Objectively Pro-Terrorist Pacifists

Mercurial Times ^ | November 8, 2001 (but more on that below) | Aaron Armitage

[A.J.Armitage]

The owner of the site I was at has been too busy to update his site, so now I'm at Mercurial Times. Maybe I'll ultimately be at both. This one was written a few weeks ago, but it's only just been posted. Here it is.

[A.J.Armitage]

.

[Hegewisch Dupa]

Bump it, Dano

[RnMomof7]

Bump!!

[Protagoras]

bump for later perusal. Thanks for the ping.

[11B3]

I'd like to pin this article to Lew Rockwell's chest....With an air nailer.

[r9etb]

Nice one.

The most fundamental problem with pacifism is that it makes no distinction between aggression and defense or retaliation.

I've heard it described (really!) as an opportunity to turn the other cheek. Taken to its logical end, this would require us to abolish all police forces and dismantle the entire criminal justice system.

It would work fine "if everybody would just...." But of course they don't.

She doesn't understand that they aren't like us.

Absolutely correct. There are those for whom a recitation of our "unalienable rights" will simply cause them to chuckle before they shoot.

[A.J.Armitage]

So does collectivism, A.J. We've learned that, haven't we?

Exactly, except that the masked men are sent by your own government with your own money.

[Maelstrom]

Add me to your list s'il vous plait!

[mlocher]

the only punishment that works is love...

does this person understand the difference between law and gospel?

[A.J.Armitage]

By "cost to ourselves", I mean cost in lives, both of our soldiers and of people getting killed in the terrorism it would inspire. The government's purpose is to protect innocent Americans, so that's the highest consideration. Of course innocent lives, of any nationality, are more important than monetary cost.

[A.J.Armitage]

No, you miss my point. Americans were helpless before terrorists, despite our elaborate, exorbitantly expensive, collectivist "defense." The individual is disarmed by the government, and left vulnerable, yet we are told to trust the government to do what it most emphatically cannot do....protect us.

You're right, at least about terrorism. The government indeed has failed to protect us from it.

[nothingnew]

the only punishment that works is love...

Ridiculous statement to begin with..."love" a punishment?

Anyways, who is she, the "6th" Beatle?..."Love, love, love...".....Get real, moron.

FMCDH

[BikerNYC]

Oh, leave the Amish alone. They are hardly a threat. Their pacifism is a deeply held and sincere belief based upon their religious understanding as Christians. They believe that if the result of their pacifism is death at the hands of the attacker, so be it; death is not threatening to them as Christians. If, as Christians, they believe they are living righteous lives that will lead to after-death rewards, I don't think their view is that unsound.

[A.J.Armitage]

I didn't have the Amish in mind.

[DoughtyOne]

Good comments. It's my opinion that to resist and combat evil even by force is a noble endeavor. To remain silent and pacifist in the face of it, is evil.

Thank you.

[BikerNYC]

To remain silent and pacifist in the face of it, is evil.

Oh, Amish folks ain't evil. They just mind their own business trying to live their lives in accordance with their religious beliefs, one of those beliefs being pacifism.