With Miko piloting the ship, I took a three-day vacation from blogging. I love doing this, but I find that the main thing I sacrifice to make time for writing posts (which I generally do in the evenings after the kids are in bed) is sleep. It was nice to hit the sack at a reasonable hour for a few nights in a row. I tried not to think about abstinence for a couple of days. That post will come tomorrow.
This weekend, I also kept a promise to game with the kiddos (for five hours straight!), read Parable of the Sower
What does this have to do with pacifism? Absolutely nothing. So enough with the chit-chat. I found a liberal Christian discussion of the five questions your pacifist friends are tired of answering, and I want to ask three of them in a way that they would be applicable to non-Christian pacifists as well (hat tip to GatheringInlight.com; original discussion is from the Burnside Writers Collective, which also has a great list of potential Anti-Christs including Jon Stewart, Katie Couric and Bono):
- What if your (insert loved one here) was attacked?
- Shouldn’t we live non-violently in our personal lives, but not corporately?
- So, you’re suggesting pacifists sit back and do nothing?
Here’s my ten-minute response:
1. I would fight to defend my family from an immediate threat, if it was apparent that nothing short of violence would protect them. I would try not to use lethal force. But I hate that these questions are almost always presented in a binary fashion–you have to choose between the death of the attacker or the death of your family. Real life is almost never that clean cut.
2. I’m actually more opposed to corporate violence than personal violence. For example, I support the use of non-lethal force by law enforcement agents, but I am totally against the use of collective military force. I’m not sure that I’m willing to go so far as to impose my pacifism on others, but I believe that the principled opposition to war by a persistent minority is necessary to create a warless future.
3. People mix up pacifism and passivism. The most devoted pacifists must be willing to lay down their lives in the cause of peace. Most pacifists are activists who are vocal in politics and who do what they can to make the world a better place. It takes greater effort to achieve a peaceful solution to a problem. War is almost always the solution chosen by the impatient, arrogant, and unempathetic.
10 responses so far ↓
1 Wess Daniels // Feb 26, 2007 at 7:22 am
Thanks for the hat tip, and I absolutely love delicious library. I keep all my books and movies in it. In fact, I was just updating my library yesterday.
Finally - I found your #2 point to be really great. I like how you’ve flipped the question around a little.
2 Johnny // Feb 26, 2007 at 10:01 am
What do you think about the relationship between pacifism and religion?
Obviously, one need not be religious to be a pacifist, but there is a historical relationship between the two. Both Christianity and Buddhism are traditions wherein some say argue pacifism is the proper way. However, secular ethical theory does not take pacifism as a serious option from what I have seen.
3 John // Feb 26, 2007 at 11:42 am
Thank you, Wess!
Johnny, I agree with you that most people are pacifists because of their religious beliefs. However, my experience shows a lot of secular pacifism as well. This is purely anecdotal, but many of the pacifists I know are atheist or simply irreligious. Others may come from a religious background, but don’t make a strong connection between their religion and their pacifism. In fact, one of my frustrations of organizing with local peace activists a couple of years ago was that my pacifist action at the time was modeled on Gandhi and Dr. King’s compassionate nonviolence (which is still confrontational, but is grounded in love for those you oppose), and my friends were acting more out of anger, frustration–even hatred for those in authority.
My personal pacifism has its roots not in religion, but in being raised with explicit books and movies on war and in visits to Nagasaki and Hiroshima. Japan has one of the highest proportions of atheists in the world, and is one of the most pacifistic countries as well (at present, at least). I think that most of this is rooted in experience first, and perhaps religious and ethical thought second.
There’s quite a range of beliefs and practices that fall under the umbrella of pacifism as well; I can’t see ethical theory being as antagonistic to the “lighter” expressions of pacifism as to the more extreme forms. What do you think?
4 Deborah // Feb 26, 2007 at 11:54 am
Thanks for the link to Librarything! I’d never seen it (so cool), and it’s perfect for my new blog ’cause now I can store all my book pics one place! Most excellent.
5 Miko // Feb 26, 2007 at 12:13 pm
[shifty look] Thanks for letting me take a sabbatical the other week. I was a little burnt out by so many other things and needed to step away from all responsibilities for a while. I very thoughtlessly didn’t tell you before hand & just…disappeared…but it was very healing and I’m grateful for the break & happy to pick up the slack, now
[/shifty look]
I’m not a pacifist because I think that violence is sometimes the answer. I am, however, a pacifist because I know that, very often, my first response to any stimulus is violence. This is why I find safe outlets for my violence; and am startled when others don’t elicit this as the first response.
I respect the pacifist from the stand point that I know I could never live that life, but, in a very typically (ex)republican way, feel that pacifists need nonpacifists just as much as we need pacifists. Currently, I think the world is being run by warmongers, and that is an inexcusable imbalance.
6 Miko // Feb 26, 2007 at 2:22 pm
incidentally, I just might crash the Huntington thing, if I remember
7 John White // Feb 26, 2007 at 4:16 pm
*sigh*
And I might ditch it.
I have a class in maths I’m taking at the same time.
8 Johnny // Feb 26, 2007 at 5:11 pm
John,
I agree with you that ethical theory is not antagonistic to pacifism. Most normative ethical theories try to articulate how to have “perpetual peace.”
I wonder how many books there are about pacifism that are from a secular perspective, I’ll have to check that out.
9 John // Feb 26, 2007 at 9:09 pm
Miko, it would be awesome if we all could get together! Jana may try to email links to short stories if you haven’t read anything by Butler yet. Also, we may try to do dinner in Pasadena before the lecture.
BTW, I totally understand the need to take spontaneous breaks. I did the same when you started posting again.
Mind on Fire is the Anti-Guilt Site. No need for shifty looks!
10 Miko // Feb 27, 2007 at 8:34 am
I’d love to read some of her short stories, but I’ve read a few of her full-length novels. She came & spoke at my school when I was a Freshman. Unfortunately, I just realized that it will conflict with me getting to Tai Chi, which I just started so prolly shouldn’t blow off so fast :-p I don’t know how long you expect it to last, but we could meet up for dessert…? We get out around 2130 (I thought the lecture was in the morning)
Leave a Comment