Awarded the second place in the 2024 Gospel and Academia Project essay contest prize for postgraduate students

Full title: Normativity in State Legitimacy: A Philosophical Framework for An Analysis of Teleology, Ontology, and Order in Times of Crisis (Grounded in El Salvador’s Current Measures of Criminal Justice Related to Gang Violence)

El Salvador

Picture a sterile hallway of indiscriminate gray, lined with cells. The hallway is perhaps 30 feet wide, and filled with 100 guards dressed in unbroken black. When you first see the guards, you see merely a strip of skin around their eyes and their ungloved hands. They are otherwise a column of black wearing helmets with clear masks (lifted), holding riot shields and standing, at times, two deep along the perimeter. Their backs are to the cells, and they face the hallway where prisoners have been arranged and seated in rows of 10. The prisoners are all young-ish looking men with shaved heads and white shorts, backs bared to show the gang tattoos they carry. They sit with their hands cuffed behind them and their heads bowed, slumped onto the man they sit immediately behind. It is unclear how long the hallway is or how many columns of men the camera misses. This photograph has been provided to journalists by El Salvador’s presidential press office.¹ Human rights organizations denounce the new measures of gang prevention from Salvadoran President Bukele which have given El Salvador “the highest incarceration rate in the world.”² One journalist writes, “it’s a mass incarceration comparable with some of the harshest regimes and wars in history – the equivalent of locking up more than three million in the United States in under a year.”³ Amnesty International calls Bukele’s actions “systematic” and denounces them due to the arbitrary nature of the detentions and arrests, allegations of torture and ill-treatment (including overcrowded cells, failure to try and release detainees quickly, and lack of access to basic services), as well as a lack of transparency.²

Over 76,000 people accused of gang affiliation have been arrested,⁴ and the Asamblea Legislativa has “approved legal reforms to allow for mass trials of up to 900 people”⁵ as well as trying “children ages 12 and above.”⁶ A Human Rights Watch (HRW) 2022 publication notes that security forces have arrested over 1,600 children on the charge of gang affiliation.⁷ Echoing Amnesty, HRW writes that the “human rights violations were not isolated incidents” but systematic, sustained by the “rhetoric of high-level government authorities, including President Bukele.”⁷ MS-13 and Barrio 18 are the two most prominent gangs in El Salvador (maras), and, until Bukele’s crackdown, theyoperated brazenly, patrolling neighborhoods, and engaging wantonly in rape, murder, and extortion.⁸ “Nearly 20,000 Salvadorans were killed from 2014 to 2017” and police officers wore face coverings to protect their families from gang retaliation.⁹ As a small snapshot of life beneath gang rule, 11-year-old José Luis PerézMadrid was indiscriminately kidnapped while playing soccer, “beaten, tortured, stabbed, and beheaded.”¹⁰ The motto of MS13 is ‘mata, viola, controla’ (kill, rape, control).¹¹

In September 2023, President Bukele stood before the UN General Assembly and declared that, in a very short time, he had taken his country from being the most dangerous country in the world to being the safest country in Latin America.¹² Addressing the international criticism he has received on the night of his re-election, Bukele asked the human rights organizations, “los derechos humanos de quien?” (whose human rights?).¹³ Perhaps, he says, his government has finally prioritized the human rights of honest people over those of criminals. He asks those who oppose his policies why they want the criminals to spill Salvadoran blood and why Salvadorans and their children must die so international actors can believe that El Salvador is respecting their “falsa democracia” (false democracy).¹⁴ Ensuring they “had God and the people on board,” his government became a “benchmark for security,” claiming their sovereignty and acting on behalf of the people.¹⁵ As one journalist states, “it seems that savagery has restored order to El Salvador’s streets.”¹⁶ Bukele’s approval ratings have “been over 75% since he became president” and he is “the world leader with the highest domestic support.”¹⁷

How should we understand this?

There is a sense in which ‘legitimacy’ is a primary question for the evaluation of this situation: are the actions taken by Bukele’s government legitimate? If Bukele has indeed secured his country from gang violence and insecurity, what are the implications for evaluating his methods? What is the role of state morality in dilemmas concerning state security, and how is that morality to be assessed? Does the violence of gangs such as MS13 merit such stringent measures from state actors? 

This essay seeks to understand the purpose of the state – specifically, the purpose of the Salvadoran state in the context of extreme gang violence, repressive criminal policies, and international critique. The Christian understanding of reality is fundamentally valuable for its definitions of the nature of mankind, justice, purpose, and boundaries. I begin by defining legitimacy (speaking briefly of the distinction between normative and empirical legitimacy) before arguing for the primacy of normative legitimacy in light of objective reality. I conclude by offering three boundary markers within and by which we may seek understanding regarding the Salvadoran context. The first maintains we may be sure that normative legitimacy exists because of the Lord’s preeminent sovereignty, and, from the security of this assurance, seek normative standards via understanding the purpose for which a state exists because we serve a God of order and intention. The second boundary marker proposes that this purpose (telos) of the state is primarily concerned with order and security, and the third postulates that evaluations of normative legitimacy must be grounded in the purpose of the state and in Justice.¹⁸

Empirical vs Normative Legitimacy

To summarize two complex ideas, normative legitimacy concerns an objective “set of standards” for an institution or regime while empirical legitimacy concerns “whether people believe” in the legitimacy of the institution or regime.¹⁹ Critiques of normative legitimacy worry that the “actual views held by the subjects of a given regime” may differ from those of the philosopher evaluating it.²⁰ There is a right concern that certain truths and decisions that can only be understood from the ground. The perspective of José Luis’ mother regarding Bukele’s measures of violence reduction will differ greatly from that of the Senior Executive of Amnesty International. When a humanitarian suggestion fails, it is not the international humanitarian who must bear the consequence, be it societal or personal.²¹ To this end, normative conceptions of legitimacy are often dismissed by the social sciences as the idealized notions of the ivory tower, unstained by the muck and mire of reality. In contrast, empirical legitimacy determines whether there is “a belief among the subjects of a governing institution that it is legitimate.”²² The origin of this conception is credited to Max Weber who declares that “the basis of every system of authority is… a belief.”²³ Thus, empirical legitimacy is derived not from ideological ideals, but the practical willingness of citizens to obey an institution born out of a genuine belief in its rightness.

Legitimacy is “nested within a particular society” regardless of the views of non-community members.²⁴

However, while there is much to be gleaned from this conception, and we must be wary of value judgments (particularly for nations not our own), there remains the fundamental truth that God is a God of Justice who stands above and outside of every culture. Moreover, His Justice is (to some extent) knowable, whether by natural law, revelation, or some combination thereof. By His Justice, normativity may exist in analysis, creating a benchmark by which to measure and judge the actions of a state in accordance with the objective reality we are called to steward. This normativity is not derived from human rights organizations²⁵ or international standards or treaties, but the justice, truth, order, goodness, and rightness of God and His created order for mankind. Thus, the first boundary marker – the validity of standards of normative legitimacy and their ontological security against time, culture, and philosophical persuasion – has been laid out by the Creator.

Defining State Legitimacy

We now move to consider the second boundary marker offered for this discussion: the telos of the state. Certainly, there is no shortage of thinkers who have sought to define the purpose of states.²⁶ However, I postulate three thoughts by which to ground this discussionand await their full elaboration for another time. The first borrows and remolds an Aristotelian teleology. A teleological lens on the state would, philosophically, seek to explain the state in relation to its purpose. This view posits that the state exists because of its end goal.²⁷ The state does not exist as an end in and of itself, but it exists because of its telos; it exists, in part, to provide certain goods for those individuals living within set borders. Secondly, a study of the ontology of the state (i.e., its nature of being) would provide deep and substantive frameworks by which to assess legitimacy and assess how well a state is performing its end goal (i.e., operating in accordance with its nature). The third idea which offers a grounding point regards Platonic Forms.²⁸ Plato’s Theory of Forms maintains that perfect, abstract, and idealized Forms exist and are the basis of true reality.²⁹ The Forms are such that concepts such as truth, goodness, beauty, courage, justice, etc., can be measured against the true Forms of Truth, Goodness, Beauty, Courage, Justice. Grounded within and upon these concepts,³⁰ I argue that normative legitimacy (objective standards by which to measure state actions and behavior) may be understood in light of the purpose of the state. If the state of El Salvador is true to its purpose, then there is indeed both a political and moral legitimacy to its actions.³¹ In other words, telos defines (in part) normative legitimacy.

One primary purpose of the state is to provide order and security for its citizens. Albert Mohler says that the answer to the question of why democratic voters “overwhelmingly vote for man that is seen as a threat to democracy”³² is that they are, for the first time in generations, safe.³³ Mohler argues that the key to understanding this situation is the question of “which is primary, order or liberty?”³⁴ Blood, extortion, and horror ran in the streets of El Salvador; gangs determined who could enter neighborhoods, raped indiscriminately,⁸ and beheaded 11 year old boys.³⁵ Order – structure, framework, functionality – must precede liberty and civilization. We serve a God of order. The Lord of all creation has chosen to create order out of chaos and call humanity to steward and govern that order, causing humanity to flourish. To look at creation itself, each atomic structure is just that: a structure. Creation is comprised of intricately interwoven, complex, beautiful order. We have been given agency within that order: an agency which – though corrupted by the fall – equips mankind to push back against entropy and chaos. To be free of all restraints is not freedom, but anarchy, and we know instinctively that states cannot operate within conditions of anarchy. In times of emergency, the constitution of ancient Rome was willingly overturned so that order could rule until the crisis had been resolved.³⁶ There is a necessity for order as a framework through and by which liberty can flourish. The breakdown of order seen in many countries leads to human misery.³⁷

Habakkuk 1:3-4 speaks of the paralysis of the law and justice which occurs in destruction and violence (i.e., disorder and chaos). Justice is perverted in strife, contention, and wickedness; justice, when it does go forth, is perverted by an ineffective law. In El Salvador, if wanton destruction and violence rules the streets, how can justice rule in any true sense elsewhere? How can societal good (ontologically linked to Justice) be achieved when chaos runs unchecked? Nothing happens in a vacuum; to offer a tangible example, the political and societal good of economic development in El Salvador was paralyzed by the gangs’ violent extortion. The good of economic flourishing could not come forth in unchecked chaos. Indeed, Aquinas maintained that order is an intrinsic political good necessarily preceding any extrinsic good.³⁸ Political order ought to mirror “God’s unity in its complex and ordered diversity.”³⁹ Secular power is not fully subordinate to spiritual power but “free to undertake its own activities.”⁴⁰ This agency given to secular states is pivotal to this debate because it implies that, though there are wrong answers,⁴¹ there is not necessarily a right answer to every dilemma the state encounters so long as the state exists within certain boundaries defined by purpose and method. Aquinas defines four limitations for the state: moral standards with a special emphasis on justice, rule of law, the duty to defend and promote common good (including virtue), and the authority and rights of the Church.⁴²

Thus, the debate may be reframed into a question of whether Bukele has transgressed democratic lines to the political detriment of his nation, or whether he is restoring an order to his state that must precede the proper functioning of democracy. There are many sources (with Yashar 2018 and Trejo & Ley 2020 as primary) which argue that the violence and corruption of many Latin American contexts emerges from the prior corruption of security forces in the authoritarian era which was inadequately addressed in the transition to the democratic period. This is, fundamentally, a problem and question of order: there is a disorder created by Latin American security forces as they fail to walk forward in their proper ontological and teleological ends (as measured against Forms of Justice, Integrity, and other intrinsic goods and purposes, whose symbiosis produces duty) which fundamentally wreaks havoc upon state and citizenry.

Grounding Normative Legitimacy

I further posit that normative legitimacy must be grounded not only in the purpose of the state but also in justice. That our God is a God of Justice is under no doubt, nor is the fact that He expects justice from us on individual, corporate, and societal levels. We can knowJustice, objective Truth, and objective Reality through the definitions, spiritual principles, and character of God as revealed in Scripture. Justice is fundamentally important to God;⁴³ there is a punishment and dread which will fall upon those who pervert it,⁴⁴ and a blessing for those who seek it.⁴⁵ Earthly rulers “bear the sword” against those who do wrong and stand as the avenger of God on wrongdoers.⁴⁶ Justice matters because man is created in the image of God⁴⁷ and God loves the world.⁴⁸ We ought to be just for fear of God⁴⁹ because He loves justice⁵⁰ and does not pervert what is right.⁵¹ Those who seek the Lord understand justice completely,⁵² and oppression and injustice show contempt for God.⁵³

Many of these passages pertain to rulers and authorities, including commands to not take a bribe for it perverts justice.⁵⁴ It is fascinating in the case of El Salvador to remember that the Lord appoints avengers for wrongdoers.⁵⁵ This reminder mirrors Locke’s understanding of the state’s power.⁵⁶ Locke argues that men from their state of nature set up “a judge on earth, with authority to… redress the injuries” which may occur for commonwealth members.⁵⁷ Redressing injuries is part of calling forth order for society.

Justice is integral to legitimacy⁵⁸ and must be joined together with state telos to understand and evaluate normative legitimacy. Quoting Aquinas, King declares that “an unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law” and justice can be measured through the honoring or degradation of people.⁵⁹ Justice is not merely a Christian value, but one whose worth is made clear by natural law.⁶⁰ Justice and telos, then, are the third boundary markers for legitimacy.

Conclusion Regarding a Philosophical Framework for Teleology, Ontology and Order in Times of Crisis

Thus, set in the context of the Salvadoran state, normative legitimacy is of the utmost importance as a consideration and mode of evaluation; normative legitimacy exists as a right understanding of objective reality. Although there are important cultural and political considerations which cannot be fully understood from an outsider’s perspective, there is a Truth and Reality which penetrate and cut through cultural and ideological differences. By this Truth, we stand for true Justice and order. This returns us to Colossians 1:15-16 and the supremacy of Christ. Christ is the ultimate Reality by which we know and see all else. ‘Love’ is valuable only when it is established and maintained by boundaries which accord with the reality God has created – reality which is conveyed both through natural law and revelation. Calling adultery ‘love’ does not change its ontological reality. Similarly, ‘order’ isonly true when it is based upon the reality of God’s world, Truth, and moral goodness. ‘Justice’ is only ontologically significant when it accords with the Justice of God and the reality of His world.

Returning to El Salvador, are the actions taken by Bukele for the purpose of crime prevention and the restoration of order to his state legitimate? It is the Bible, ultimately, which provides the framework and lens by which to have this debate, for it is the Bible which offers the horizon line for which to aim. Criminology, though possessing a fundamental strength in its willingness to hear every voice, stands to benefit, deeply, from biblically derived definitions regarding what is good and evil, true and false, just and unjust.

To summarize my argument (and indeed call for it to be further expounded upon for the bones have barely been laid by this essay), there are three guidelines I offer to understand normative legitimacy in the context of El Salvador. The first is that normative legitimacy (understood as a standard against which to measure the moral and political actions of the state) may be rightly maintained given the Lord’s preeminence over all and discerned through understanding the proper purpose of the state. The second is that this teleological purpose of the state primarily regards order and security (with ‘order’ deriving from objective reality grounded in the two greatest commandments⁶¹ ).⁶² Order precedes liberty because liberty without order is anarchy. The third and final guideline is to recognize the primacy of justice and state telos in evaluations of normative legitimacy.

Where Do Justice and Mercy Meet?

There remains an instinct, however, which mourns this state of affairs. As much as there is satisfaction in Justice – as much as there is need for Justice – there are now 40,000 children who have witnessed one or both parents arrested.⁶³ There are now 75,000 people detained in El Salvador, 30,000 officially incarcerated⁶⁴ without hope of release.⁶⁵ Yes, there is justice in the imprisonment,⁶⁶ and, yes, these measures are necessary to allow for human flourishing in El Salvador. Yet what of mercy? It is in God alone that justice and mercy meet. Both justice and mercy are human impulses as we are made in His image to assert His dominion over both. Yet so often justice and mercy feel at odds or seem that, when one is given precedence, the other is lost. How can justice⁶⁷ be done if mercy softens its blow? How can mercy bring healing and life at the expense of justice?

Christianity offers an answer as to why justice matters, why there is such an instinct for justice, and it is because God loves justice.⁶⁸ We are right to hate rape because rape is a fundamental degradation and perversion of what God created to be good, right and beautiful. We are right to hate murder because murder is a fundamental usurpation of what God alone should rule (life and death). Humans are made in the image of God, and any violation of that dignity, worth, life, and wholeness shows contempt for God and for those He made and loves.

Christ also offers an answer as to why mercy matters, and why there is such a heart cry for mercy. Mercy is defined as “compassion or forgiveness shown towards someone whom it is within one’s power to punish or harm.”⁶⁹ Regardless of the wrong someone has done,⁷⁰ when they cry out for mercy, there ought to be an instinct or an ache this cry elicits within us. This ache comes from an understanding that humans matter, that humans are more than their actions, more than their words, and that there is a weight to their lives, a weight to their cries beyond what we can immediately perceive. For both justice and mercy, we must remember that our actions (i.e., works) have weight,⁷¹ and our faith is connected to those works.⁷² Biblically commanded justice⁷³ consists of speaking up for the voiceless and the destitute, defending the rights of the poor and needy,⁷⁴ caring for the poor and needy,⁷⁵ protecting the stranger, fatherless, and widow,⁷⁶ maintaining justice in courts,⁷⁷ treating one’s workers well,⁷⁸ showing integrity in courts,⁷⁹ keeping and making peace,⁸⁰ keeping one’s hand from evil,⁸¹ and delivering the oppressed.⁸² God’s justice is consistent⁸³ and all-encompassing.⁸⁴ There are elements in all of these which reflect justice and also reflect mercy.

In the world, we are drawn to these principles without always understanding why; without God, how can one know the proper moorings of justice? Without God, how can mercy ever be justified? Any argument, any attempt to defend either of these concepts or fight for them falls flat and disintegrates in the face of the perpetuation of violence. Without the promise that the Lord holds salvation, mercy, justice, wholeness, and healing in His hands, how can we endure this life? If all of human history stretches on either side of us like a void rife with suffering, anguish, violence and fear, how can we endure the suffering which litters the world today? Without an endpoint – without a promise of judgment, of restoration, of reckoning – what can anchor our efforts for justice? Any effort for mercy?

Oftentimes, arguments arise that we fight for justice or mercy (depending on the context) because that fight, that aim, keeps us human. Yet what is the justification for humanity outside of God and His reality? Why should we assume humanity has any spark of goodness when we see the atrocities which humanity commits, justified by religion, hate, fear, anger, and every other motive under the sun?  Criminology points to Christ because criminology is concerned with justice, and true justice, true mercy, true restoration can only be found in the hands of Christ through His atoning blood. He paid the price for both justice and mercy on the cross. The words of Isaiah 58 ought to cause every Christian to hit their knees as God calls upon His people to“ loose the chains of injustice, and untie the cords of the yoke, to set the oppressed free and break every yoke.”⁸⁵ This call is why we fight. It is why we battle injustice. It is why we continue to wade into the muck and mire of reality, to press on against the tides of darkness. We know there is a battle between spiritual forces, and we know that every single soul has weight and worth. We can see humanity for what it is: dignified, made in the image of God, corrupted, redeemable, warped by inherent sin. We can see reality for what it is – the beauty of it and the horror – and choose to fight in hope and freedom because we know this world ends before the judgment seat of God.

Justice and mercy meet in this judgment seat for God saw that humanity faced a debt we could never repay – that each individual faced that debt, and we were hopeless before it. This debt came through rebellion against Him, perverting His world, perverting what He had made, what He had done, what He had called good. And yet God loved us. He loved us with a love beyond human comprehension, and so He Himself came to shoulder our debt. He lived as a man – fully and perfectly – and then, standing in our shoes, standing in our place, He submitted Himself to judgment, and paid with His blood the price His righteousness demanded for our sin. He died and was buried. He broke the hold of sin and death and rose with healing in His wings,⁸⁶ freely offered to all who would call upon His Name.⁸⁷ In His mercy, He paid the debt of Justice. In God alone do mercy and justice meet without an ounce of either being lost, and creation itself groans for the day when the full expression of God’s glory is revealed.⁸⁸

Clara Grace Cowden was born and raised in Austin, Texas. She completed an undergraduate degree in International Relations and Philosophy at the University of St Andrews, a Master of Philosophy in Criminology at the University of Cambridge, and is currently a candidate for a Master of Arts at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS) in Washington DC. Clara Grace plans to pursue a career in the field of security as it pertains to persons.

1. AP. 2023. “War on Gangs Forges New El Salvador, but the Price Is Steep.” EL PAÍS English, March 22, 2023. [↩]
2. Amnesty International. 2023. “El Salvador: One year into state of emergency, authorities are systematically committing human rights violations.” Amnesty International, 3 April 2023. [↩] [↩]
3. Grillo, Ioan. 2023. “Inside El Salvador’s brutal gang crackdown: Bukele’s violation of human rights is winning votes.” UnHerd, 11 January 2023. [↩]
4. Barrera, Carlos. 2024. “Portraits from El Salvador’s nearly 2-year, sprawling crackdown on gang suspects.” Wisconsin Public Radio, 6 February 2024. [↩]
5. Strayer, Amanda, and Suchita Uppal. 2023. “Human Rights Abuses in Bukele’s El Salvador Demand Sanctions.” Human Rights First, 7 November 2023. [↩]
6. Human Rights Watch. 2022. “‘We Can Arrest Anyone We Want’: Widespread Human Rights Violations Under El Salvador’s ‘State of Emergency’.” Human Rights Watch, 7 December 2022. [↩]
7. Human Rights Watch, “We Can.” [↩] [↩]
8. Grillo, “Inside El Salvador.” [↩] [↩]
9. International Crisis Group. 2018. “Life Under Gang Rule in El Salvador.” International Crisis Group, 26 November 2018. [↩]
10. Zaidi, Tariq. 2019. “Photo Essay | A Nation Held Hostage.” Foreign Policy, 30 November 2019. [↩]
11. United States Attorney’s Office District of Maryland. 2023. “Conspiracy Involving a Violent Murder and for Drug Distribution and Firearms Violations.” United States Attorney’s Office District of Maryland, 1 June 2023. Press Release. [↩]
12. Bukele, Nayib Armando. 2023. “General Assembly: General Debate.” United Nations | General Assembly, 19 September 2023. Speech, 16:11. [↩]
13. Bukele, Nayib. 2024. “Derechos Humanos | English subtitles,” YouTube, 13 February 2024, 0:00-1:39. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68zGA-7nICI. [↩]
14. Bukele, “Derechos Humanos.” [↩]
15. Ibid. [↩]
16. McArdle, Megan. 2023. “Opinion | El Salvador shows just how much people will sacrifice to control crime.” The Washington Post, 25 September 2023. [↩]
17. Galdamez, Eddie. 2024. “President Nayib Bukele’s Approval Rating! What’s Behind the President’s Popularity?” El Salvador Info, updated 17 January 2024. [↩]
18. I use ‘Justice’ rather than ‘justice’ in an effort to call to mind the Platonic forms – the Justice of God is not merely just acts or decisions but perfect and whole. In our broken world and nature, we merely hope to echo His Justice with justice. [↩]
19. Aloyo, Eamon. N.D. “Fostering a Sense of Legitimacy – For Students, Educators, and Trainers.” Beyond Intractability. Accessed 2 March 2024. [↩]
20. Agné, “Legitimacy,” 25. [↩]
21. Kennedy, David. 2004. The Dark Sides of Virtue: Reassessing International Humanitarianism. Oxford: Princeton University Press, xxiii. [↩]
22. Agné, “Legitimacy,” 26. [↩]
23. Weber, Max. 1964. The Theory of Social and Economic Organization, edited by Talcott Parsons. New York: Free Press, 382. [↩]
24. Clark, Ian. 2003. “Legitimacy in a Global Order.” Review of International Studies, Vol. 29: 80. [↩]
25. Indeed, there is much to say regarding human rights organizations and how we as believers ought to interact with them. Right concern must arise from the fact that abortion is touted as a human right even as Christians are among the first to denounce genuine human rights abuses which fail to acknowledge the dignity of man created in the image of God. [↩]
26. See Levitov 2016 for a critical secular overview. See Locke’s Second Treatise for an exposition on civil government and legitimate rule as based on the consent of the governed (which seems to overlap interestingly with empirical conceptions of legitimacy – indeed, scholars such as Amanda Greene (2017, 2019) are beginning to investigate the overlap between empirical and normative conceptions). See also Martin Luther King’s “Letter from a Birmingham Jail” for an exposition on justice and its worth. See the whole of Aquinas’ political philosophy for (unsurprisingly) fundamental insights to guide us in these conversations. [↩]
27. Woodfield, Andrew. 1998. “Teleology.” Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy (1998). Taylor & Francis: doi:10.4324/9780415249126-N087-1. [↩]
28. I would be remiss not to briefly mention an idea Plato explores in The Republic which connects the health of souls to virtue in a parallel with the health of cities being connected to virtue, justice, and good (The Republic 444c-444e). [↩]
29. Kraut, Richard. 2022. “Plato.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, revised 12 February 2022. [↩]
30. With full acknowledgement that these concepts have not been adequately expounded upon [↩]
31. A word of caution here against Utilitarian notions of the state – as believers, we may take comfort in the fact that the ends do not justify the means. The purpose of the state is not merely a matter of achieving certain figures or data points, but the question of how these goals are achieved remains integral. In the case of El Salvador, Bukele would not be justified in his measures if they utterly failed to accord with notions of right and wrong and if they did in fact violate the human rights of his citizens. If, however, it may be shown that his measures, though harsh, are not out of bounds given the context and agency of the people he combats and that his use of force is proportionate within this context, it may still be argued that he achieves these goals in a legitimate way. There are many theories expounding upon proportionality in punishment (Andrew von Hirsch 1992; Leo Zaibert 2007; John Deigh 2014; Göran Duus-Otterström 2019; Richard S. Frase, et al, 2019) whose conceptions are immediately relevant to the Salvadoran case. [↩]
32. This is another element of the Salvadoran case not covered in the introduction – a constitutional reform was enacted during Bukele’s first term of presidency which made allowance for a second consecutive presidential term (BBC News. 2021. “El Salvador Court Rules Presidents can Serve Two Consecutive Terms.” BBC News, 4 September 2021. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-58451370). In February 2024, Bukele was reelected with overwhelming support (BBC News. 2024. “El Salvador’s President Bukele wins reelection by huge margin.” BBC News, 5 February 2024. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-68196826).  [↩]
33. Mohler, Albert. 2024a. “Which is More Basic, Order or Liberty? What the Election of Nayib Bukele in El Salvador Reveals About Human Needs.” The Briefing, 6 February 2024. [↩]
34. Mohler, “Which is More Basic.” [↩]
35. International crisis Group, “Life Under.” [↩]
36. Bonner, Robert J. 1922. “Emergency Government in Rome and Athens.” The Classical Journal 18, No. 3 (December 1922): 145. [↩]
37. Mohler, Albert. 2024b. “On the Precipice of Collapse – the Preconditions of Order and the Crashing Breakdown of Haiti’s Social Systems.” The Briefing, 11 March 2024. [↩]
38. McCormick, William. 2023. “A Unity of Order: Aquinas on the End of Politics.” Nova et vetera 21, No. 3 (Summer 2023): 1020. [↩]
39. McCormick, “A Unity,” 1020. [↩]
40. Ibid, 1022. [↩]
41. Guided, as a starting point, by the principle of proportionality in punishment. There is no shortage of criminological research dedicated to proportionality; an excellent starting point is to read Cambridge’s Leo Zaibert. [↩]
42. Finnis, John. 2021. “Aquinas’ Moral, Political, and Legal Philosophy.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, revised 16 March 2021. [↩]
43. Isaiah 61:8. [↩]
44. Amos 5:6-15; Proverbs 24:24-25; Isaiah 58: 4. [↩]
45. Amos 5:24, 14; Isaiah 61:8; Isaiah 58: 10-12. [↩]
46. Romans 13:4; Proverbs 37:27-29. This is of particular significance in regard to the organized criminal groups Bukele opposes. [↩]
47. Genesis 1:27; Psalm 139:13-14; Proverbs 14:31. [↩]
48. John 3:16-17. [↩]
49. 2 Chronicles 19:7; Luke 18:1-8. [↩]
50. Psalm 33:5. [↩]
51. Job 8:3. [↩]
52. Proverbs 28:5. This verse is fascinating for it creates an ontological entwinement between the one who seeks God and the one who understands (presumably, enacts) justice. [↩]
53. Proverbs 14:31; Luke 11:42. [↩]
54. Exodus 23:8. [↩]
55. Romans 13:4. [↩]
56. Locke, John. 2021. “Second Treatise of Government.” The Project Gutenberg eBook, updated 25 December 2021. Produced by Dave Gowan and Chuck Greif. Section 88. [↩]
57. Ibid, Section 89. [↩]
58. Rawls argues that the political authority must conform to principles of justice (Moon, J. Donald. 2014. “Legitimacy.” Chapter. In The Cambridge Rawls Lexicon, edited by Jon Mandle and David A. Reidy, 422. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014). Interestingly, Rawls distinguishes between public reason and nonpublic reason wherein the principle of legitimacy is fundamentally concerned with justice, and “constitutional essentials” must “be based on public reason, and public reason alone” (Moon, “Legitimacy,” 424-425). This ‘public reason’ is rooted in justice and reflects citizens’ ideals (Moon, “Legitimacy,” 424). [↩]
59. King, Martin Luther Jr. 1963. “Letter from a Birmingham Jail.” African Studies Center – University of Pennsylvania, edited by Ali B. Ali-Dinar. [↩]
60. See Buchanan 2003. [↩]
61. Matthew 22:36-40. [↩]
62. Without utilitarian extremes or cost. [↩]
63. Rochabrun, Marcelo. 2023. “El Salvador is Imprisoning People at Triple the Rate of the US.” Bloomberg, 12 September 2023. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-09-12/el-salvador-jails-1-6-of-population-in-crime-crackdown?embedded-checkout=true.  [↩]
64. Gellman, Mneesha. 2024. “Salvadorans Have Traded Their Rights for Uncertain Security.” Jacobin, 2 March 2024. https://jacobin.com/2024/03/el-salvador-incarceration-gangs-bukele#:. [↩]
65. Wall Street Journal 2023, “66,000 Imprisoned,” 4:07. [↩]
66. When those who were wrongly imprisoned are excluded from analysis [↩]
67. Taking a retributive rather than consequentialist view of justice here [↩]
68. Psalm 33:5; Amos 5:24, 14; Isaiah 61:8; Isaiah 58: 10-12. [↩]
69. Oxford Languages Dictionary. Accessed 1 May 2024. [↩]
70. And without argument that mercy is always correct within the finiteness of our human capacities. [↩]
71. James 2:26, 1 Tim 6:18-19; Jeremiah 17:9-10; Matthew 5:14-16; James 3:13; 1 Peter 2:12; Hebrews 10:24-15; Luke 6:27; 1 John 3:18. [↩]
72. James 2:26; James 1:27. [↩]
73. Isaiah 56:1; Micah 6:8. [↩]
74. Proverbs 31:8; Jeremiah 22:3; Proverbs 31:8; Psalm 82:3; Isaiah 1:17. [↩]
75. Isaiah 58:7, 10; James 1:27. [↩]
76. Jeremiah 22:3; Isaiah 1:17; Zechariah 7:9-10. [↩]
77. Amos 5:15; Leviticus 19:15; Zechariah 7:9-10. [↩]
78. Deut. 24:15; James 5:4-6. [↩]
79. Proverbs 6:19. [↩]
80. Proverbs 6:19; Matthew 5:9; Psalm 34:14. [↩]
81. Isaiah 56:1; Jeremiah 22:3; Zechariah 7:9-10; Proverbs 6:16-19. [↩]
82. Psalm 82:3; Isaiah 58:6. [↩]
83. Leviticus 24:22. [↩]
84. Matthew 12:36-37. [↩]
85. Isaiah 58:6. [↩]
86. Malachi 4:2. [↩]
87. Romans 10:13-15 [↩]
88. Romans 8:22. [↩]