Pacifism
Pacifism
By Punkerslut
When people believe that they must solve their problems with
the direct use of force and violence, it will show as a great
sign of the failure of civilization. Do sophisticated men solve
their quarrels with the use of violence? When scientists are
presenting a new theory or hypothesis, would they ever feel the
need to use physical force, or would they bring evidence? A good
theory will not be in need of violence, just as much as good men
will do as much as they can to solve their problems peacefully.
I believe in Pacifism, and by this, I believe that whenever
violence arrises, the beautify in humanity decreases, the flower
of reverence wilts, and a storm just begins to foment on the
horizon of the future.
My opposition to violence, to the use of physical brutality as
a method to reach a conclusion, is based on my humane
philosophy, and my love of every conscious being. For every
organism that is alive in this Universe and lives every day with
as much fear as they do hope -- who adores those tender memories
of intimacy, and writhes and cries at those traumatic events
that shifted their reality into a nightmare -- for every being
that can suffer and every being who mourns such suffering, there
is another reason to believe in Pacifism; to believe in the way
of peace, in that it is an ultimate goal of our humane
sentiments. For every experience that is touched with the pain
of violence, there is another mournful tear in the eye of
compassion -- another lie spoken by truth. In this world of
ours, where war and famine are consequential results of a
Capitalist economy, where a man's opinion is enough for the
government to curse them, where the most respected of the
population are revered for their devotion to an unseen being --
when everyday is another spectacle at how much a joke our
civilization is, at pursuits that create nothing and share no
inspiration, at every person's fear to say and be what they
think -- to see the regrets of those who are now war veterans,
to feel the trembling pains of those who never sought a lover --
when everyday is just another struggle to be honest and sincere,
the only wish I can cast upon the fading star of our future is
that more will appeal to the position of Pacifism, and more will
adhere to those non-violent solutions.
When it comes to a fight, a physical fight, it is little more
than an expression of aggression, but the bruises will always
run deep down to the soul. Humiliation and Depression may infect
the mind, just as scars and debility will destroy the body.
There is not a just court in this world who would accept a fight
as a proper method to reach a verdict. Those verdicts which are
guided by the principles of justice and fairness, they are not
based on the fighting ability of either the defendent or the
plaintiff, but rather by the evidence presented by both sides.
It was a blessed day when Dueling grew old and tiresome, and
garnered no respect from those who valued civilization and
truth. The idea that a quarrel, a dilemma, an argument, can be
settled with the use of brute force -- this idea is simple a
demonstration of grave ignorance, at the cost of intelligence
and truth. When we see two individuals fighting each other, for
the sake of some trifle or another, little more than disdain can
be used to express our opinion on the matter, as fighting will
solve nothing. When two scientists are arguing against each
other, both of them upholding their own method as being a better
way, evidence will be the determining factor in which one we
decide to believe. In matters of intellectual investigation, of
confirming or debunking, when it matters because it's what we
believe -- brute violence, the use of coercion, has never been
loyal to the spirit of truth, has never offered assistance to
the methods of reason.
"Be with me now," a lover will say to the person who gives
light to life. Never are these words more sincere than at the
conclusion of some conflict, at the end of some arduous
fighting, intolerance, indignance, viciousness. To engage in
fighting, in a contest of physical strength, it will not solve
problems. To those who are so willing to do so, they may find
that for years they will be haunted by the screams of their
downed victims, by the tears of widows and orphans.
Mercilessness among every vice -- when a child cries, only those
hands that belong to a humane person will reach. For a man to be
robbed, to walk down the same street he has every day of his
life, and to have his property taken away from him -- the man
will have lost more than a physical item. His heart will be
wrought with the pains of the depth of cruelty in men. It may be
a thing to lose an item one day, no matter how cherished or dear
that item is. But when someone destroys your reasons to believe
in charity, your motives to understand the emotions of the
hearts of others -- when something is capable of rendering such
a bruttish, terrible effect, it is more than just the loss of a
physical item. So, too, when a man is struck or attacked, he
will feel more than just the pain from the blows, but an
unending confusion and depression, mostly centering around the
question, "How could they do that?" And it will be meant that it
is hard to believe that a person could reach such cruel depths.
I will not pretend that I can accurately express how horrible a
man feels when they are wronged -- such emotions are beyond the
possibilities of our humble language. But, hopefully, I have
been able to demonstrate to some degree what it means.
Ultimately, when fighting and conflict rise from beyond the
domestic crises, it will manifest itself in war -- but much more
than just that. For every bomb dropped, it is another sign of
lost hope. For every soldier bayonetted, every village burned,
every dissent of opinion suppressed -- when we look at every
sign of war, we are reminded a little less of why we believe in
the bloom of humaneness. War has never brought peace, it has
never brought Democracy, it has never brought economic
stability. Those incidents of revolution may in some cases be
the exception to this. But the rise of the Western World's
dominance in global affairs, of such a small amount of countries
making up the policies and regulations for such a great amount
of nations, it has only followed a great deal of Imperialism and
war. In every nation that has felt the grueling whip of the
overseer, there has been the crater of war, the empty bowl of
famine, the slums of poverty. In these conditions, nations will
struggle to survive, as all meaning of a true Democracy are
removed by foreign investors. And so, we have the image of war:
sacrificing the lives of our children, for the sake of economic
prosperity. Yet, it is not economic prosperity in that all
involved benefit, but it is rather economic slavery, in that one
is forced into cooperation at no benefit, whereas the other
receives the profit of the other. As soldiers march off to
battle an enemy their leaders have told them was a source of all
infamy, there will be one less reason to think that civilization
will be acheived.
Of all inventions, of cultures which have made the human
species sing praise and of those thinkers that men attribute
genius to, of all creations, there are fewer that have more
merits than that of Diplomacy. Through the use of this wonderful
creation, we can try to settle our differences not through the
sword of war, but through the quill of reason -- not in spite of
compassion, but at the aid of reverence. Leaders may be reviled
as those who are either dictators or representatives, and the
difference between the two possibilities is rather
insignificant, but there was one tool that leaders had at their
disposal which gave civilization a brilliant light to its shine.
That tool was Diplomacy. The first day that a person used reason
instead of force to conclude an argument was the first day that
civilization had a true realization. Not just in the structures,
or the artwork, or the productivity, or those fickle matters
that historians toil over when it comes to culture. But in the
hearts of men and women, there is a real understanding of
civilization, when they lean towards solution which are most
peaceful, and offer the greatest praise when violence can be
averted. I will give Diplomacy this very merited distinction
among other creations. Unlike the factories that produce more
bombs than we have earth -- more bullets than we have people --
Diplomacy was a creation that was not brought about for use
against or for justice, against or for liberty, but rather, as a
conflict-resolving, peaceful method.
Violence is violence, and it is a form of brutality that will
never be acceptable in the heart of the Humanitarian -- it will
always be reviled as ignorant as much as it is merciless. There
are, though, a very few amount of cases where violence can be
condoned, but in these instances, the definition of "violence"
and "force" are almost altered entirely. When a man is attacked,
this is violence, but when he fights back, it is equally
violence -- but in the case of fighting back, it is justified,
it is a sign of strength and duty. There is no way that I could
still adhere to the foundations of Reason and Logic, and still
not defend a person's right to self defense. Asside from this
right, there is one other instance where force and coercion can
be allowed. In those instances where an injustice has been
committed, and recompense must be paid, it is allowable. An
example of this would be our modern corporations: they pay
poorly and they sell at high prices. In the end, the business
world gathers wealth whereas the poor struggle to survive. In
this world, where Capitalism reigns and the downtrodden must
suffer, to shoplift from a store is but an act of revolution --
it is justifiable in that corporations are thieves themselves.
In a very real way, shoplifting is more of repossession and not
theft. When companies force 12 year old children to sew soccer
balls for 10 cents an hour, this is a crime. When a street punk
steals food to feed himself, this is not a crime. And it is
interesting to recognize that the law recognizes the first as
not a crime and the first as a crime. The government does not
exist to serve the will of the people. But in the instance where
a person is defending themselves or their rights or justice,
physical force is justified, but in those instances where people
are trying to solve a simple dilemma, it is not justified. This
is my position on the matter of Pacifism and Peace as a
Humanitarian.
www.punkerslut.com
For Life, Punkerslut