"Growing up in Europe where the memory of the WW2 was still very much alive, learning of its unbelievable atrocities and its human toll, I naively accepted as a truism that this experience will serve as a sufficient deterrent of any future war, that people will have finally clearly understood that no civilized, rational, not to mention empathic, beings could ever think of war as a justified collective venture."
"Though the call for pacifism as a personal ethical and religious goal is certainly an inspiring vision, something we should all ultimately strive for, bearing in mind the state of the world we live in today, the more urgent is the call for universal anti-war pacifism, its proximal goal being cessation of present and prevention of any future armed conflicts. This, I believe, can only be achieved by abandoning the very idea of war as an acceptable means of resolving international conflicts."
Universal anti-war pacifism demands cessation of present armed conflicts and prevention of future wars by rejecting war as an acceptable method of resolving international disputes. The memory of World War II and its atrocities emphasizes the immense human toll and the moral failure of war as a civilized, empathetic response. Pacifism is presented as the only viable moral solution, supported by pragmatic reasons favoring peaceful negotiations over armed conflict. The two primary counterarguments—self-defense and the charge that universal pacifism is unrealistic—are identified for direct refutation. The right to life is asserted as fundamentally violated by war.
Read at Apaonline
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]