Xxxxxx’x dilemma. Xxxx Xxxxxx (1969) introduced the notion that any definition of physicalism will end up being either trivial or false (Stoljar 2021). The main question is whether the physical is defined via reference to current physics, or future or ideal physics? The following are the horns of Xxxxxx’x dilemma (Stoljar 2001a: 394):
Xxxxxx’x dilemma. In a seminal essay on lawfare and counterinsurgency, Xxxxxx Xxxxxxx questions whether the law, or mechanisms of justice, can be used firmly by counterinsurgents to promote legitimacy, or whether it will necessarily be perceived as unfair and will thereby undermine legitimacy. Perhaps the most meaningful indicators of the legitimacy of any state are the rules (and even more importantly the degree to which the state follows them) that govern its exertion of force, especially exertion of force against its own citizens. By announcing and demonstrating their commitment to these rules, counterinsurgents can enhance the government’s legitimacy and weaken the insurgents.294 This question is echoed by an earlier practitioner of counterinsurgency. In his Low Intensity Operations, a work (written during a sabbatical from military service at Oxford University in 293 A useful term adopted by Xxxxxxx Xxxxxxx 294 Xxxxxxx, ‘Use of law in counterinsurgency’, p155 1970)295 that synthesised his experiences into what amounted to a doctrinal treatise, General Xxxxx Xxxxxx looks at the dilemmas presented by the use of justice as a weapon. He advises that: … the military leadership should present to the supreme council a number of issues of joint military-civilian co-operation on which firm policy rulings should be taken before operations against those practising subversion can start. An excellent example concerns the way in which the law should work. Broadly there are two possible alternatives, the first one being that the law should be used as just another weapon in the government’s arsenal and in this case it becomes little more than a propaganda cover for the disposal of unwanted members of the public. For this to happen efficiently the activities of the legal services have to be tied into the war as discreetly as possible ... the alternative is that the law should remain impartial and administer the laws of the country without any direction from the government.296 For governments concerned with the conduct of operations within a legal framework, this is an exceedingly difficult balance to strike. As will be seen below, Xxxxxx’x dilemma was extremely familiar to those closely involved in counterinsurgency operations in the 1950s.297 In The British Way in Counterinsurgency 1945–1967, Xxxxx Xxxxxx quotes the assistant secretary at the Colonial Office with responsibility for Palestine in 1946: The plain truth to which we firmly shut our eyes is that in this emergency Regulation...
