Talk:Pacifism

Red links...
Gaaah! Red links! Red links everywhere! 16:51, 26 September 2008 (EDT)
 * So write some articles. I think those redlinks are all article-worthy, and I'm surprised some aren't articles already actually. Totnesmartin 16:53, 26 September 2008 (EDT)
 * Actually it's sort of suggested that if you create the link you should consider creating the stub as well: Help:Red links.--Bobbing up 17:30, 26 September 2008 (EDT)
 * Why do you have to type out your entire comment in the edit summary? it takes all the surprise away. Totnesmartin 17:39, 26 September 2008 (EDT)
 * I have this weird sensation of having had this entire conversation already today.  What I'm doing is following the RW policies. Help:Edit summary If it irritates people then perhaps we should review the policy?--Bobbing up 17:44, 26 September 2008 (EDT)
 * RW has policies?!?  A rmondiko V  User_Talk:Armondikov 17:47, 26 September 2008 (EDT)
 * Yes, and Mission Statements and POV and everything.--Bobbing up 17:49, 26 September 2008 (EDT)

Goering quote
I wantd to add this quote from Hermann Goering under Criticism: "voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country." but I thought it would be too much like an argumentum ad Hitlerum. What do you guys think? Totnesmartin 17:08, 26 September 2008 (EDT)
 * Well, it's not so much comparing it to the nazi's as just taking a quote on it from someone who happens to be a Nazi. On a related note of what could exand the article, would the Civil Rights Movement (and by that I mean Martin Luther King not some of the more "active" ones) count under secular or even pacifism?  A rmondiko V  User_Talk:Armondikov 18:00, 26 September 2008 (EDT)


 * I was going to add the Goering quote under "criticism" as a bit of snark aginst anti-pacifists - Goering said this, so anyone arguing against pacifism is a nazi, which isn't true. You could count MLK as a pacifist, deffo, but probably not Malcolm X. The Civil Rights movement wasn't so much about war vs peace as trying to end racial discrimination (although There's possibly an argument for counting discrimination as a form of violence). Totnesmartin 18:27, 26 September 2008 (EDT)


 * I was reffering to the peacceful methodology since MLK was inspired by Gandhi and that it's a fairly imporant event and movement relating to pacifism in the 20th century. As would be conciousous objectors during the wars, who were severely criticised so that would work well in a "cricits of pacifism" section.  A rmondiko V  User_Talk:Armondikov 21:58, 26 September 2008 (EDT)


 * Even CP doesn't really criticize pacifism, but I guess that means that it hasn't come to the attention of the upper echelon.Willis 22:13, 26 September 2008 (EDT)
 * Hm. Good point.   16:46, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

Hypocrisy
I added a section about religions that seem to promote peace but actually are pretty pro-war. No idea if it really belongs here, so feel free to move/delete. (Although part of the motivation was the stuff about Sikhs advancing ahimsa, when Hindus and Buddhists do the same and neither is particularly reluctant to war.) --Annanoon (talk) 15:12, 25 October 2019 (UTC)