[lit-ideas] Re: Frcnch Pacifism and German National Socialism
- From: Donal McEvoy <donalmcevoyuk@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2009 20:51:07 +0000 (GMT)
Popper on pacifism might be summed up as follows:-
1)Pacifism [taking B Russell for example] cannot be identified with cowardice -
on the contrary, to stay true to a principle despite the mindless howling of
the crowd takes moral courage.
2) The aim of pacifism is correct: that is, the elimination of violence as as a
way of resolving disputes is a central aim. Popper goes as far as claiming that
the central value of civilisiation is the minimising of violence [indeed, this
is key to his defence of democracy which he defends not by way of majority
rules etc. but that it gives us the scope to get rid of bad leaders without
bloodshed].
3) Pacifism is nevertheless a paradoxical position: if you will not meet force
with force, you will be destroyed and your tradition of pacifism will be
destroyed along with you. Put another way: we have to use force against those
who would try to get their way by force against us.
4) The paradox at 3) is not a logical but a pragmatic paradox and does not
undermine the fundamentally sane and sound aims of the pacifist. Unfortunately,
it may mean we have to wage war for peace [paradoxical as this might sound].
5) Making judgments as to the moral necessity of war is very difficult and
complicated [unless of course you are a fascist or communist or other
totalitarian with little respect for human life].
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
