The article examines the legal status of servicemen and members of their families as particular subjects of law of social security. Analyzed the basic of differentiation of legal regulation of social assistance for this category of citizens, the justification of special status. Designated amount of cash payment, benefits, guarantees.
The basic historical stages of the existence of war are constituted by the special combinations of its factual and normative sides. The contemporary transformation of war means first and foremost the sifts of the major proportions of this combinations. From its factual side the war tends to become robotic, informational, hybrid, etc. From its normative side it moves towards militarism. The so called, Just War Theory in its contemporary paradigm if Justice of Human Rights is nothing else but a version of militarism. The Just War Militarism in its turn drags the factual side of war in such a way, that war and not peace becomes the norm, and the war itself tends to become absolute although constrained. Hyper terrorism is one of the inevitable consequences of such a normativity and peace itself tends to be substituted by permanent low level war, resembling the situation in Europe before the Peace of Westphalia.
Violence constitutes one of the threats for civilization. Since the monopoly on violence still belongs to the state, the core of the problem is theexcessive violence of the state. The violence of the state has two sides - the violence towards the citizens of the state and the violence towards the other states. These two sides of the problem are usually treated separately. The author of the article approaches them in conjunction. The purpose of the article is to highlight the possible normative approach to the violence-free society.
Carl von Clausewitz, the author of the well known magnum opus "On War" is often regarded as a militarist or at least a realist but of the variety, very close to militarism. I am claiming that the realism of Clausewitz occupies a very special niche inside the general trend of realism. It may be called enlightened realism, which is very close to Kant and in fact very close to the humanistic idea of the constrained war. The driving force for this realism is the ideal of enlightened politics, very different to the hobbesian idea of politics.
Victory should be regarded as a military version of a success. There is a difference between the content and meaning of victory. The contemporary transformation of war is dramatically shifting the meaning of victory. The normative conceptions of war, such as pacifism, militarism, realism and just war theory have their own conceptions of meaning and content of victory, which should be explicated. The just war theory contains a paradox in this regard. Victory is strictly speaking impossible in a just war.
In 1909 Dmitriy N. Logofet published the Book “Strana bespraviya” (“Land of injustice”) where he criticized the power system, economic relations and living standards in this state. Author concludes that D. Logofet was a something like spokesman of military circles, and his book was a part of a confrontation between the Military Ministry and Ministry of Foreign Affairs on “Bukhara problem”.
The contemporary just war theory should be regarded as the major normative source triggering the decisions on the complicated matters of war and peace in the West. The theory is the product of the further development of the general idea of the justified or limited war and one of the possible normative attitueds to war alongside pacifism, militarism, realism, just war theory. My claim is that the theory is both theoretically and pragmatically false. It incrisingly fails to prevent the global violence. On the contrary, the theory fasilitates violence and paves the way for the global absolute war. The theory fails as a theoretical construct but incrisingly serves the purposes of information warfare.