Democracy, Patriotism, and Treason

First of all, for those who haven't seen Valkyrie, be warned that this article contains some spoilers regarding the recently released movie. If you're one of those people who can't stand to read the spoilers before you watch a movie, I'll simply say it's a great movie and you should go see it before it stops playing in theaters.

However, for those who have seen the movie (or do not mind the spoilers), please continue reading.

Is it justifiable to assassinate and overthrow evil political leaders? Valkyrie answers this question with a resounding yes. In fact, the message of the movie tells us that such a course of action is not only justifiable, it is the morally right thing to do.

For those unfamiliar with the history of Operation Valkyrie (as I was before I saw the film), the operation was the last of the attempts to assassinate Hitler before he shot himself in 1945. The conspirators within the Valkyrie operation tried to not only kill Hitler, but also stage a massive coup designed to place all of German controlled Europe under a new government that would negotiate peace with the Allies. The plan was to use Hitler's own operation for activating Germany's reserve forces (known as Walk�re) to neutralize Nazi SS and Gestapo agents under the pretense that the SS and Gestapo were behind Hitler's assassination. Meanwhile the core instigators of the operation would see to Hitler's assassination and the institution of the new government.

The details and suspense behind this operation are highly detailed in the movie, Valkyrie. However, simaltaneous to all the intrigue and drama comes a highly developed moral issue that philosophers and political scientists have pondered for centuries. Though, there never is too much conflict for the main characters due to this moral struggle, (they are firmly on one side of the issue), the importance of understanding the moral struggle is very important to us. Do people under an evil government have the right to overthrow the government and even assassinate its leadership?

Concerning the answer to this question, John Locke, the brilliant English philosopher of the 17th century wrote in the Two Treatises of Government that "For all power given with trust for attaining an end, being limited by that end, whenever that end is manifestly neglected, or opposed, the trust must necessarily be forfeited, and the power devolve into the hands of those that gave it, who may place it anew where they shall think best for their safety and security. And thus the community perpetually retains the supreme power of saving themselves from the attempts and designs of anybody, even of their legislators, whenever they shall be so foolish, or so wicked, as to lay and carry on designs against the liberties and properties of the subject." In simpler English, Locke argued that when government acts unjustly against its citizens, the people have the right to remove the power previously vested in those political leaders and then restore the power to new leaders that they trust. This argument justifies something called the "right of revolution."

Today, we call this the method of democracy. If we take the time to think about it, democracy simply is the peaceful exercise of the right of revolution. When people have the chance to vote, they are able to oust previous leaders if they think they're doing a bad job and then implement a new leader all without blood and violence. This is exactly what happens in revolutions, yet usually they are accompanied with much more violence and sorrow. Therefore, every November, U.S. citizens exercise this peaceful right of revolution, be it in regards to local, state, or federal leaders. Unfortunately, the right of revolution can be abused in a society with democracy, and I believe it has been for the past century in the United States, however, that is a different article for another day. Despite this, there is no question that individuals within a society each bear the right of revolution.

In Valkyrie, however, the peaceful right of revolution was denied to the instigators of the assassination attempt on Hitler. Therefore, the question becomes: did the morally desireable right of revolution dissolve when Hitler declared himself the leader of the Third Reich? Was there a conflict between patriotism and treason? Absolutely not. The right of revolution was retained, however, it could no longer be exercised peaceably, as the men in the Valkyrie operation understood. Therefore, they realized they had to betray their evil government in order to stand for their patriotic love for Germany.

This is the theory that justifies the men in the Valkyrie operation and the portrayal of those men in the recently released movie. Unfortunately, as we all know, none of the attempted assassination plots on Hitler ever succeeded, and Operation Valkyrie shared the same fate. The ending is emotionally tough, but the boldness and patriotism that excudes from the conspirators in Valkyrie is something to admire. When their government ordered them to march under the banners of evil, they chose to betray that very government and exercise their God-given right of revolution. In the end, the paid the ultimate price, but in doing so, they stayed true to their principles and their patriotism in the name of a better Germany.

As Colonel von Stauffenberg (portrayed by Tom Cruise) said at the beginning of the movie, "You can serve Germany, or the Fuhrer. Not both!" The men in Operation Valkyrie chose Germany with God as their judge (a point also made by Stauffenberg in the movie). To this day, even as we remember the tragedy of Hitler's Germany, these men allow us to see one of the many bright lights that persisted even under the darkness of Nazism.