Pacifism is Objectively Immoral

***I am reposting some stuff from my blog to make my positions clear as well as fill Sparkle's metephorically big shoes.


"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things: the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feelings which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight: nothing he cares about more than his own personal safety: is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions and blood of better men than himself." – John Stuart Mill

Pacifism is an immoral choice in the face of aggression, both as individuals and as a society. Pacifists do not oppose aggression when attacked, inviting further aggression both to themselves and to their neighbors. Worse, many pacifists self-righteously oppose violence when others are attacked, but quickly change their mind when they themselves are assaulted, even calling upon others to fight for them.

The philosophical or religious basis for pacifistic views is irrelevant. Clearly, pacifists exist only where and when others have bled to insure the safety and security of the society. Safe from violence, pacifism seems like a rational decision, as if reason and not violence were why strife and violence are not troublesome.

"In the final choice, a soldier's pack is not so heavy a burden as a prisoner's chains." - Dwight D. Eisenhower

Further, those living free from fear and violence often slide into moral stupidity. Moral equivicators do not draw distinctions between self defense and aggression, often casting themselves and high-minded and moral for disparaging honorable soldiers and terrorists alike.

When pacifists get their way, people die. Cambodia, for example, millions died at the hands of Pol Pot, The Khmer Rouge commited the act, but our withdrawal, precipitated by US pacifists, allowed it to happen.

Sometimes pacifism appears to work. In India, Ghandi's pacifist movement seemed to be the means to free India from British colonial rule, but it was the British legal tradition that freed India. They listened to the arguement made for Indian independance, publicity and reason won because the British Parliment chose to honor its principles.

"If you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed; if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a small chance of survival. There may even be a worse case: you may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves." - Winston Churchill