I see. So while the rest of us would have been be physically fighting the British so that we (including you) could live in a country with liberty and justice for all, you would have staged a “peaceful protest.” :rolleyes:
We should all get on our knees and thank God there weren’t very many Americans like you around in 1776…
All right, all right, let’s have some facts here. Of the residents of the American colonies at the time of the revolution, only a third of them were patriots. Another third remained loyal to the British Empire to the bitter end, and the remainder were neutral. So the decision of whether or not to fight the most powerful empire in the world went well beyond valor and bravery; it was a question of whether you wanted to. And “the rest of the world” probably didn’t care too much about the colonists’ concerns; they just, like they always have, wanted to beat up on Britain (esp. true for the French, our biggest allies in that war).
Likewise, I don’t particularly care for violence, and I’d never even consider joining the military. If I were drafted, I’d point out that I’m not exactly soldier material (lotsa body fat, don’t exercise all that much, not particularly agile, not used to combat, armed or otherwise) and that I’d be better off serving in a noncombat capacity that feel within one of my proficiencies, say, typing, records management, or account-keeping. (This is hardly unusual; by one estimate, seven-eighths of the servicemen in Vietnam did these kind of mundane, noncombat tasks.) Before I’d even consider picking up the gun, someone would have to convince me that I’m serving a good cause…no way in hell am I risking my life to protect an unspeakably cruel dictatorship that’s at least as evil as the fanatical freedom fighters trying to take it over.
Yes, I’d dodge the draft if it came to that, and without the slightest twinge of guilt. “But Darrell, what if your country needs you! You have to defend your country!” Well, demonstrate to me that that’s exactly what I’ll be doing. It wasn’t the case in Vietnam (President Diem’s tenure makes Saddam Hussein look like a playground bully), it wasn’t the case in Iraq (Yeah, that absolute monarchy we saved really is a pillar of democracy, huh?), and it isn’t the case now…unless, of course, you actually see the logic in hunting for the Al Quaeda in Afghanistan instead of Saudi Arabia…you know, the nation they’re from?
So I’m a pacifist except when convinced otherwise. And there hasn’t been much to do that as of late.
And that’s according to John Adams - who couldn’t have been the most objective person under the circumstances.
Everyone just abhors violence, until they think they have a good excuse to use it. You could probably count on one hand the number of pacifists who do it more out of ethical concerns than fear of what will be done to them. Fighting back could win you the fight or it could make you get beaten harder for resisting.
when i was a senior in high school this chick in my choir decided that she’d had enough of me and my pretty voice and punched me in the nose and broke my frint tooth. i wanted to hit her back., real bad. but i couldn’t. so i went inside and called my daddy so he could make me a dentist appointment. so, ya, i am a fundamental pacifist. i think i could defend someone else though, like maybe my children if i ever have any, or my little sister. i hope so. 
Who are you calling a wimp? 
I can’t speak for other pacifists, but I am not particularly afraid of physical conflict. It’s true that my pacificism (or pseudo-pacifism) is not 100% based on ethical principles, but I would say that the most important emotional factor influencing my attitude is empathy, not fear. Since I feel terrible when people get hurt, I want to live my life in a way that minimizes the amount of pain that I inflict on others. As long as I’m not attacked and forced to defend myself I see no reason why this is not a reasonable goal.
-DP
I’m not saying that resisting violence because it would only hurt you in the end is a bad thing. No need standing up for yourself if it only hurts you in the end. Some call em wimps, some call em survivors.
I’m no pacifist, but I prefer violence and war as a last resort. Diplomacy should come first.
If it came down to it I would hurt someone, very badly if necessary, in self defence, but I couldn’t kill them. That would really bug me. If I were in a war I might be able to kill, but It would be under orders, otherwise I wouldn’t.
I think Ghandi was a great person and his peaceful protests were a very good example to follow. His ways were much more effective than the alternative, terrorism and geurrillaism. The Palestinians should have tried peaceful protests, but alas, it’s too late.
This is an anecdote I don’t believe until I see some kind supporting evidence. And It doesn’t mean a third were pacifists either. There definately appeared to be more support for secession from Britain than this.
I would have fought in the American revolution because when it finally boiled down to it there was no alternative. More and more taxes and an increasing stripping and trampling of rights. It was a legitimate reason to fight. I wouldn’t have Vietnam, Grenada, Panama, or in the Balkans, well, maybe the Balkans. They were pointless. And I won’t fight in or support action in South America if there ever were to be any fighting there.
So I’m not a pacifist, but non-violence is still the best.