“While it can seem noble enough when the stakes are low, pacifism is ultimately nothing more than a willingness to die, and to let others die, at the pleasure of the world’s thugs,” Sam Harris said in 2004.
Before I begin my criticism, let me start by defining my terms since there are many variations of pacifism, and many people (notably on our Quaker campus) will identify themselves as pacifists. When I speak about “pacifism,” I am referring to the belief that “there are no moral grounds which can justify resorting to war,” as Brian Orend wrote in his book “War and International Justice: A Kantian Perspective.” This philosophy is in opposition to Just War Theory, which holds that resorting to war is sometimes morally justified. For the purposes of this piece, if you believe that war can ever be justified — you are not a pacifist.
So what’s wrong with a principled opposition to warfare in all cases? Firstly, it is not realistic; it is idealistic. Aggression cannot always be pacified by nonviolent means. While we should certainly recognize and honor the example set by MLK Jr. and Gandhi, we should also note that their movements were successful because those they opposed were not wholly unscrupulous. It is trivially easy to imagine enemies less benevolent than the Americans or the British of the 20th century. In the face of unyielding aggression (the Nazis come to mind), pacifism is ineffective at best and suicidal at worst (just ask the Confessional Church or the White Rose members).
Secondly, pacifism actually rewards aggression. If A invades B, and B is not allowed to use lethal force if necessary to defend his or herself, B risks losing everything (except his or her precious principles of pacifism) while A loses nothing. In fact, A gains whatever he or she desired from B in the first place. Pacifists would have us believe that it is important to allow such rights-violations to take place (instead of ever resorting to war to defend B) — and they apparently see no problem with teaching A that his or her aggression can be rewarded.
No one denies that we have an obligation to avoid war whenever possible. However, we also have an obligation to uphold and protect everyone’s right not to be harmed. If you believe in protecting against human rights abuses in all cases, you should reject pacifism and embrace Just War Theory.
