 |
| |
|
|
Whaleboy
|
 |
Please make all cheques payable to Whaleboy
Jan 2003
time: 05:33
|
|
Response to Orwell's attack on Pacifism
quote:
"Since pacifists have more freedom of action in countries where traces of democracy survive, pacifism can act more effectively against democracy than for it. Objectively, the pacifist is pro-Nazi." - Orwell
|
This statement was written in a time when Orwell's country of origin, namely the United Kingdom, was under threat of Nazi invasion., however, one can replace that particular foe with a contemporary, equivalent, for example, Islamic, anti-West terrorism at the time of writing.
In a time when one point of view was fighting another, an opinion such as that of the Pacifist will be regarded by the nation in which one resides as inherently opposed to the interests of that nation and thus supporting that of the enemy. This leads to such statements as "You're either with us or against us".
However, the belief that one should not go to war is an objective perspective to the view "I support nation A" or "I support nation B". It is so because it is an ideology that is separate to that of nationhood and is not intrinsically opposed to any one nation. Nor, indeed, are most of its interpretations opposed to the concept of nationhood itself, though it can be argued that nationhood leads to war, in a coherent pacifism, I know of no major strand of pacifism that does this so it cannot be used in this instance. It is an opinion separate to that of "Britishness", or indeed of any nation embroiled in a conflict.
Consider a triangle of apexes a, b and c. Where a and b are at war, and a member of c resides in nation a, he will be regarded as being friendly to nation b because he is neutral. On the simplistic line between between a and b, c is in the middle, but as c is independent, objectively it is neither necessarily for or against either or the other two positions. Though it is possible for a pacifist to be a lover of freedom on top of peace, pacifism itself does not dictate national allegiance. The Pacifist will be regarded as friendly with the enemy by ones warring nation of course, but that is a view dictated by that nations own subjectivity and inability to emulate the point of view of anyone objective, let alone their enemy. The statement: "Objectively, the pacifist is pro-[enemy]", is false. It is a mere subjective observation that bears no relation to reality.
Don't get me wrong, I respect Orwell as a writer and as an anti-totalitarian, but his strawman really stinks, and has been used for decades to associate pacifists with "the enemy", perhaps illustrated most famously by Hermann Goerings Nuremberg quote in 1946:
quote:
Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger.
|
It's good to be back! 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Whaleboy
|
|
Please make all cheques payable to Whaleboy
Jan 2003
time: 05:33
|
|
I can only speak for myself but I will defend my own interests but not a political system I don't believe in. That is entirely separate, a pacifist will generally link himself with a political system or "way of life" that is under threat but not specific interests. That translates to what Drogue says of self-defense.
I am not a patriot, not do I love my country, or any political system, and I certainly would not want to fight and die for it. If it was, for example, France poised to invade and I did not find elements of their system disagreeable, I would not have fought in 1940. I would have only fought to prevent the results of a political system that I disagreed with from being imposed upon me, which in 1940 meant lack of free speech, lack of freedom of association and the fact that as a Jew, I would have been enslaved or killed.
Don't get me wrong, a pacifist would not support or enjoy fighting in any situation, but one is still free to make a utilitarian judgement on the basis of the individual. In other words, me not fighting would lead to me getting killed, thus I reluctantly fight. Kill or be killed basically. I would not send men over to die, I would not ask others to die for me. As a pacifist, incidentally, one will critique the warmonger for that action, and not ally himself to the interests of that warmongers enemy.
Pacifists will, in other words, fight in some cases, that is not hypocrisy, that is where the conceptual and contextual limit of a philosophical system has been reached and breached.
quote:
The word Pro-Life gets missed used he same way. It doesn't mean exclusive to abortion, it means in all circumstances to include the death penalty. So as you can't be Pro-Life and support some forms of legal killing, you can't be a Pacifist and support some forms of violence.
|
Wrong. Ones overriding philosophical concern is a contradiction in terms. Again one has to make a utilitarian choice.
quote:
not when they ARE bieng attacked.
|
You only know that for sure in retrospect, and as it is a question of individual interpretation, your point is surely irrelevant since it depends on what you believe from the government. In this day and age, the strongest body of evidence shows that we are not being attacked by terrorists to evoke a response, patriotic or otherwise from pacifists to renounce that, yet this is what we are told to believe  .
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ramo
|
 |
Austin, Texas, USA
Oct 1999
time: 23:33
|
|
The Orwell quote, I think, should be interepreted in the context of his writings in general of the period. He was in large part disgusted with the moral bankruptcy of much of the left in the West - particularly commies, who advocated fighting fascism prior to the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact (they were gung-ho about fighting for the Spanish Republic, opposed appeasement of Hitler, etc.), and then became immediately anti-war after the Pact was signed because the war supposedly became about capitalist imperialism. And after the invasion of the Soviet Union, they of course flip-flopped again.
These attitudes probably clouded his judgement for a time towards those he considered pacifists. And deep down, he was not idicting pacifism per se, but inconsistent pacifism. And further, I think that the view has to be kept in the context that Nazi Germany was not just any state, but an extremely powerful one and that other ways of stopping it didn't exist and putting the matter off for a time was not an option.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lord Merciless
|
|
Pacifists are a breed of humans doomed for extinction.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Flip McWho
|
|
New Zealand
May 2002
time: 17:33
|
|
quote:
Whaleboy, a true pacifist would not retaliate when struck. Why then should they fight even when facing death? |
It is kinda different when faced with death. Most peoples survival trait is kinda strong in life or death situations.
I consider myself a pacifist. I wouldn't fight in almost any situation. The only time I could imagine me fighting is when someone I really care about is getting hurt bad. Even for myself I would only fight back in dire situations. However I could imagine myself 'answering the call' and going to war...........Eh, maybe I'm not really a pacifist then. I'd never fight offensively.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Promethus
|
 |
Battle Creek, Michigan
Jan 2002
time: 00:33
|
|
Harris and the Mare found on:
Between the Breaks...Live!
Poetic Justice
Harris, my old friend, good to see your face again
More welcome, though, yon trap and that old mare
For the wife is in a swoon, and I am all alone
Harris, fetch thy mare and take us home
The wife and I came out for a quiet glass of stout
And a word or two with neighbors in the room
But young Clary, he came in, as drunk and wild as sin
And swore the wife would leave the place with him
But the wife as quick as thought said, "No, I'll bloody not"
Then struck the brute a blow about the head
He raised his ugly paw, and he lashed her on the jaw
And she fell onto the floor like she were dead
Now Harris, well you know, I've never struck an angry blow
Nor would I keep a friend who raised his hand
I was a conscie in the war, cryin' what the hell's this for?
But I had to see his blood to be a man
I grabbed him by his coat, spun him 'round and took his throat
And beat his head upon the parlor door
He dragged out an awful knife, and he roared "I'll have your life"
And he stuck me and I fell onto the floor
Now blood I was from neck to thigh, bloody murder in his eye
As he shouted out "I'll finish you for sure"
But as the knife came down, I lashed out from the ground
And the knife was in his breast and he rolled o'er
Now with the wife as cold as clay I carried her away
No hand was raised to help us through the door
And I've brought her half a mile, but I've had to rest a while
And none of them I'll call a friend no more
For when the knife came down, I was helpless on the ground
No neighbor stayed his hand, I was alone
By God, I was a man, but now I cannot stand
Please, Harris, fetch thy mare, take us home
Oh, Harris, fetch thy mare, and take us out of here
In my nine and fifty years I've never known
That to call myself a man, for my loved one I must stand
Now Harris, fetch thy mare take us home
Written and recorded by Stan Rogers. Copyright Fogarty's Cove Music
Đ Fogarty's Cove Music
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Comrade Tassadar
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Patroklos
they are people why will not fight for any reason at all, including defense. The term is wrongly used |
quote:
Originally posted on the unamerican Dictionary.com website. Evil commies!
pac·i·fism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (ps-fzm)
n.
The belief that disputes between nations should and can be settled peacefully.
Opposition to war or violence as a means of resolving disputes.
Such opposition demonstrated by refusal to participate in military action |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Comrade Tassadar
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Patroklos
There are no disputes to a true pacifist that can be solved through violence. There is nothing in their about exceptions. YOU may think that self defense is a good reason to resist, which is fine, but your not a pacifist.
|
Then I suppose I've had major inclinations towards pacificsm.
I also suppose that most people in this world are not pacifist.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Comrade Tassadar
|
|
While I think those people are probably quite...not intelligent, I would hardly consider them cowards.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Comrade Tassadar
|
|
quote:
"I donīt like his POV, so he canīt be intelligent" |
I never said he was unintelligent. I just said he was unintelligent in that area.
quote:
Hell, he brought down an empire without firing a gun. |
Yes, which was a really good thing (though unfortunately his actions have now resulted in todays India-Pakistan crisis), however I'm just saying I disagree with his stance of total-pacificsm. Though it is better than a bloody, violent revolution. Much better.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Comrade Tassadar
|
|
quote:
He opposed the partition of India... |
Perhaps, however he was unable to stop it. He is the father of Pakistan.
quote:
That doesn't make him stupid. |
Yes it does.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:33.
Apolyton Time is 00:33. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
12-01-2004 04:26
By that logic I could conclude that anyone who doesnīt like my avatar must be stupid....
|