Can pacifism ever succeed?

[boskysquelch]

War! What is it good for? Absolutely nothing.....

gave U the ability to tap that out...

 

[boskysquelch]

I may be on a bit of an intolerant rant-mood tonight.

go and read the Jensen intro to the Ward Churchill book, that darkfibre provided, then...

 

[Paulie Tandoori]

 

[Barking_Mad]

That's right. The past has nothing to teach us about the limitstions of anything tat you barking mad might happen to persoanlly believe in. Nothing.

The past has lots to teach us, including the fact that violence leads to more violence. My point was that nobody should take history as a template for the future which was what your original comment appeared to suggest to me.

And the second bit, after what you just said about reductionism? Please, that totally trite xmas card greeting is about the def of it

The interaction between changing concrete conditions and collective/ individual consciousnessis a far more fruitful path to consider than the idea that we must all change ourselves into perfect beings by the power of love before any real change can come about.

I didn't say anything about human beings becoming perfect before any change can come about. Wanting peace does not and would not, equal perfection. My point was that some people believe that an idea is good but only if everyone else were to do it first.

I agree with your italicised text, but people have to change the way they think before any different action can take place. Action and thought are independent of each other but a change in action can ONLY happen after a change in thought.

Unless holding a gun to peoples head is the answer......

 

[butchersapron]

Action and thought are not independent, that's the whole point.

And please, leave off the crap last lines.

 

[Bernie Gunther]

As that intro referenced above pointed out though, the problem is the Hannibal Lecter types, who unfortunately are selected by our society for positions of power. In business, in politics, in the security industry, in all walks of life which accrue power, we unfortunately have a system that gives power to psychopaths, whose manners may be nice, but who can only be stopped from fucking up the lives of their fellow citizens by some form of coercion.

If that coercion can be non-violent, then that's a blessing, but as you may have noticed our lovely government (see note about psychopaths above) have made up some legislation that turns non-violent direct action into terrorism.

So even if you are a pacifist, and only harm the machinery of destruction rather than the people who operate it, the state has given itself the right to fuck your life up with extreme predjudice ...

 

[Paulie Tandoori]

That's the problem with political stripes, period. It's also probably the reason why people think pacifism is a good idea, but are not willing to take it on until everyone else does.

I don't really see what you're getting at with this. Do you mean that pacificism per se is a good worthwhile pursuit, or that most people will revert to a position of apathy until change occurs that is to their best advantage?

 

[Barking_Mad]

Action and thought are not independent, that's the whole point.

Not entirely. How do you convince some people to act differently (about anything) when they currently think differently?

And please, leave off the crap last lines.

I was making a point by degree, not kind.

 

[butchersapron]

Not entirely. How do you convince some people to act differently (about anything) when they currently think differently?



I was making a point by degree, not kind.

You're already placing the question in terms of a) ideas being prior and b) you needing to convince someone of that your ideas are better than theirs. Rather than conciousness developing out of peoples own actions and reflections on them. Not some burning cross that's objectively true placed above them for them to work towards.

 

[Barking_Mad]

if you want to do death by quotes, then what about those who fail to learn the mistakes of the past are doomed to repeat them (or something similar anyway).

Touche. I agree, i just dont think we should let history become a self fulfilling prophecy. Ermm that's an oxymoron, but im sure you get my drift.....

I don't really see what you're getting at with this.

Pacifism is something im interested in, (tho I wouldnt necessairly say im a pacifist) but im arguing on the fly, it's stuff thats sat in my head and its falling out, so apologies for it not making sense or being plain crap.

Do you mean that pacificism per se is a good worthwhile pursuit, or that most people will revert to a position of apathy until change occurs that is to their best advantage?

I guess pacifism is a belief (and in some ways is similar to athiesm in that it is a belief in the lack of something (ie violence/god) rather than a pursuit of something. Yes, some people will resort to apathy and shrug their shoulders about violence and accept it as a given.

Hmmm, so yeah.

Right, coincidentally enough im off to finish War & Peace with a nice cold beer.

 

[darkfibre]

go and read the Jensen intro to the Ward Churchill book, that darkfibre provided, then...

Heh... I hadn't even noticed that intro, TBH, I linked to a later edition than the one I have.

Reminded me what you were saying about Jews the other day.

 

[butchersapron]

They didn't though!

 

[darkfibre]

No? Go on, then...

 

[butchersapron]

Is it mine to prove then?

This is the ill-defined claim taken from another site:

"The Jews who participated in the Warsaw Ghetto uprising—including those who went on what they thought were suicide missions—had a higher rate of survival than those who went along. Never forget that."

What are we talking about? What does 'went along' mean? There's plenty more questions about why warsaw is important, how it got to the stage where armed resistance only happeneed at the last minute (with zero effectiveness), hiow it compared to different places withy different or earlier levels of violent resistance and so on.

Buit that might spoil such a trite claim.

 

[darkfibre]

Well, to give Jensen's 'trite claim' some context (perhaps also to illuminate you as to what he means by 'went along'), try searching the terms 'jensen warsaw ghetto' for a start - you'll see it's a 'trite claim' that he appears to have made very many times over the last few years. I've not seen anyone challenge him on it, though.

One of the smartest things the Nazis did was to co-opt rationality and to co-opt hope. The way they did that was by making it so that at every step of the way it was in the Jews’ rational, best interest not to resist.

Would you rather get an ID card or would you rather resist and possibly get killed? Do you want to go to a ghetto or do you want to resist and possibly get killed? Do you want to get on a cattle car or do you want to resist and possibly get killed? Do you want to take a shower or do you want to resist and possibly get killed?

Every step of the way, it was in their rational best interest to not resist. But I’ll tell you something really interesting: The Jews who participated in the Warsaw ghetto uprising had a much higher rate of survival than those who went along. We need to keep that in mind over the next ten years.

http://www.nocompromise.org/issues/26jensen.html

If we should - and if anyone is going to - challenge him on it, it's probably going to be easier if there's a little more substance to the challenge than 'some bloke on a forum said...'

 

[butchersapron]

If he's making the claim then he must surely have something to back it up. He doesn't seem to reference any source for the claim, ever. Repitition of claim doesn't count, nor does lack of challenge to same claim on the internet. Neither of them are acceptable back ups for proper sources.

 

[darkfibre]

OK, so what is your claim (that the quote is factually incorrect) based on?

Here's the article boskeysquelch's quote seems to come from: http://www.derrickjensen.org/fear01.html

 

[butchersapron]

OK, so what is your claim (that the quote is factually incorrect) based on?

Here's the article boskeysquelch's quote seems to come from: http://www.derrickjensen.org/fear01.html

I know where it's from, i googled it at the time. I read all the various postings of it. I noticed the total lack of reference or source for the claim and the willingness to believe it with no further evidence. I see also that discerning minds demand i disprove 'facts' or they'll take any old shit spouted on the internet as true. or at least not hold them to the same standared that you'rw now requiring.

The death rate in the ghettos was largely unaffected by resistance, violent, silent, armed or unarmed, by collaboration or co-operation. It was pretty uniform. This is one of the central areas of investigation on the holocaust. I don't need to prove some internet bloke making up a good sounding example to back his case up to be wrong to prove this If you really want sources/refs then i'll find them for you tommmorow.

 

[darkfibre]

Hmmm...

If you 'googled it at the time' and 'read all the various postings of it', why did you claim not to know what 'went along' meant?

It's pretty clear in both the links I posted that he was referring to the Nazi's 'co-opting of rationality'.

I can see where you're coming from re: references, so if you know of evidence that suggests that those who allowed their 'rationality to be co-opted' into meekly doing as they were told had a survival rate higher than, or no less than those who resisted, you should share it.

If you really want sources/refs then i'll find them for you tommmorow.

If you'd be so kind.

 

[boskysquelch]

If you really want sources/refs then i'll find them for you tommmorow.

I personally remember using a similar reasoning in a debate in 1982 via quotes from Lord Russell of Liverpool'sThe Scourge of the Swastika ie the going along with things....but Warsaw Ghetto specific: you say "uniform"...so you dismiss any resistance if the outcome(historically) is proven?

mmmmmmmmmmmkay.... fairdoes.


how about 50,000 odd died and only these 10 survived::: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warsaw_Ghetto#Survivors.... does that suit?

I think I'll go out with a scream rather than a whimper about having correct sources, qualitative & quantitative analysis, n data to hand if it's kays with yooz.

The mouth obeys poorly when the heart murmurs.

 

[butchersapron]

Hmmm...

If you 'googled it at the time' and 'read all the various postings of it', why did you claim not to know what 'went along' meant?

It's pretty clear in both the links I posted that he was referring to the Nazi's 'co-opting of rationality'.

I can see where you're coming from re: references, so if you know of evidence that suggests that those who allowed their 'rationality to be co-opted' into meekly doing as they were told had a survival rate higher than, or no less than those who resisted, you should share it.

If you'd be so kind.

Because i was talking about the specific claim rather than the argument. And for that specific claim to make any sort of sense we need some defintion of those who 'went along', some group we can compare numbers with - still sadly lacking in that article and in any later responses. Without that no comparison leading to such a claim can be made.

So, if you'd like to define the group who allowed their "'rationality to be co-opted' into meekly doing as they were told" then yes... if you'd be so kind.

 

[butchersapron]

how about 50,000 odd died and only these 10 survived::: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warsaw_Ghetto#Survivors.... does that suit?

Only 30% resistance fighters. Does that suit?

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Im an anarchist but I don't know if you should condone violence to get what you want

The jews were pretty pacifistic in the face of Nazi aggression. What it meant was that it was that much easier to get them into the cattle cars, and get them to the death camps.

 

[butchersapron]

Do you think it was some sort of character failing that they didn't resist more? And maybe they sort of deserved it as a result?

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Do you think it was some sort of character failing that they didn't resist more? And maybe they sort of deserved it as a result?

No.

 

[butchersapron]

Yet you argue that i do when say the same thing as you just did .

Hey at least you're steadfast and not inconsistent.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Yet you argue that i do when say the same thing as you just did .

Hey at least you're steadfast and not inconsistent.

 

[butchersapron]

Indeed, see how easily and indiscrimanently you throw around such accusations - you lose track of them.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Indeed, see how easily and indiscrimanently you throw around such accusations - you lose track of them.

You've lost me.

 

[yield]

You've lost me.

Probably this from the "Why didn't the Jews resist?" thread.

I don't believe in Pacifism. The state has a monopoly on violence.

So I button up.