I’m a pacifist. There, I’ve said it. It’s not something that I just woke up and decided on a whim, no I think this has been brewing in my head for a very long time now and, to be honest, I’m not really sure how to live the pacifist lifestyle.
I did a search and found this from Wikipedia:
Pacifism is the opposition to war or violence as a means of settling disputes or gaining advantage. Pacifism covers a spectrum of views ranging from the belief that international disputes can and should be peacefully resolved; to calls for the abolition of the institutions of the military and war; to opposition to any organization of society through governmental force (anarchist or libertarian pacifism); to rejection of the use of physical violence to obtain political, economic or social goals; to the obliteration of force except in cases where it is absolutely necessary to advance the cause of peace; to opposition to violence under any circumstance, including defense of self and others.
Pacifism may be based on moral principles (a deontological view) or pragmatism (a consequentialist view). Principled pacifism holds that at some point along the spectrum from war to interpersonal physical violence, such violence becomes morally wrong. Pragmatic pacifism holds that the costs of war and inter-personal violence are so substantial that better ways of resolving disputes must be found. Pacifists in general reject theories of Just War.
Pacifists follow principles of nonviolence, believing that nonviolent action is morally superior and/or pragmatically most effective. Some pacifists, however, support physical violence for emergency defense of self or others. Others support destruction of property in such emergencies or for conducting symbolic acts of resistance like pouring red paint to represent blood on the outside of military recruiting offices or entering air force bases and hammering on military aircraft. However, part of the pacifist belief system is taking responsibility for one's actions by submitting to arrest and using a trial to publicize opposition to war and other forms of violence.
Hmm, reading that makes me think a bit so, let me break it down piece by piece and tell you what I think:
Pacifism is the opposition to war or violence as a
means of settling disputes or gaining advantage. Pacifism covers a spectrum of
views ranging from the belief that international disputes can and should be
peacefully resolved; to calls for the abolition of the institutions of the
military and war; to opposition to any organization of society through
governmental force (anarchist or libertarian
pacifism); to rejection of the use of physical violence to obtain political,
economic or social goals; to the obliteration of force except in cases where it
is absolutely necessary to advance the cause of peace; to opposition to
violence under any circumstance, including defense of self and others.
Some of
these views are way more radical than I’m willing to go. For instance, I would
not call for the abolishment of the military or war,
however I do think that war should be the very last thing on the very long list
of things to use to help settle a dispute.
And I mean a very long list of things. I’m talking a list that goes from
the top of the Empire state building down to the ground. I’m also not an anarchist or libertarian, I’m
a Democrat but that’ll be for another entry.
I also
reject the use of violence to obtain political, economic or social goals. I think that’s why I got so upset at the ‘town
hall’ meetings that took place over the summer for health care reform. It wasn’t that I disagreed with the questions
that were being asked, I disagreed with the way they were being asked and that
made me deaf to what was being said. I
also agree with the obliteration of force except in cases where it is
absolutely necessary. Again, there’s a
long list of things to do before you act with violence but I do understand that
violence is sometimes needed to settle a dispute. Normally that’s because the other person
wants to use violence and you have no choice but to defend yourself.
Pacifism may be based on moral
principles (a deontological view) or pragmatism
(a consequentialist view).
Principled pacifism holds that at some point along the spectrum from war to
interpersonal physical violence, such violence becomes morally wrong. Pragmatic
pacifism holds that the costs of war and inter-personal violence are so
substantial that better ways of resolving disputes must be found. Pacifists in
general reject theories of Just War.
This one I
haven’t been able to wrap my brain around yet.
However, I do agree that there is no ‘Just War.’ It makes it almost
glorify war but I don’t think war should be glorified. In fact, it should really be demonized
because war, 99.9% of the time, is a waste of human lives. The only war I can think of
that people might have an argument against is World War II. I personally don’t think it was a Just War, I
think it was an unavoidable one.
Pacifists follow principles of nonviolence,
believing that nonviolent action is morally superior and/or
pragmatically most effective. Some pacifists, however, support physical
violence for emergency defense of self or others. Others support destruction
of property in such emergencies or for conducting symbolic acts of
resistance like pouring red paint to represent blood on the outside of military
recruiting offices or entering air force bases and hammering on military
aircraft. However, part of the pacifist belief system is taking responsibility
for one's actions by submitting to arrest and using a trial to publicize
opposition to war and other forms of violence.
This is
the core of what I believe. I try to
follow the principles of nonviolence and nonviolent action. I think we stand a better chance of getting
things accomplished by sitting down and talking to one another instead of
bashing in each other’s heads. I don’t
support destruction of property, that seems go to against what I believe. Basically, everything in the first half of
this paragraph I give thumbs up too, everything in the
second a thumbs down too.
Now, of
course, I know people I tell this too are going to throw scenarios at me that
are unlikely to happen. “Oh, what if you’re
in a dark alley with your girlfriend and some guy comes up and grabs her and
starts to beat her up, will you just stand there and talk to him or will you
beat the living crap out of him?”
Well, I
mean, gee, let me think. How about I
push him off my girlfriend and run like hell to the nearest place where there
are people. And hey, let’s take a minute to back track and just say I will
never go into a dark alley, ever. Have
you ever walked through a dark alley? I
know I haven’t. In fact, can you even
show me a dark alley and plus, why would someone be hiding in a dark alley
anyway? Are they just hoping some guy
comes by and walks through?
The one
that I know will be thrown at me (because it has when I had a conversation with
someone about this not too long ago) goes along the line of. “What if your daughter was raped and killed
by some scum and you had the chance to be alone with that guy for five
minutes. What would you do?” The guy
then proceeded to tell me what he would do, which is basically beat the guy to
a pulp.
Now, of course
this will never happen (especially since I don’t have a daughter.) and I’ll be
honest, I don’t know what I’d do. I
might just sit down and make the guy feel bad for what he did. Maybe show him some photos of her, tell him
that he took away a wonderful girl. To
me shame is something that never heals but a physical bruise will go away
within a few weeks. Heck, I’m still
ashamed of getting my sister in trouble for something I did when I was 8 years
old!
I’m sure
there are a thousand situations that will test my commitment to being a
pacifist and I’ll probably fail a few of them but I hope that if I’m faced with
a choice of violence or nonviolence I chose the nonviolence. It’s not going to be easy, but I’m going to
work hard to make it happen.
