they have pursued ruthless regional and global dominance, which has shaped international relations—and particularly relations with Russia—for over a quarter-century.

Resolving the crisis in Ukraine would have only required a reassessment of Washington, Brussels, and Berlin’s strategic miscalculations and a respect for Russia’s legitimate security interests. Unfortunately, the current political leadership in the US and Europe lacks the necessary restraint to peacefully resolve the conflict.

For example, neither the weeks-long Russian troop build-up on the Ukrainian border nor Russia’s security demands—outlined in a letter to Western leaders prior to the military action—led to any acknowledgment of Russia’s national security concerns by the US, EU, or NATO. They denied Putin any opportunity for diplomacy. The blame for the collapse of dialogue and the first step toward Russian aggression lies solely with the West.

While public and international discourse on this issue often focuses on the Kremlin and the White House, little attention is paid to Ukrainian President Zelensky’s role in the current crisis. Had he defined his country’s national security interests wisely and sensibly within the broader geopolitical context, particularly in relation to Russia, he might have avoided the conflict and preserved his country’s territorial integrity. Instead, driven by his Western backers and perhaps megalomaniacal ambitions, he pushed Ukraine toward NATO membership and the stationing of nuclear weapons—decisions that overstepped the reasonable limits of an adequate security strategy.

Renunciation of Truth - How Long Can We Survive a Reality Based on Falsehoods?

---

Truth is the acknowledgment of reality—the recognition of how things truly are. At its core, truth is grounded in the first law of logic: the law of identity. A = A. A thing is itself and nothing else. Reality is simply that which exists.

For centuries, truth has been central to Western thought. Despite human imperfection, fallibility, and conflict, truth has remained a vital value—a means of aligning human judgment with reality. Essential fields like jurisprudence and science depend on truth, implicitly assuming it in their practices. Beyond these, individuals of good character in politics, the media, and civil society have persistently upheld the value of truth. For the faithful believer, truth culminates in the Christian proclamation that truth is the way and the path of life.

Yet, falsehoods have always been wielded for personal and political gain. Across civilizations and political systems—whether authoritarian, totalitarian, or democratic—history is replete with examples of such manipulation. We all know this from experience.

In our contemporary era, however, the distortion of reality and the implantation of falsehoods seem to have reached unprecedented levels. Where has the "love for truth" gone? How have ideological prejudice, political power, personal vanity, and self-importance come to overshadow decency, honesty, fairness, and humanity? Do people no longer understand—or perhaps never have—that truthfulness and truth-seeking are based on moral grounds? That no society can long survive without them? Don’t they grasp that justice, righteousness, honesty, and decency are merely the visible manifestations of truth in our social and political lives?

I addressed the moral and intellectual implications of truth in my 2016 blog entry Truth in Life and Politics (available here).

Beyond educational shortcomings that distort the very notion of truth, I want to highlight two reasons for the alarming magnitude of reality distortion we face today. One is as old as humankind; the other is relatively new and particularly pernicious to our civilization. Both, however, converge to form the disastrous reality we now confront.

First, human malice and wickedness—those timeless aspects of human nature—have reached new levels of harm. While human nature remains unchanged, contemporary technologies, the proliferation of media, and the pervasive use of social media enable unprecedented manipulation and denigration.

The four years of Donald Trump’s presidency saw the rise of delusions perpetuated by corrupt politicians, media giants, and tech companies like Facebook and Twitter. I have discussed at length the evil influence of the U.S. Democratic Party, arguably the most destructive political force in the Western hemisphere in our lifetime. The RINOs and anti-Trump factions within the Republican Party are close behind. These forces make left-wing movements in Europe and Latin America seem relatively mild in comparison. I’ve written about this vile group repeatedly (for example, here).

A recent example is the misrepresentation of the January 6 Capitol riot. The rioters, it turns out, were largely unarmed, and the FBI appears to have orchestrated much of the chaos to discredit Trump supporters and pressure Republican politicians into abandoning efforts to challenge the election results. The identity of the security officer who shot unarmed protester Ashley Babbitt remains undisclosed. Contrary to earlier reports, the Capitol officer purportedly killed by a protester with a fire extinguisher had died of natural causes, as confirmed by his family. Additionally, the Russian collusion narrative pushed by the media turned out to be unfounded, despite relentless coverage. Trump’s attempts to improve relations with Russia were painted as evidence of him being a Russian agent.

Similarly, attempts to impeach Trump on baseless charges ended in failure. While left-wing groups like Antifa and Black Lives Matter engaged in months of rioting, Democrats tried to paint right-wing extremism as the nation’s primary threat. Even traditional Christian values now face condemnation as "extremist." Election Integrity Laws are falsely labeled "voter suppression," and President Biden absurdly claimed that voter suppression is the greatest challenge the U.S. has faced since the Civil War. This claim persists despite evidence of irregularities following the 2020 election. Doubts about voter fraud are dismissed as conspiracy theories, yet the monstrous idea is that we should blindly trust the system.

The list of lies, distortions, and falsehoods could go on endlessly. One thing is clear: the majority of the political apparatus, the media, and security agencies have become machines of deception. These ideologically subverted institutions are willing to violate the law and morality to push the left’s progressive agenda.

The second reason for the ongoing reality distortion is arguably more dangerous. It concerns the increasing delusion of human capability, driven by hubris. Our era is marked by an unprecedented anthropocentrism—the belief that human beings can transcend natural limitations. This mindset fuels the creation of fake realities that ultimately harm us.

No longer is truth about understanding the natural world—what nature dictates to humankind, and the limits she sets. Instead, we are now driven to overcome these boundaries. Social constructivism manufactures false realities, creating an environment of fake authenticity.

Marxist Takeover in the U.S. Leads to the Self-destruction of a Superpower

---

Two months have passed since the inauguration of Joe Biden and his administration, and in that time, the radical left's agenda has been pushed forward at a stunning pace.

The elderly figure in the White House, guided by his progressive handlers, has offered us a textbook example of disastrous politics — zealously pursuing ideological utopias at the expense of the nation's well-being and its citizens.

As for the mainstream media, nothing has changed. They continue to report selectively, desperately trying to cover up the radical agenda and present a distorted reality that masks the true nature of what is unfolding.

Through a series of executive orders (EO), the Biden administration has dismantled President Trump's accomplishments in just a few short weeks. The southern border is in chaos, border wall construction has been halted, and illegal immigrants are flooding into the country due to Biden’s promises to reverse his predecessor’s policies. The cancellation of the Keystone XL pipeline has caused significant economic harm. The return to Obama-era foreign policies has already weakened U.S. relations with Russia and China.

A new arms race and Cold War scenario are taking shape. Cultural decline has accelerated with executive orders that push for the inclusion of biological males in women’s sports and taxpayer-funded sex-change surgeries for military personnel. The list of troubling changes goes on.

What is equally appalling, however, is the complacency within the right-wing establishment in this country. There are few signs of any real resistance, either politically or socially. The convenience of the corrupt status quo in Washington, D.C., has led even many Republicans to accept the realities of electoral fraud, a cognitively impaired leader in the White House, and the damage wrought by the left over the past two months. A handful of brave senators and representatives, including Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia and Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, have stood against the tide, attempting to prevent the worst outcomes.

Republicans are now looking to the midterm elections in 2022, hoping for a shift in power that might reset the balance in Congress. However, this hope may be futile. Early in March, the House of Representatives passed a sweeping piece of legislation, the “For the People Act 2021,” a 791-page bill that many see as a blatant attempt by the Democratic Party to secure their rule for generations to come — if the nation even survives their current term.

This law enshrines measures for election manipulation and fraud. It removes voter ID requirements, allows illegal immigrants to vote, lowers the voting age to 16, and institutes automatic voter registration whenever someone interacts with government services. In short, it legalizes the very practices that turned the last election into a spectacle of voter fraud on a scale that has never been seen in a free society. Biden has already indicated his support for the bill and is expected to sign it into law. It is currently under debate in the Senate, but it appears unlikely that Republicans will stop its passage.

We are witnessing a prime example of reckless governance — a regime that, in its zeal for ideological fantasies, is disregarding the will of the people and accepting disastrous consequences for the nation. If the past two months and the current state of U.S. politics cannot serve as a warning about the dangers of poor leadership, nothing will.

The modern-day Jacobins, intoxicated by wokeness, identity politics, political correctness, and globalist ideals, are determined to undermine the foundational principles of our civilization. For now, they seem to be succeeding, and unless a long-overdue moral and intellectual counterrevolution takes place, the victory will be theirs. However, hopes for such a shift are slim. The key pillars that uphold the moral and spiritual fabric of society — the media, academic institutions, culture, and the arts — are largely in the hands of a corrupt and ill-educated elite.

These institutions continue to promote a false narrative, obscuring the true nature of what is happening and, more critically, what is at stake in terms of our civilization’s future. Increasingly, concerned citizens must turn to alternative media, attend speeches and interviews in person, and — most importantly — apply critical thinking and healthy intuition to uncover the truth.

Above all, we must speak out to change the prevailing atmosphere of cultural and moral decline.

Politics of Hatred Brings Success for Democrats and Biden – The Swamp Prevails

With yesterday's inauguration of the Biden/Harris administration, a significant moment in American history unfolded—its true impact on world history remains to be fully understood. However, one thing is certain: dark times have begun for the Christian-conservative camp in the U.S. and the defenders of Western civilization. Tyranny is now upon us.

After four years of fierce propagandist vilification of the 45th President, the "storming" of the Capitol on January 6 provided a fresh opportunity for journalists and commentators to engage in their ongoing Trump denunciations and judgmental excesses.

What began as unrest caused by fringe elements within a peaceful demonstration of tens of thousands of Trump supporters has been elevated to a democratic catastrophe. Donald Trump has been blamed as the sole instigator, despite the fact that he never called for violence, instead encouraging his followers to demonstrate "peacefully and patriotically." The fact that Capitol security forces opened the gates at the precise moment Republican members of Congress and senators were preparing to present evidence of election irregularities and blatant voter fraud is conveniently omitted.

The united left accuses Mr. Trump of inciting a violent coup and claims that the Capitol's occupiers desecrated a landmark of American democracy. What is conveniently overlooked is the fact that many politicians, with strong backing from the power centers of the Deep State, have long turned the Capitol into a den of corruption and moral decay.

Since Trump’s 2016 election victory, a campaign of hatred—wholly incompatible with any legitimate opposition in a fledgling republic—has been waged to oust him from the White House. After Hillary Clinton's defeat, Nancy Pelosi, House Speaker, and Chuck Schumer, Senate Minority Leader (until yesterday), as leading figures of the nation's progressive left, spearheaded an almost irrational campaign to destroy Trump. They were supported by the bulk of the corporate media in an unprecedentedly vicious, partisan effort.

Since day one of his presidency, Trump has faced what amounts to an ongoing coup—a "color revolution," a coup d’état carried out without military force.

Representatives and senators from both parties, beholden to oligarchic donors from globalist, revolutionary elites like George Soros, Bill Gates, and Mark Zuckerberg, collaborated to further the globalist agenda against this political outsider. Trump, by strengthening the United States as a nation-state and adopting his "America First" principle, stood in the way of their plans.

Every means possible was—and is—considered legitimate to remove this "troublemaker." Despite his flaws and constant attacks, President Trump proved to be an excellent and influential leader. His accomplishments for the American people were numerous, including:

• Tax reform benefiting corporations and individuals

• Dismantling anti-industrial regulations

• An unprecedented economic recovery with record employment rates for Black Americans, Hispanics, and women (a recovery that was only slowed by the pandemic)

• Improved trade agreements with Canada, Mexico (USMCA), and China

• Initiatives toward restructuring and pacifying the Middle East

• The beginning of ending endless wars and bringing troops home from overseas territories

• Promoting energy independence, achieving the United States' first true energy self-sufficiency

• Reviving Christian values and social ethics

Even before he took office, rumors of a supposed collaboration between the Trump campaign and Russia (the RussiaGate scandal) were spread, only to later be proven entirely baseless. Then came the ill-fated impeachment trial over a phone call between Trump and Ukrainian President Zelensky, while evidence of former Vice President Biden's abuse of office in Ukraine went unaddressed. Nothing was done when Biden forced the resignation of a Ukrainian prosecutor investigating alleged bribes to him and his son, Hunter, from the energy company Burisma, despite Biden bragging about withholding support payments until the prosecutor was fired.

When impeachment failed and Nancy Pelosi's dramatic tearing of Trump’s State of the Union speech before a global audience didn’t achieve its goal, the Democrats found a new weapon in early 2020: the pandemic.

Though the pandemic certainly slowed economic recovery, governors are primarily responsible for managing pandemic response. Yet, Trump was blamed for every COVID-19 death. Democratic state leaders who sent infected patients into nursing homes, leading to tens of thousands of deaths, were hailed as heroes. Once the public saw through the myth, the final card was played: the manipulation of the 2020 presidential election. Despite clear evidence of irregularities and voter fraud—such as Judicial Watch’s finding of 1.8 million more voters than actual voters in 27 states—politicians and courts sided against Trump. Over 74 million of his supporters, who viewed him as an exceptional president due to his success in economic, energy, immigration, and foreign policy, saw him as robbed of re-election and do not recognize Joe Biden as a legitimate president.

For many, the betrayal of Trump and the shameful corruption of politics have reached unbearable levels. The Capitol incident and the absurd accusation that Trump incited an insurrection represent the tragic climax of this betrayal.

Violence only seems to be acceptable when it comes from the right, often tolerated or even applauded by the left. The arson and looting carried out by violent left-wing groups like Antifa and Black Lives Matter since the summer of 2020 has cost lives and caused billions in property damage. Left-wing mobs have stormed and occupied state capitols in Wisconsin and Minnesota, yet because these actions do not fit the narrative of cultural Marxists, they are either ignored or downplayed.

But fraudulently voting Trump out of office is not enough for the political left. They are determined to ruin Donald Trump personally and prevent him from ever holding political office again. As the final step in their strategy of total discrediting, they have shamelessly used the Capitol occupation to push through a second impeachment, charging Trump with inciting violent insurrection. This attempt at impeachment—far more absurd than the first—now moves to the Senate, with an uncertain outcome. What is clear, however, is that some Republicans have already stabbed Trump in the back, and a repeat performance cannot be ruled out.

The erasure of Trump’s political legacy coincides with a growing mental dictatorship reminiscent of the totalitarian regimes of both communist and fascist origins. Trump has been denied access to social media and the ability to communicate directly with the public. His supporters have been socially ostracized, and some have faced threats and persecution.

For now, the political left has triumphed at nearly every level. What is most devastating is that their politics of destruction and hatred have been rewarded, while the inertia and spinelessness of the Republican Party, along with most of their representatives, have allowed the left to gain even more ground. The arrogance of these forces will only grow.

The Marxist left's totalitarian machinery, which has been steadily intensifying, is now fully operational. With the Democratic Party controlling the Presidency, Senate, and House of Representatives, Marxist-driven policies are all but assured. I fear that what we are witnessing may soon be compared to the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 or the rise of the Khomeini theocracy in Iran in 1979.

American society is deeply divided, and frustration is widespread. The cultural struggle is likely to intensify. The Biden/Harris agenda is poised to bring disaster to the United States, leading to widespread damage across all political fronts—economy, defense, cultural values, immigration, education, and free speech. There is no immediate solution in sight. Before the conservative camp can once again engage in the culture war, it must first overcome the emotions of resignation stemming from defeat and betrayal.

Colossal U.S. Election Fraud - When the Righteous and Virtuous are Absent the Evil Triumphs!

After four years of relentless attacks and an ongoing campaign of lies and defamation against President Trump, unprecedented in both this country and possibly in the entire history of democratic republics, the left’s attempt at a coup against him has culminated in a colossal operation of voter fraud. The Democrats have stolen an election that President Trump had already won on the evening of November 3.

At this crossroads of political decay, the forces behind this swindle are emboldened by their election success, now seeking to install the usurper, Joe Biden, in the White House. Yet, a critical question remains: How much further will this wickedness and malicious mockery go before it all ends in an apocalyptic reckoning? The U.S. is now experiencing a societal climate of division and hate that has reached an unprecedented level of deterioration.

In my previous blog essay (link to essay), I addressed the issue of executive power and leadership in times of crisis for a nation. Anticipating the chaos surrounding the elections, I advocated for early law enforcement and military intervention to quell the unrest, violence, and looting fueled by Black Lives Matter and Antifa militants across the country. I also highlighted the challenges of governing a federally organized country, where constitutional mandates allow regional politicians to openly oppose the nation’s leader, even working actively against him. Initially sparked by the tragic killing of George Floyd by a police officer, the aforementioned organizations morphed into movements that sought to overthrow the government and remove President Trump from office. It remains incomprehensible why certain governors and mayors were allowed to continue their destructive practices. Their refusal to uphold their duties—by giving stand-down orders to law enforcement and even encouraging civil unrest and looting—should have led to legal action, including temporary removal from office.

While President Trump and a few cabinet members warned of widespread fraud and the chaos that tens of millions of mail-in ballots would cause, authorities did not act with sufficient urgency to secure a fair election.

The OSCE (Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe), the world’s largest security-related intergovernmental organization, could have deployed election monitoring personnel to the U.S. It routinely sends election observers to Eastern and Southeastern Europe, and upon invitation, could have provided impartial oversight here as well.

However, the issue of election observers was never discussed in the public discourse, nor was the possibility of a repeat election brought up—especially in swing states where attorneys and control agents uncovered significant irregularities and substantial evidence of fraud, supported by dozens of affidavits from election officials and observers. There is now an abundance of proof (though, of course, denied by the Biden camp and the mainstream media) that tens of thousands of illegal votes were cast, and that the software used to evaluate ballots in many states was either flawed or deliberately manipulated. Estimates on the number of votes that were initially given to Trump but ended up going to Biden range from several hundred thousand to a few million.

While it may seem that the scale of fraud and election rigging renders any revision or a win for Trump impossible, under no circumstances should he concede or allow the left to get away with this fraudulent operation. The Trump administration must exhaust all legal avenues to prevent the Biden-Harris ticket from occupying the White House.

If we allow this election fraud to stand, the incoming Democratic administration will chart a course for Marxist-globalist destruction. Biden and his team will reverse and erase the monumental successes President Trump achieved during his first term. To name just a few: the restructuring of the Middle East, ending endless wars and unjust overseas military engagements, achieving energy independence for the U.S., tax reform benefiting both corporations and individuals, unprecedented economic growth with record-low unemployment rates for Black Americans, Hispanics, and women, new and improved trade deals with Canada and Mexico in place of the disastrous NAFTA, a trade agreement with China, and the revival and defense of Christian values and social ethics.

The triumph of the vile and depraved Democratic Party in securing the presidency is not a foregone conclusion. And we must never forget: evil has no existence on its own—it thrives only in the absence of the righteous and virtuous. I predict that the virtuous will return, and they must prevail, for the future of this nation—and of Western civilization itself—is at stake.

 

Charlie Hebdo, a Beheaded Teacher and the Abuse of Free Speech

Could we possibly imagine a serious ethical and moral framework that would justify the killing of a person who, under the guise of artistic creativity or political freedom of expression—despite being degrading to specific individuals or groups—expressed their convictions? Of course not. The brutal beheading of the teacher must be unequivocally condemned. There may be causal explanations for such an act, but there is no excuse for it.

However, the horrific act that led to the teacher's death should not obscure the fact that the teacher himself made a mistake. Rather than using the controversial cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad from Charlie Hebdo as an example of the abuse of free expression, he used them to justify and exemplify free speech. In doing so, he unintentionally triggered a misguided radical to commit a politically and religiously motivated murder.

The reactions to the French teacher's beheading by an Islamic extremist further reveal, with few exceptions, how inadequately educated many of the so-called "educated" people are and to what extent they lack the capacity for critical thinking.

It should be the task of every educator to convey that freedom of expression is not absolute and, therefore, not unlimited. Like all other areas of human activity, free speech must be limited by the responsibilities inherent in the exercise of human freedom. Elsewhere, I have discussed the connection between freedom and responsibility and made clear that they are two sides of the same coin. We cannot think of freedom without responsibility, and responsibility is void if one is not free to act. The liberty of human beings is, therefore, about responsible freedom. Irresponsible freedom—defined as the arbitrary exercise of will, manifesting itself in unchecked egoism—gives only the illusion of freedom. A person who is a prisoner of their impulses and self-centeredness is not free; rather, they are held hostage by their own morally deficient personality.

From my essay on the Crisis of Morality: "True human freedom is finite freedom, limited by the conditions of social coexistence and the legitimate aspirations of all other individuals. We must not mistake freedom for independence from everything; instead, it must be understood as a choice within the framework of something larger."

This quotation highlights that our responsibility as human beings extends to all other individuals and living organisms, in every social and political context, because they hold relevance in relation to our actions. The boundary between our freedom and the freedom of others, when expressed in a formal and universally applicable manner, is what we commonly refer to as justice.

Injustice, therefore, occurs when one's freedom extends beyond the boundaries of justice and infringes upon the freedom of another, thus preventing them from exercising their own choices. When we meet the demands of justice through our own actions, we practice ethical and moral righteousness. This principle also establishes the ongoing responsibility of the legislature to define, at any given time and place, the legitimate claims to freedom of all individuals in relevant contexts and to codify them into law. The application of justice is dynamic, as it must account for the evolution of human coexistence and its respective contexts, but the concept of justice remains timeless and unchanging. This truth explains why positive legislation that neglects this normative principle can embody wrong—something that has occurred throughout history.

As a result, it becomes clear how utterly irresponsible and morally unjustifiable any form of blasphemy is, as it violates the legitimate claim of religious practitioners to freedom, without justification for such interference. Even if a legal provision (whether immoral or ill-conceived) were to permit blasphemy, it would never be ethically justifiable to mock or ridicule another person's faith. Provoking Muslims by making fun of the Prophet Muhammad is just as inappropriate as provoking Christians by mocking Jesus Christ in satirical works or art. In Paris, Charlie Hebdo was misguided and irresponsible when it mocked Islam's religious figures in its satirical magazine, just as Pamela Geller’s cartoon contest "Draw Muhammad" in Garland, Texas was irresponsible. In both cases, the agitators hid behind misinterpretations of the principle of free expression—either a misguided understanding of the U.S. First Amendment or a neglect of the moral-philosophical ideal that dictates responsible action.

Truly free and responsible individuals have long understood that responsible behavior is never simply about complying with the law. They recognize that legal provisions primarily set the boundaries for what one cannot do to avoid harm, while moral responsibility dictates what we must do and how we should act.