Defining The Pacifist Mind

The first is an inability to reason. Those who champion the catechism of non-confrontational response are incapable of comprehending logic or historical precedent. Their arguments on any given topic are based solely upon emotion, disregarding facts whenever they conflict with "feelings."

Second. Unable to confront real world problems — such as war — pacifists concoct vague dilemmas to assuage their feckless, hypocritical and desultory nature. They scream about stolen elections which were conducted fully within the parameters of constitutional guidelines. They whine about piddling issues such as the need for gun control, gay marriage ceremonies and hate crime laws. They cry over the wise utilization of natural resources, even as they drive hither and yon in their gas guzzling SUV's. Pacifists, being too vainglorious to acknowledge matters of true substance or a sense of nationalistic pride, engage in odd behaviors in an effort to divert attention from their absence of conviction. They have been known to live on the limbs of redwood trees as a protest against logging. They don funny costumes and wave signs. Frequently, in this part of the world, they proselytize the removal of ranchers and farmers from their homes in order to make room for a brucellosis carrying beast as obsolete as the passenger pigeon. To heck with those who work for a living. Mother Buffalo needs her free range jogging path.

These tactics of distraction are brought into play whenever the pacifists suspect others will see them for the idle and privileged incompetents which they are. Publicly, they call for a return to the simple life of unspoiled vistas, natural foods and homespun cloth. Privately, they reside in luxurious surroundings, sip champagne and sleep beneath cashmere sheets. Publicly, they are antediluvian Luddites. Privately, they are hedonistic libertines.

Third: Despite their talk of equality, tolerance and diversity, pacifists believe themselves superior in thought and action to those professing ideologies differing from their own. Tolerance ends when their "solutions" are exposed as self-indulgent and impotent. They don't actually abide by the tenets they so loudly affirm, but nonetheless climb the soapbox in the mistaken conclusion that such actions will garner them a reputation for altruism, magnanimity and humanitarianism.

Intellectually incapable of considering any idea save those hackneyed cliches which allow them to appear popular with their peer group of latte-swigging pseudo-socialites, pacifists speak incessantly of hate. They label repugnant and evil any idea with which they disagree. They inveigh mightily against racism, branding as bigoted those who would dare suggest approaches in opposition to their own. It's a childish and egocentric modus operandi, based upon an all encompassing insecurity, a pitiful attempt to philosophically align themselves with the corrupt politicians, bi-polar thespians and media darlings whom they idolize.

Many urban pacifists move to rural settings, and immediately attempt to force their views down the throats of the indigenous population. They view the locals as unenlightened hicks and inbred morons, unnecessary occupants of what they condescendingly refer to as "flyover country," the vast area between the east and west coasts. They are undeviating in their delusion that rural dwellers can't possibly have widespread contacts or be informed on world affairs. Fungus-toed yokels can't possibly comprehend socio-political scenarios with the acumen of those who have resided within the all knowing world of "Must See TV."

So, being a fungus-toed yokel, me no understand. It's a fact that state-sponsored, middle eastern terrorists have killed nearly 10,000 innocent Americans in the past few weeks. Judging by their words and actions, the pacifists are oblivious and uncaring of such atrocities. They seem to feel that if we just sit back and pretend the world is perfect, if we allow our allies to swing in the wind, if we all "JUST GET ALONG" then the murderers will leave us alone. They seem to feel that the American way of life, which has provided them with untold wealth and freedom, is a heinous and despicable entity. The pacifist does not wish us to respond too forcefully to those who would butcher us. They care about the lives of our enemies, almost as much as they care about themselves. Too bad they don't care about their neighbors or their nation with the same tenacity and resolve.

As I predicted a month back, we are now seeing the second tier of attacks. The biological wave is spreading, but what we have seen to date is only a tiny sample of what is to come. Unless we wish more American death, we must utterly obliterate the states that sponsor terrorism. There are some enemies with whom we can't bargain. They seek only one thing...our physical deaths and the death of American idealism. In light of such knowledge, the only solution is to let them know that we are willing to take their lives without so much as a second thought. It is both a logical and reasonable course.

For the pacifist though, logic and reason will always take a backseat to narcissistic sentiment and unfounded belief. The real world — a world at war — is too unsavory for their unpatriotic and morally relativistic attitude. It should not be contemplated or discussed except in the most vague and ambivalent manner, and any "inappropriate" voices, ideas or opinions should be silenced.

It's a contradiction the pacifist can never understand. In our present situation only the ultimate force will secure a lasting peace.

The writer is correct. Proof may be found at the "guestbook" at warresisters.com. Here's an example (with the peaceful strains of "Kum Ba Yah" in the background):

All of us are correct in our views and observations. It's all part of the human condition, and one thing I'm sure we can all can agree on, is that right now the human condition is in very BAD condition and will most likely get worst.

So what do we do about this? The truth is we all want Peace. It's how we get to peace that we can't agree on.

War is a temporary and primitive answer to the complex issues that face the modern world, and it seems like the only day that world will see true peace will be the day after a meteorite wipes all of us so-called advanced life forms from the face of the Earth, or, we do that ourselves.

So once again...WHAT CAN WE DO?

Well you know what? I look at all of your comments, and I look at all of the different countries that those comments came from. I see all of these people from around the world, who want to talk to eachother and I think to myself..."could this be the first step?"

Our comments and feelings truly illustrate the fact that we no longer need to depend on our governments and religious leaders to completely speak or act on behalf of all their people. technology has turned the distances between us into a minor technicality and will continue to do so if given the chance. We can now communicate with each other like never before, but, as the world gets smaller, the consequences of war are getting bigger.

It is necessary that all civilians of Earth who desire peace, be it through war or (heres a crazy idea) peace, to reach out to the innocent civilians of the Middle Eastern nations and stress our compassion for their cause and their suffering. Only then will the terrorists be vulnerable when those they manipulate feel they are truly apart of the global family. Our Governments have proved themselves inadequate at achieving this most important goal in the fight against terrorism. It is up to the civilians of all Earths countries to actively promote peace to better allow our governments to serve Justice as opposed to war.

source. I feel so much better now, kind of warm and tingly.

Whatever you may think of pacifists, what you are reading here is not an analysis of the pacifist mind. It is an analysis of the mind of the pacifist as he exists in the imagination of Ron Marr. Useful for ridiculing the pacifist, but not very useful for yielding any insight whatever into what makes such people tick. Just for starters, I am sure that there is a wide variety of types of pacifists, and no single simplistic characterization will suffice. For example, during the Vietnam war, a common type of "pacifist" was the 18-25 year old man who didn't want to get his butt shot off in Southeast Asia.

True pacifists are never found. They simply don't exist or if they do they don't exist for very long. The people calling themselves pacifists are simply "holier than thou" types who hope their pronouncements will translate to a safe spot when the shooting starts. They are a luxury a society with enough warriors can tolerate if not enjoy.

In the present struggle we the citizens are co-equal targets with our soldiers. If you're not prepared to fight and resist, you are counter-productive baggage.

There are people who are pacifists out of religious conviction. I believe most of these are sincere. In World War II many such young men served on the battle field as medics, it is a little hard to doubt their sincerity. I was raised in such a religion. I do not any longer follow it and don't consider myself a pacifist but respect those who do consider themselves such for religious reasons.

While, as I said, I don't consider myself a pacifist I do believe one should not suspend analytical thought process for the duration when one's nation (it is the nation, not the country, that goes to war) is at war, or what passes for war. Some seem to think that such suspension, on the part of the ordinay citizen, is a necessary concommitant of "patriotism".

First, I didn't pass judgement on these people for not wanting to get shot. Some did affect pacifism which I think was hypocritical, but hypocricy is a small vice and a common one. There were legitimite grounds for opposing the war, I have no negative judgement of those who did that.

As for the draft, I am strongly opposed to the draft, it is a form of involuntary servitude, for one thing. For another, needless to say, it ended up sending men to their deaths; often for reasons quite different from what they were told they were being asked to risk their lives for.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.