English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Unless one construes peace in the spirit of domination a la Pax Romana, isn't the drive towards peace, in the anti-Orwellian sense, a death-drive?

Why do we value inaction, capstoning history, amnesty, and absolution? Isn't this just the working-class crying for another day off, freedom qua extension of the long-overdue vacation week in the Bahamas?

I've never enjoyed such a vacation. I'm trying to understand what peace is supposed to be like, but it seems either like a fatbastard fantasy (Pax Romana.. worker becoming leisurely class) or self-immolation, ultimate forgiveness, release from the material world...
i.e. death.

2006-08-18 07:00:36 · 5 answers · asked by -.- 6 in Arts & Humanities Philosophy

To save space I omitted the obvious fact that I am not advocating war in any hawk-like fashion. But GJ interpreting that Peace is nothing but dichotomous relation to War. That is not my point at all.

2006-08-18 07:35:16 · update #1

Meh. I suck at asking questions.

2006-08-18 09:06:05 · update #2

5 answers

First off, Pax Romana Was Hardly "Peace" It was characterized by innumerable invasions to German territories, skirmishes in Britain. and fighting in the east. It was a period of relative Peace.

In Fact by pax romana standards the current period of time can be called Pax Americana. Compared to WWI and WWII the current "wars" are nothing but insignificant skirmishes with casualties being smaller then .1% of WWII casualties.

So what MORE do people who demand peace want? Hard to say. But the kind of peace those people want -- would be unprecedented. And probably impossible.

2006-08-18 10:39:42 · answer #1 · answered by hq3 6 · 0 0

Peace does not mean a lack of action. There are peaceful actions that I do every single day that are constructive and worthwhile. There is nothing that I stand for that if someone disagreed with could only be resolved with me killing that person. If I never see that person, if I am in an entirely different place where I do not have to come into contact with that person, then that person is fine with me. The people that try and force their views on others, or manipulate people into viewing things in a certain light to their benefit are the people that need to be isolated, to whatever degree. Peace is not the lack of war, or the lack of conflict, peace is the willingness to exist in diversity although you may not agree with it all or partake in all of it.

2006-08-18 07:30:39 · answer #2 · answered by deep bass 2 · 0 0

Pacifism, like many "isms" is a way of intellectual neglect. Many see WWII as the expression of a deep crisis in Western Civilization. Things got confusing, and so instead of trying to understand things, ppl started to raise flags, like comunism, fascism, etc. The "isms" are used nowadays with more calmness, but its still a sign of intellectual lazyness.

2006-08-18 09:24:33 · answer #3 · answered by OrtegaFollower 2 · 0 0

The quest for peace is driven by a naivete that altruism sponsors.

2006-08-18 08:51:07 · answer #4 · answered by neverteatea1953 2 · 0 0

War, especially with the weapons we have is nihilistic.

2006-08-18 07:06:19 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers