Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[fqllve]

There seems to be a lot of mentally (not to mention physically) weak sadsacks that fear physical harm

I find the idea that nonviolence and pacifism require you to be mentally weak pretty hilarious. Trust me, violence can sometimes be a very compelling course of action and honestly I feel like a lot of times it takes more mental fortitude to maintain composure in light of aggression than it does to respond in kind.

And if you fear physical harm? Pacifism isn't exactly the smartest option to take.

[LibidoMax]

There seems to be a lot of mentally (not to mention physically) weak sadsacks that fear physical harm

I find the idea that nonviolence and pacifism require you to be mentally weak pretty hilarious. Trust me, violence can sometimes be a very compelling course of action and honestly I feel like a lot of times it takes more mental fortitude to maintain composure in light of aggression than it does to respond in kind.

And if you fear physical harm? Pacifism isn't exactly the smartest option to take.

I mean people who avoid violence out of fear, not self preservation. Knowing how to be diplomatic is important, but you have to draw a line somewhere.

[Loud Whispers]

I mean people who avoid violence out of fear, not self preservation. Knowing how to be diplomatic is important, but you have to draw a line somewhere.

So here's a hypothetical situation. Person 1 believes in the idea that if you must employ force, employ it till they fear you to the point of terror. Person 2 walks into the bar Person 1 is in, generally talking loudly and annoying everyone. Person 2 believes in employing violence to those who employ it against them irregardless of the situation.
Person 2 walks up to Person 1. Person 1 punches Person 2. They both go down screaming. Who is right?

[Dr Feelgood]

If the murder victims tried to defend themselves and failed, then they at least kept their dignity. Pacifists rely on the mercy of their assailants and keep neither their dignity or lives.

Violence is a necessity. It is neither good or evil. Fear and violence are what allow societies to exist.

They are what threaten their existence to begin with.

A nation that is incapable of waging war will eventually be annihilated. Laws without punishment have no power. Punishments without the fear of violence or death will not deter crime. People are incapable of living together without the fear of violence.

Pull out a gun and end the threat.

And continue the suffering.

The dead don't suffer.

Lying down and taking it can be a form of self preservation. Why get into a fight you cant win?

People who sacrifice their dignity to throw themselves at the mercy of their attacker are cowards. A coward may live, but his life is not his own, since he handed control of his life to his attacker. It is better to die, than to abandon your self-worth and suffer abuse.

No conflict > preplanned violence > preemptive violence > fleeing > regular violence > surrender

[fqllve]

I mean people who avoid violence out of fear, not self preservation. Knowing how to be diplomatic is important, but you have to draw a line somewhere.

It can be hard to draw the line between fear and self-preservation. Generally people are afraid of things because they're dangerous.

That said, my point is that you seem to think people who are categorical pacifists are somehow afraid. Having both been in fights, and now refusing to, I can tell you that responding to a violent person in kind is way less terrifying than responding peacefully.

It is better to die, than to abandon your self-worth and suffer abuse.

You say that now. And even if you always would, that's not something you get to decide for other people.