You can choose to answer one question or the other, or better yet both, or just write things that you find relevant about this subject, as usual.
I really advise you to check the provided links if you are not fully understanding of one of these concepts, they are very informative while remaining relatively simple.
Pacifism is a current of thought that advocates the search for international peace through negociation, disarmament and no-violence. I don't really think whether pacifism is a good idea , because unfortunately we can't always resolve conflicts or wars through negociations. One can't escape the war, and therefore not to violence. Sometimes the force is deemed absolutely necessary to advance the cause of peace. Personally, I find it difficult to give a view of pacifism; I think it dépends on attitudes.
Nowadays pacifism is only possible because of militarism. In fact there is no pacifism because it doesn't exist, it is just a period of time with a neutral situation but the conflict is hidden inside of it. Pacifism is a way of conflict, when there is no war there is exchange who's another way to make war. The humanity fought,fight and will fight himself for ever. If you want to consideer pacifism as a possible option to live with, it is just a dream because men, into their state of nature will always be in conflict.
I said that pacifism needs militarism because of this. Militarism is a way to protect borders and the integrity of the nation. It is obvious that countries without a military force have not any power and they can't protect themselves. If they can't, the civilians of those nations will face pain and struggle because of other nations and organisations (such as ISIS) who will attack them soon or later. There is no pacifism, wars are constantly on and we have to accept it and live with. If we are free to think and say what we want in our country it is because we have a heavy military force. Be proud of it and of our nation because not all humans can live free as we do.
I don't think we can say directly that pacifism is good or not because it depends on the situation and on the people. Some persons don't support to kill people for ethic or religious reasons most of the time. We can mention Afghanistan's war and its aim : fight against the terrorism and eliminate A-Qaida. George Bush sent American troops just after 11th September 2001 attacks. We can think that the president acted without stepping back and engendered many deaths. Certainly, we have to fight against terrorism but in this case a period of pacifism just after twin towers' attacks to think about the consequences and to avoid some deaths would be a best thing to my opinion.
However, a total pacifism can't be useful because nowadays there are many conflicts in the world. We can take for example Syria. Many civils are killed everyday. For example we can mention Kobané's bloodshed where about 260 kurds were killed by Islamic State. How can we stay in our country and see this horror without doing anything ? All the countries and especially those which have powers like the USA have to take part in this war to defend human rights.
Pacifism can be defines as being the emphasis of the diplomacy rather than forces.The pacifism was always considered as the good model to be followed, nevertheless this model showed his limit many times.So what do we do ?Do we persist or we manage away to an other model?
Humanity always militated for peace and pacifism but yet it alaways end up in wars .Pacifism is more an ideal that an solution ;history has prove it.Pacifism is an ideal which if it is put up in the right way could do good to humanity.But with "if" we can rebuilt a world .Pacifism can't work when the protagonist are not ready to face it .For example war is horrible but some people need wars to make profits and this people will do everything in their power to conclude to a war .Today we build armys thanks to the name of pacifism , governement use military to build an "pacifist ideal".
Howerver history has proved that pacifism could work . Indeed through the characters of Gandhi or Mandela we can witness that this both men have showedtaht we could get indepandence without execesive violence .And both men succed even if it cost 27 years of his life to Mendela and his life to Gandhi .
In conclusion we can say that pacifism is a good things when it's uses in the good wayby the good people .
We can talk about the Flower power as a major part of the Pacifism ideology in the late 1960s and early 1970s. It was a symbol of passive resistance, rooted in the opposition movement to the Vietnam War which was opposing the US army to the Viets rebels. The expression was invented by the American poet Allen Ginsberg in 1965 in order to transform war protests into peaceful affirmative demonstrations. This term later became generalized as a modern reference to the hippie movement and the so-called counterculture of drugs, psychedelic music and art but also social permissiveness. However, this slogan is the symbol of the picture untitled « The Girl Of The Flower » by the French photojournalist Marc Riboud. It's a press photography, taken during a protestation against the Vietnam War, in Washington, in the 21 of October 1967 in front of the Pentagon. This photo of seventeen-year-old high school student called Jan Rose Kasmir clasping a daisy and gazing at bayonet-wielding soldiers had been spread all over the world et became one of the emblem of th Flower Power . The Smithsonian Magazine later called it "a gauzy juxtaposition of armed force and flower child innocence"
In my own opinion the ideology of pacifism cannot be used in our days because people who make wars and violence don`t understand the language of peace. For me personally pacifism which is not passive, and accompanied by the relevant law of action, may be perceived positively in the range when it`s not passing the edge of national security in the broadest sense of the term and not damage its defense capacity and public order. But as many people don`t even know about the existence of pacifism sometimes we must answer on violence with rather cruel methods
Pacifism is a word difficult to classify, whether he is good or bad. First, if we say " pacifism", people heard "no war" and imagine love, flowers and of course peace. A pacifist person can be considered as a neutral person, without opinion and who doesn't like conflicts. The word is good and positive but the person not really. On the contrary, a pacifist person can be very involved in his opinion and can spread his peace ideas to the others, in hope of stopping the war, and sometimes it works ! For exemple in 1960, Hippies became very important and everybody knows them, with their symbol of "peace and love". At least but not last, Pacifism also affects several domains like art with Andy Warhol or with The Beatles and their song " All you need is love". To conclude, in my mind pasificm is a good thing when people have a good intentionas to proclaim love and try to make all the world happy and bring some comfort. Sometimes, Pasificm can't stop all the problems like violence, because their will be always people in conflits, having different point of view.
Pacifism can be a good thing in general since I strongly believe that war is always asociated with violence and terrible situations such as deaths and destroy of cities and monuments. However pacifism can be sometimes not very well controlled due to the fact that people are most of the time not in the same mood and/or can have strong disagreement or have different opinions. So in these latter cases it can be even worse. Absolute pacifism is utopian in the real word since different cultures exist among countries and continents and this concept can not be apply everywhere since, as an example, there is huge differences between people living in industrial countries and other countries underdevelopment. Pacifism can be in theory a good thing since it means that no violence no crimes no fights are observed between people living in the same community. In fact absolute pacifism can not be apply nowadays due to the fact that different feelings exist between people and modern life induces high pressure and many challenges between different levels of person having different responsibilities. Of course it will be wonderful to live in a country where the pacifism has been set up but I think that this situation can not be permanent. To the best of my knowledge, none of the current governments in the Wordl have been involved in this philosophy and it will be really impossible to adopt pacifism for a country to be productive and efficient. Civilian based defense is also something that you can see in your dreams but it is far away from the real life. Unfortunately each human has is own character and intelligence and the thoughts of individuals are so different from one to another that a civilian based defense will be very difficult to set up. In summary pacifism and civilian bases defense are probably impossible to develop in modern life since too many challenges exist now. These concepts were certainly better adapted in the past when people was living just after the second world war.
You can choose to answer one question or the other, or better yet both, or just write things that you find relevant about this subject, as usual.
ReplyDeleteI really advise you to check the provided links if you are not fully understanding of one of these concepts, they are very informative while remaining relatively simple.
Pacifism is a current of thought that advocates the search for international peace through negociation, disarmament and no-violence. I don't really think whether pacifism is a good idea , because unfortunately we can't always resolve conflicts or wars through negociations. One can't escape the war, and therefore not to violence. Sometimes the force is deemed absolutely necessary to advance the cause of peace. Personally, I find it difficult to give a view of pacifism; I think it dépends on attitudes.
ReplyDeleteNowadays pacifism is only possible because of militarism. In fact there is no pacifism because it doesn't exist, it is just a period of time with a neutral situation but the conflict is hidden inside of it. Pacifism is a way of conflict, when there is no war there is exchange who's another way to make war. The humanity fought,fight and will fight himself for ever.
ReplyDeleteIf you want to consideer pacifism as a possible option to live with, it is just a dream because men, into their state of nature will always be in conflict.
I said that pacifism needs militarism because of this. Militarism is a way to protect borders and the integrity of the nation. It is obvious that countries without a military force have not any power and they can't protect themselves. If they can't, the civilians of those nations will face pain and struggle because of other nations and organisations (such as ISIS) who will attack them soon or later.
There is no pacifism, wars are constantly on and we have to accept it and live with. If we are free to think and say what we want in our country it is because we have a heavy military force. Be proud of it and of our nation because not all humans can live free as we do.
I don't think we can say directly that pacifism is good or not because it depends on the situation and on the people. Some persons don't support to kill people for ethic or religious reasons most of the time. We can mention Afghanistan's war and its aim : fight against the terrorism and eliminate A-Qaida. George Bush sent American troops just after 11th September 2001 attacks. We can think that the president acted without stepping back and engendered many deaths. Certainly, we have to fight against terrorism but in this case a period of pacifism just after twin towers' attacks to think about the consequences and to avoid some deaths would be a best thing to my opinion.
ReplyDeleteHowever, a total pacifism can't be useful because nowadays there are many conflicts in the world. We can take for example Syria. Many civils are killed everyday. For example we can mention Kobané's bloodshed where about 260 kurds were killed by Islamic State. How can we stay in our country and see this horror without doing anything ? All the countries and especially those which have powers like the USA have to take part in this war to defend human rights.
Pacifism can be defines as being the emphasis of the diplomacy rather than forces.The pacifism was always considered as the good model to be followed, nevertheless this model showed his limit many times.So what do we do ?Do we persist or we manage away to an other model?
ReplyDeleteHumanity always militated for peace and pacifism but yet it alaways end up in wars .Pacifism is more an ideal that an solution ;history has prove it.Pacifism is an ideal which if it is put up in the right way could do good to humanity.But with "if" we can rebuilt a world .Pacifism can't work when the protagonist are not ready to face it .For example war is horrible but some people need wars to make profits and this people will do everything in their power to conclude to a war .Today we build armys thanks to the name of pacifism , governement use military to build an "pacifist ideal".
Howerver history has proved that pacifism could work . Indeed through the characters of Gandhi or Mandela we can witness that this both men have showedtaht we could get indepandence without execesive violence .And both men succed even if it cost 27 years of his life to Mendela and his life to Gandhi .
In conclusion we can say that pacifism is a good things when it's uses in the good wayby the good people .
We can talk about the Flower power as a major part of the Pacifism ideology in the late 1960s and early 1970s. It was a symbol of passive resistance, rooted in the opposition movement to the Vietnam War which was opposing the US army to the Viets rebels.
ReplyDeleteThe expression was invented by the American poet Allen Ginsberg in 1965 in order to transform war protests into peaceful affirmative demonstrations. This term later became generalized as a modern reference to the hippie movement and the so-called counterculture of drugs, psychedelic music and art but also social permissiveness.
However, this slogan is the symbol of the picture untitled « The Girl Of The Flower » by the French photojournalist Marc Riboud. It's a press photography, taken during a protestation against the Vietnam War, in Washington, in the 21 of October 1967 in front of the Pentagon. This photo of seventeen-year-old high school student called Jan Rose Kasmir clasping a daisy and gazing at bayonet-wielding soldiers had been spread all over the world et became one of the emblem of th Flower Power . The Smithsonian Magazine later called it "a gauzy juxtaposition of armed force and flower child innocence"
In my own opinion the ideology of pacifism cannot be used in our days because people who make wars and violence don`t understand the language of peace. For me personally pacifism which is not passive, and accompanied by the relevant law of action, may be perceived positively in the range when it`s not passing the edge of national security in the broadest sense of the term and not damage its defense capacity and public order. But as many people don`t even know about the existence of pacifism sometimes we must answer on violence with rather cruel methods
ReplyDeletePacifism is a word difficult to classify, whether he is good or bad.
ReplyDeleteFirst, if we say " pacifism", people heard "no war" and imagine love, flowers and of course peace. A pacifist person can be considered as a neutral person, without opinion and who doesn't like conflicts. The word is good and positive but the person not really.
On the contrary, a pacifist person can be very involved in his opinion and can spread his peace ideas to the others, in hope of stopping the war, and sometimes it works ! For exemple in 1960, Hippies became very important and everybody knows them, with their symbol of "peace and love".
At least but not last, Pacifism also affects several domains like art with Andy Warhol or with The Beatles and their song " All you need is love".
To conclude, in my mind pasificm is a good thing when people have a good intentionas to proclaim love and try to make all the world happy and bring some comfort. Sometimes, Pasificm can't stop all the problems like violence, because their will be always people in conflits, having different point of view.
Pacifism can be a good thing in general since I strongly believe that war is always asociated with violence and terrible situations such as deaths and destroy of cities and monuments. However pacifism can be sometimes not very well controlled due to the fact that people are most of the time not in the same mood and/or can have strong disagreement or have different opinions. So in these latter cases it can be even worse. Absolute pacifism is utopian in the real word since different cultures exist among countries and continents and this concept can not be apply everywhere since, as an example, there is huge differences between people living in industrial countries and other countries underdevelopment. Pacifism can be in theory a good thing since it means that no violence no crimes no fights are observed between people living in the same community. In fact absolute pacifism can not be apply nowadays due to the fact that different feelings exist between people and modern life induces high pressure and many challenges between different levels of person having different responsibilities. Of course it will be wonderful to live in a country where the pacifism has been set up but I think that this situation can not be permanent. To the best of my knowledge, none of the current governments in the Wordl have been involved in this philosophy and it will be really impossible to adopt pacifism for a country to be productive and efficient.
ReplyDeleteCivilian based defense is also something that you can see in your dreams but it is far away from the real life. Unfortunately each human has is own character and intelligence and the thoughts of individuals are so different from one to another that a civilian based defense will be very difficult to set up. In summary pacifism and civilian bases defense are probably impossible to develop in modern life since too many challenges exist now. These concepts were certainly better adapted in the past when people was living just after the second world war.