Can pacifism ever succeed?

[boskysquelch]

Only 30% resistance fighters. Does that suit?

if you wish to quote me literally...by all means...doesn't mean I haven't read or couldn't provide more numbers, with more accuracy.

you response is as flippant as mine.

But it is you that wishes for qualification and have offered to provide.... I'll wait for the facts you have offered to provide to either prove or disprove the Jensen_ism...kthxbai.

 

[butchersapron]

There were 10 survivors from the ghetto. 30% were fighters. That's from your own link. Game over i think. Unless you want to disprove your own post.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

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

Not sure what that has to do with this thread.

Do you have an encyclopedic collection of everything I've said? If so, I hope it helps to get you through the cold nights.

 

[butchersapron]

You're not sure what that has to do with this thread?

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

You're not sure what that has to do with this thread?

Er, I wasn't talking to you.

 

[darkfibre]

Sooooo... before I reach for the Travis Bickle pics...

What IS your opinion on pacifism, Butchersapron?

 

[butchersapron]

Yes, you were.

 

[butchersapron]

Sooooo... before I reach for the Travis Bickle pics...

What's your opinion of pacifism, Butchersapron?

I think the short book you linked to earlier sums my thoughts on pacificism. It's dangerous, counter-productive and as an exclusive organising model saps the life out of anything it comes into conatct with.

 

[boskysquelch]

Game over i think.

Thanks.

* w00t! I beat Butch!

 

[darkfibre]

I think the short book you linked to earlier sums my thoughts on pacificism. It's dangerous, counter-productive and as an exclusive organising model saps the life out of anything it comes into conatct with.

Awww... (((Group Hug))))

...I hope you're not just saying that because you're scared of me.

 

[boskysquelch]

There's plenty more questions about why warsaw is important

can we do this tomorrow? now i've done me homework...fkkkn depressing tho'

I take it you mean the whole gamut of what happened in Warsaw under Nazi & Soviet Occupation.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Sooooo... before I reach for the Travis Bickle pics...

What IS your opinion on pacifism, Butchersapron?

He's hoping for a communist takeover, so that he can kill anyone he doesn't like under the guise of 'destroying the class enemy'.

 

[goldenecitrone]

He's hoping for a communist takeover, so that he can kill anyone he doesn't like under the guise of 'destroying the class enemy'.

For an intelligent being, that's a pretty poor response, like an old drunk uncle.

 

[clusterflux]

I've always thought of pacifism as a brilliant strategy. The unspoken question for me is, Was Jesus a pacifist?
You can bring Darwin into the argument and relegate humanity to mere animals competing for resources. Explain art, literature and music as stratagems for acquiring resources. You will eventually have to face the fact that this Godless morass of angry and increasingly violent monkeys will kill themselves off. I keep hearing people arguing for violence, and even using examples from 40s Germany, yeah well what happened to those folks? I know the first thing to pop into some folks brains will be that other, more violent people did away with them. They will think this disproves pacifism. History is far slower in rendering verdicts.
I think the violent monkeys will win, and thats fine with me, I choose to believe God will let pacifists have a planet to live on, with no monkeys to deal with.

 

[Paulie Tandoori]

that's so sweet.

 

[clusterflux]

It is really kind of violent, being intelligent enough to realize your life as part of a multigenerational society and standing back while violent members of this society kill each other and possibly you as well realizing that they will eventually kill themselves off is kind of a acquiescence to violence, as such it can be interpreted as a violent act. Thus my mention of Jesus and the obvious question of his stance regarding the Roman empire.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

For an intelligent being, that's a pretty poor response,

I'd agree. It's pretty impotent, waiting for the revolution so you can get yours back, after all.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

I've always thought of pacifism as a brilliant strategy. The unspoken question for me is, Was Jesus a pacifist?

"Jesus Goes Apeshit"

 

[darkfibre]

"Jesus Goes Apeshit"

Damn you, Canuck! You steal all the best lines!!!

Whatever, my sky-pixie can kick your sky-pixies arse any day.

No monkeys? How about dinosaurs? Dinosaurs are

 

[ska invita]

I am sure Nelson Mandela was originally a pacifist but became convinced of the need for targeted violence.

I don't know if Nelson was ever a pacifist, but lets be clear, the ANCs terrorist campaign utterly failed. Nelson spent a lifetime in jail and became a martyr-figure, and that's about all the credit he can take for ending apartheid in SA.
(interesting thread on Mandela's failure here: http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=258443)

In my opinion the fall of apartheid was achieved nonviolently (on the whole) - check out the incredible documentary "Amandla: a revolution in four part harmony" for more...

[pacifism] could only work if 100% of the population were by nature pacifists and it isn't.

sorry, but this comment is armchair nonsense. There is a history of nonviolent resistance, and it has had its successes - some small, some big. I highly recommend Gene Sharp's "Waging Nonviolent Struggle: 20th Century Practice And 21st Century Potential" - Housmans Bookshop are the sole UK distributors (in fact Housmans is probably the only shop that has good books on pacifism its history and theory).

Amongst other things, in this book you get about 15-odd bite size chunks of history that show how a nonviolent revolution can and has be achieved. The 'colour' revlutions of the former eastern block were said to be greatly influenced by the writings of Gene Sharp.

Pacifism/nonviolent direct action is a relatively recent development in human history, and as such, its techniques need studying and considering. I came to the subject utterly cynical, but have been increasingly won over. Gene Sharp in particular makes for a very convincing read.

Here's a pretty good review/summary of it:
http://www.peacenews.info/issues/2499-2500/24992514.html

burmese pacifist movement never took off

The burmese monks are pacifists, and the crushing of their uprisings shows a bravery and commitment to their beliefs that deserves the highest of respects. That said, they have been, till now, unsuccessful - but the moral victory has ubdoubtedly been theirs.

The Burmese example is hardly a ringing endorsement of the effectiveness of nonviolent uprising (in that the monks were visciously supressed by the army), but I am sure that it has had a big effect on furhter undermining the burmese dictatorship.

[this thread?] never had any chance despite these cliches.

pacifism, or nonviolent direct action (NVDA) is worth looking into and reading up on - there are a lot of cliches and un-thought out opinions on it. If you read just one book on it, check out the Gene Sharp I mentioned.

There's a lot more I'd like to add, such as how rioting has increased the power of police/state, how armed revolution replaces one armed group with another, etc., but this post is long enough...

 

[TAE]

works in limited circumstances, esp where the opponent feels they have to operate degree of restraint, maybe for fear of bad press as in the deep south, or of repression kicking of mass violence against them - maybe in some of Britains colonial endgames - but it won't work where the opponent has no qualms about slaughtering absolutely everyone - Hitler, Stalin, Mao, etc being the more obvious examples

I agree - it works best in specific situations where moral pressure can be put on those in power.

One thing to remember is that the state needs the polulation. So if the population don't play ball, the state is in trouble.

Therefore I would suggest that whether pacifism works is down to how much of the population is willing to 'not play ball' and live (or die) with the consequences.

Even in WWII, if 90% of the german population had refused to cooperate with the 10% of the nazi elite, then Hitler could have done very little about it.

The Kingdom of God is Within You

Very interesting thank you.

 

[Shevek]

I am an anarchist. I believe the idea of a non violent society is truly radical but I worry that violence might be needed in some circumstances. I remember reading Orwell's Homage to Catalonia where he rails against pacifism for breeding apathy and quiessence amongst the population. I want to believe in the hopes and claims of pacifism but something stops me from believing in it wholeheartedly. I guess the whole pacifist/violence debate is a process, something you can only develop true opinions about through revolutionary struggle.

 

[ViolentPanda]

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.

Now, be so good to explain why some Jews were "pretty pacifistic" or otherwise malleable.

 

[ViolentPanda]

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.

The state has a monopoly on legally-permissible violence in pursuit of state aims.
That doesn't mean I'm not going to kick back if they boot me.

 

[DotCommunist]

I've always thought of pacifism as a brilliant strategy. The unspoken question for me is, Was Jesus a pacifist?
You can bring Darwin into the argument and relegate humanity to mere animals competing for resources. Explain art, literature and music as stratagems for acquiring resources. You will eventually have to face the fact that this Godless morass of angry and increasingly violent monkeys will kill themselves off. I keep hearing people arguing for violence, and even using examples from 40s Germany, yeah well what happened to those folks? I know the first thing to pop into some folks brains will be that other, more violent people did away with them. They will think this disproves pacifism. History is far slower in rendering verdicts.
I think the violent monkeys will win, and thats fine with me, I choose to believe God will let pacifists have a planet to live on, with no monkeys to deal with.

the scene at the temple with the moneylenders would suggest not, plus one of the disciples was Simon the Zealot (afaik the zealots were like proto-zionists opposed to Roman rule)

 

[ViolentPanda]

I've always thought of pacifism as a brilliant strategy. The unspoken question for me is, Was Jesus a pacifist?
You can bring Darwin into the argument and relegate humanity to mere animals competing for resources. Explain art, literature and music as stratagems for acquiring resources. You will eventually have to face the fact that this Godless morass of angry and increasingly violent monkeys will kill themselves off. I keep hearing people arguing for violence, and even using examples from 40s Germany, yeah well what happened to those folks? I know the first thing to pop into some folks brains will be that other, more violent people did away with them. They will think this disproves pacifism. History is far slower in rendering verdicts.
I think the violent monkeys will win, and thats fine with me, I choose to believe God will let pacifists have a planet to live on, with no monkeys to deal with.

G-d is a violent psychopath, and the meek shall indeed inherit the earth.

In individual plots about 8ft by 3ft by 6ft deep, usually.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Now, be so good to explain why some Jews were "pretty pacifistic" or otherwise malleable.

As I understand it, it's because they believed in the law, believed in the inherent goodness of their neighbors, and didn't believe that monstrosity was about to befall them.

 

[TAE]

the scene at the temple with the moneylenders would suggest not, plus one of the disciples was Simon the Zealot (afaik the zealots were like proto-zionists opposed to Roman rule)

On the other hand it does not sound like he was causing any permanent injuries at the temple and he never advocated militant resistance against the romans.

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.

I don't think pacifistic is the right word, it's not as if there was a huge resistence movement and pacifism was the chosen tool. They were just trying to survive somehow.

 

[ViolentPanda]

As I understand it, it's because they believed in the law...

By the time the Nuremberg laws (especially the Reich Citizenship law) were promulgated in 1935, German Jews knew they were no longer protected by law, and it was obvious to Jews everywhere that German Jews, as non-citizens, had none of the protections of German citizens.

...believed in the inherent goodness of their neighbors, and didn't believe that monstrosity was about to befall them.

Or perhaps hoped that something would be done to stop it.

The problem is also to do with the hierarchies within many of the Jewish communities in Europe.
Read something along the lines of Hannah Arendt's "Eichmann in Jerusalem" and you'll come away pretty nauseated at how much, even 45 years ago, had been discovered about how, in some cases, our elders sold us out, how in others they "ratted" on anyone who might resist, even how, in some cases, they handed over birth records that helped the Nazis trace other Jews.
There was also, as Rachamim agreed, a streak of fatalism in some of the eastern European Hasidim that literally led to them going to their deaths without complaint, because it was HIS will.

It's so much more complex than just being about pacifism or a pacifistic attitude

 

[ViolentPanda]

I don't think pacifistic is the right word, it's not as if there was a huge resistence movement and pacifism was the chosen tool. They were just trying to survive somehow.

We were never able to organise beyond our communities, and the fact that we were divided made us easier to conquer. We could have resisted harder, but how much harder is an open question.