• @captainlezbian
    link
    English
    3
    edit-2
    53 minutes ago

    It’s resolution in my experience. My rage is the byproduct of belief made active. It is the choice every day to prove to those around me that a better world is possible and it begins with self fucking control

    I’m no pacifist but I’m someone who believes humanity can be better and needs to seriously think when utilizing the power to harm

  • Dragon "Rider"(drag)
    link
    fedilink
    English
    154 hours ago

    Avatar does this great. Aang is a pacifist because that’s part of his culture, and he’s the last one left to embody his culture’s values so he doesn’t feel he can abandon them. But that boy has some anger issues. Especially when the bad guys hurt animals.

  • @Skyrmir
    link
    English
    3310 hours ago

    I still like the Doctor Who take on it. “Demons run when a good man goes to war.”

    • @PM_Your_Nudes_Please
      link
      English
      147 hours ago

      I once played D&D with a paladin who basically followed this. He was an Oath of Vengeance paladin. For the unaware, OoV paladins often have zero chill. They’re typically something akin to Batman with magic powers. My goal was to avoid that.

      His oath had something along the lines of “Without the capacity for violence, pacifism is not a choice. Pacifism without choice is victimhood. I will choose pacifism whenever possible, but will not watch idly when people are victimized. I will ensure the victimized are made whole, and the victimizers know the pain they have caused.”

      Basically, he would try his best to talk his way through encounters first. He would give enemies every opportunity to back down. He had incredibly high charisma to try and persuade, intimidate, or deceive others out of attacking. After all, he was attempting to choose pacifism whenever possible. But if he believed that a bully was victimizing someone, the gloves came off and he channeled all of his pent-up fury into making the bully regret their actions. And since paladins use charisma to cast their spells, his smites were painful.

      The DM loved it, because it helped us avoid falling into the murderhobo trope that combat-oriented D&D players often fall into. It also gave him a chance to actually flesh out some of the NPCs who would have just been throwaway no-name combatants.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      208 hours ago

      Demons run when a good man goes to war
      Night will fall and drown the sun
      When a good man goes to war
      Friendship dies and true love lies
      Night will fall and the dark will rise
      When a good man goes to war
      Demon’s Run, but count the cost
      The battle’s won but the child is lost

      Nothing good happens when a good man goes to war

      But I also like the saying “If you want peace prepare for war”. War is not the right choice, but it’s seldom yours.

    • @CitizenKong
      link
      English
      11
      edit-2
      9 hours ago

      Yeah, although the Doctor is pretty hypocritical with his pacifism. Something which this quote sums up pretty well. He did kill several species after all.

      • @Skyrmir
        link
        English
        228 hours ago

        The Doctor doesn’t call himself a pacifist, he just detests violence. If needed though, he will absolutely blow your shit up.

        The other quote to go with that one was “Good men don’t need rules, you’re about to find out why I have so many.”

      • @WhiskyTangoFoxtrot
        link
        English
        37 hours ago

        I thought Rory was the good man. It’s been a while since I’ve seen that episode.

        • @Uruanna
          link
          English
          45 hours ago

          It is, that was the twist - the Doctor is not the good man.

  • @cowardsgfy
    link
    English
    -2
    edit-2
    4 hours ago
    • pacifism is cowardly when inaction enables bad actors.
    • not everyone values peace. never assume that just because you’re chill everyone else is too.
    • the paradox of tolerance is not a paradox.
    • humanity is what you make it. what do you want it to be? MAKE IT THAT.
    • don’t let the illusion of a peaceful society lull you into a vulnerable trance. plenty of past civilizations never saw their end coming.
    • never play fair with your enemy. once you choose violence, your virtues have been compromised. there’s nothing noble about it. it’s simply what has to be done, so do it effectively.

    we will never have the society we are capable of as long as we are caught in a tug of war between narcissism and altruism. as long as the narcissists are allowed a place at the table, they will undermine any attempt at utopia for their own interests.

    i believe the 21st century began an era in which the utopia that most considered a pipe dream became a feasible reality. we have all the tools and technology now to create a world in which no one suffers, not even the other species of this planet. to have that reality within reach, and to let greedy fascists, shallow narcissists, and religious zealots derail that future, is to make yourself no better then them.

    • @UnderpantsWeevil
      link
      English
      02 hours ago

      pacifism is cowardly when inaction enables bad actors.

      But pacifism isn’t inaction. It is action with the intent to do no harm.

      not everyone values peace

      The value of peace is social, not individual. You value peace when you know you have everything you want from the status quo. You embrace violence as a means of shifting conditions in your favor.

      But violence comes at a grander social price. Simply embracing it because someone else has only compounds the costs.

      the paradox of tolerance is not a paradox

      The question of a socially acceptable degree of tolerance is a difficult one to answer philosophically and even more difficult to implement as social policy.

      It is not strictly a paradox, but it is an unsolved problem.

      don’t let the illusion of a peaceful society lull you into a vulnerable trance

      The cost of violent action is what dissuades a violent response. People aren’t in a trance, they are taking a calculated risk.

      never play fair with your enemy

      Violating a social compact erodes trust. You reap a short term gain while everyone pays a long term price.

      “Playing fair” is about establishing a social compact that everyone recognizes as beneficial. Violating broadly beneficial norms means accruing more enemies with whom you feel compelled to play unfairly.

      the utopia that most considered a pipe dream became a feasible reality

      The utopian era ended with WW1 and the industrialization of modern warfare. The 21st century has seen wave after wave of new investments in warfare, while domestic improvements and social welfare advances have ground nearly to a halt.

      If there is a utopian future, it can only come with the abolition of international militarism. Otherwise, we continue to descend into generation after generation of escalating conflict and unchecked immolation of life and property.

      • @cowardsgfy
        link
        English
        -4
        edit-2
        2 hours ago

        But pacifism isn’t inaction. It is action with the intent to do no harm.

        sure thing, pussy

        violence comes at a grander social price. Simply embracing it because someone else has only compounds the costs.

        hitler needed more americans like you

        It is not strictly a paradox, but it is an unsolved problem.

        nah

        The cost of violent action

        the cost of non violent action is to let sociopaths win.

        Violating a social compact erodes trust. You reap a short term gain while everyone pays a long term price.

        we’re fighting for the future of humanity and all the life on this planet. that battle will be decided this century. you’re the one that’s short sighted.

        The utopian era ended with WW1

        STFU with your poindexter BS. you know what the fuck i mean when i say utopia. “uh akshually” just STFU

        just STFU. you’re almost as dense as flying squid

        • @UnderpantsWeevil
          link
          English
          32 hours ago

          The utopian era ended with WW1 STFU with your poindexter BS. you know what the fuck i mean when i say utopia.

          Buddy, you don’t know what you mean. These words have a historical context. They don’t just mean what you having bouncing around between your ears. Utopianism describes a series of real social movements that involved actual people organizing to build intentional communities. Its not just vibes.

          • @cowardsgfy
            link
            English
            01 hour ago

            sure thing, poindexter.

            let’s go ask 100 people in the street what they think utopia means.

    • Dragon "Rider"(drag)
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -53 hours ago

      Narcissism is left wing though. That’s why Fox News is always trying to brainwash you into thinking narcissism is destroying America. You didn’t fall for conservative propaganda, did you?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        42 hours ago

        Fucking lol. MAGA is chock full of Boomers ready to vent their bloodlust on their children and grandchildren. “Generation ME,” but yeah, surely not narcissists.

        • Dragon "Rider"(drag)
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -22 hours ago

          The narcissistic boomers are volunteering for the Harris campaign and participating in local government, so that they can maintain the welfare programs and the libraries and the ACA and the other things they need in their retirement. The boomers who don’t care about their own wellbeing are voting for Trump because they don’t care if he repeals the ACA or destroys their pensions. Narcissists are left wing.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            22 hours ago

            hahaha okay man. I don’t think you understand, ya know, a lot of things, but I wish you the best.

      • @cowardsgfy
        link
        English
        -1
        edit-2
        3 hours ago

        i don’t fox watch news so i have no idea what you’re talking about. i use the word narcissist in the classical sense, i.e. someone who thinks only of themselves and not of the whole.

        • Dragon "Rider"(drag)
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -2
          edit-2
          3 hours ago

          That’s not the classical sense, that’s the modern pop culture sense. The classical sense is an asexual. But luckily for you, drag was also using the modern pop culture sense when drag said narcissism is left wing.

          Fascist movements are primarily made up of submissives. People who want to be dominated. White men who want a big strong man to tell them what to do. Sure, a fascist movement will sometimes have a dom at the top, but half the time it doesn’t even need that. Source: the Crusades. That was nothing but armies of bottoms committing a genocide to please Mummy God.

          One in a million fascists is a narcissist. And one in a million narcissists is the leader of a fascist movement. But the other 999,999? They’re all on the left, because they only care about themselves, and the left is the side that actually helps people.

          You should want to have friends who only care about themselves, because they’ll want to maintain the friendship and have a good life with you. The friends you gotta watch out for are the selfless assholes. Those are the kinds of people who commit a genocide because Sky Daddy says so.

          • @cowardsgfy
            link
            English
            33 hours ago

            man, everything you just said is so far askew of reality, i don’t know where to begin to deconstruct it. suffice it to say the sky is not blue in your world and i don’t know what to do with that.

            • Dragon "Rider"(drag)
              link
              fedilink
              English
              12 hours ago

              When drag doesn’t understand someone else’s point of view, drag listens to them and uses empathy and tries to reason drag’s way through their worldview. Maybe you could do that.

              • @cowardsgfy
                link
                English
                -32 hours ago

                drag should learn to stfu. drag is probably 16. drag doesn’t know his ass from a hole in the ground.

  • @aeronmelonM
    link
    English
    910 hours ago

    I, too, and a pissedifist.

  • @Curiousfur
    link
    English
    3914 hours ago

    I struggle to consider myself a pacifist as the paradox of tolerance is a difficult thing to have to come to terms with and I’m fundamentally a flawed human being, but I so fundamentally hate the presumed human cost of “just doing business”. I am filled with a searing, incandescent rage at all times, fueled entirely by the hypocrisy of liberal ideology and the cruelty of conservatives. I’m burning up and trying to avoid melting down just getting through the day, surrounded by people who seemingly willingly refuse to understand nuance on hot issues or that complicated problems oftentimes require complicated solutions. I’m tired, boss.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2413 hours ago

      a pacifist as the paradox of tolerance is a difficult thing to have to come to terms with and I’m fundamentally a flawed human being

      Don’t think of it as a paradox - tolerance is a social contract, once you break the terms you’re no longer protected by that contract because accepting that would nullify the contract for all of us.

    • Flying SquidOP
      link
      English
      1513 hours ago

      The thing is, you can be full of rage and still be against violence. Expressing rage doesn’t have to be violent. People express rage in all sorts of non-violent ways, like writing or painting or sculpting.

      • @cowardsgfy
        link
        English
        12 hours ago

        be sure to paint your way out of a fascist dystopia.

        • Flying SquidOP
          link
          English
          12 hours ago

          What are you even talking about? Are you under the impression that the only way to take action is through losing your mind and raging?

          Controlling your rage allows you to act rationally.

          • @cowardsgfy
            link
            English
            12 hours ago

            i’m not talking about rage, although i do think anger is a great motivator. i’m talking about calm, rational use of violence as a means to an end.

            • Flying SquidOP
              link
              English
              22 hours ago

              Yeah, you’re right. What did non-violent resistance ever achieve other than liberate India, give people of color in the U.S. civil rights, free the Baltic states from the Soviet Union, end one-party rule in Czechoslovakia, topple the former Ukrainian regime and other things I could probably come up with if you gave me time?

      • @Curiousfur
        link
        English
        1412 hours ago

        My biggest weakness and most toxic trait is wanting to see bad people face consequences. That person weaving through traffic at high speeds without a turn signal, with no concern for the safety of everybody else on the road? Please drive off the road, crash, do something that drives home how selfish you are acting, and I hope it’s expensive.

        Politician campaigning on hate and saying that religion punishes ‘wicked’ people? I hope a loved one suffers some horrible disease and dies in pain.

        Vote for an anti-abortion law? Watch your wife or daughter die of something entirely preventable. Refuse to provide exceptions for rape? Do unto others and all that, you know?

        Nazi/christofascist/white supremacist? Worm food. Slowly.

        I fix things, that’s my whole driving purpose in life, and basically the only thing I’m particularly good at. I have never been very creative, I suck at writing , I’m not a great artist or sculptor or musician. It causes me so much pain and frustration to not be able to fix something, and so much rage to see people deliberately breaking things, doubly so when they delight in the suffering it causes.

        • skulblaka
          link
          fedilink
          English
          12 hours ago

          I call this the Paladin Perspective. I want to be a pacifist but I can’t in good conscience call myself that. Because I know that in order to maintain peace there must be not only the open palm of acceptance, but also the closed fist of justice. And I am perfectly willing to administer that fist to someone who has earned it. In order for peaceful folk to remain at peace, there must always be someone standing guard against evil who would seek to exploit them. This has been true throughout all of human history and I don’t exactly expect us to pivot now. So the world needs Paladins. It needs someone willing to wield violence, or at least the threat of it, in the name of Good. The police force is supposed to fill this role but they’ve fallen from grace. Religious leaders have filled this role before in the past, but they too have fallen from grace. Lacking either of those or a suitable surrogate, some people take matters into their own hands. Sometimes this leads to a glorious revolution in which power is seized from evil and the evil is ousted. More often this leads to a cell, in some fashion or another.

          So it bothers me, because on one hand, I dream of a world without suffering. A world completely without suffering, where no sort of guardian would be required. But I feel in my heart that that is impossible. So instead, where that dream should be, is instead a wish to punish wrongdoers. At the heart of things when I sit down and inspect who I really am, I want to hurt bad people. I want to punch nazis. I want to defend my people from Proud Boys with my right to bear arms. I want to beat the ass off every sitting US politician except for Bernie Sanders and I want to host a cookout for everyone with a net worth higher than $5M. These things invoke a sort of sick schadenfreude that I didn’t really know was in me, and it’s hard to square that with my desire for a free and safe world where no one has to suffer. I’ve been watching myself getting radicalized in real time over the last 8 years, and if I were someone less attentive to my internal state, I might not have ever noticed and taken steps to reign it in. Sometimes I feel it would be more morally correct not to reign it in. But I do no good to anyone in prison so I stay out of trouble.

          It’s just a weird dichotomy, wishing fervently for a world without senseless violence but knowing damn well we’re going to require some sensible violence if we want to make it there. I would hope that all those who choose violence in service of good would share my same desire that it not become necessary. I know that’s not true, but a man can dream. But what it comes down to at the end of the day is, folks who say “violence is never the answer” are incorrect. It absolutely is a solution, one that solves most problems in fact, it’s just the last solution on the list. I will make every effort possible to talk and debate and deal and wheedle and compromise within reason, but when it becomes clear that violence is the path forward, I’m not afraid of that path. Woe be upon he who stands in the way of progress.

          Does this make me a bad person? Does this make me no better than those I claim to oppose? In my opinion, which I respect, I’d say no. But truth is I don’t really know. If raising the sword in service of those who cannot makes me a bad person, then I think I’ll just have to learn to live with that. Because I can’t not do it. I will not stand aside and watch torture fall upon the backs of the innocent without meeting like with like. And if that makes me evil then I will stand tall for my own punishment when it comes due.

        • HubertManne
          link
          fedilink
          210 hours ago

          I feel your last paragraph. I could maybe write but I don’t have time to develop that decently. Research is my purpose but fixing things is how I get by. It makes me feel a bit like a fraud as I figure out how to fix things but don’t have talent in it like I have seen in some.

        • @WillFord27
          link
          English
          19 hours ago

          Slightly off topic, but I find it interesting that in two of your examples it isn’t directly the oppressor paying for their crimes directly, but someone (presumably?) uninvolved. Is there a reason for that? I’m all for karma, but it feels like this is still targeting innocents…

          • @Curiousfur
            link
            English
            3
            edit-2
            8 hours ago

            It’s why I feel so conflicted. It’s targeting those “the only moral abortion is mine” types in the only way they’ll feel it. How wise do you get an old Conservative man to understand how important abortion is without someone “innocent” (assuming they weren’t complicit) suffering from the consequences? I guess it’s punishment in a more Biblical sense than moral consequence, but they need to feel the level of pain they inflicted on people and then be met with the same “God’s plan” bullshit as they watch someone they care about suffer. I just don’t think they’ll ever understand otherwise

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      310 hours ago

      Pacifism doesn’t mean you don’t get angry. It basically just means that you don’t think violence should be the first option.

      Like, I’m a pacifist, but I wouldn’t think twice about using lethal force to defend my life or others if no other peaceful option existed. But I’ll always try non-violent approaches first.

      • @cowardsgfy
        link
        English
        12 hours ago

        that’s exactly it. i grew up naively believing in peace. i still do. i have tried every angle to make the world a better place in a non violent manner. i’ve exhausted my options.

      • @WillFord27
        link
        English
        28 hours ago

        Not to gatekeep pacifism, but I would really struggle to justify taking another human life, even when seeing red. It would probably take long enough to get over that hurdle for what I was trying to prevent to occur. I am a physically large man and could do a lot of damage, so when I’ve been hit in the past I’ve found other methods of de-escalating the situation. Not applicable in every situation. But it would be something I’d have to put a lot of thought into.

    • HubertManne
      link
      fedilink
      110 hours ago

      I am with you. Much of it is that I got this far in life without intentionally causing harm to folks. If I was younger in this day and age and im not sure I could go the distance.

  • urda
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1211 hours ago

    You know, Dude, I myself dabbled in pacifism once. Not in 'Nam of course.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    7115 hours ago

    I’d also like to see more imagery of Jesus smashing up the temple rather than him calmly sitting under a tree.

    • MentalEdge
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1715 hours ago

      It’s easy for religious figures to be depicted as tranquil. They are often all-knowing, and if not, have faith in something all-knowing. They can blindly believe that everything will be fine, even if right now things look bad.

      Because sky-daddy will take care of things.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1
        edit-2
        4 hours ago

        This is nothing to do with actual tranquility (in the sense of passaddhi), which is basically the opposite of everything you are describing.

        You don’t cultivate tranquility by not knowing “not caring” about worldly factors; you cultivate tranquililty by abandoning the five hindrances (covetousness, ill-will, sloth, agitation, and compulsive questioning).

        The Upanisa Sutta says that tranquillity comes from rapture and leads to happiness (the Samaññaphala Sutta repeats this). The precondition for tranquility is rapture, not “not caring about the state of the world”.

        Tranquility is a mind that maintains a spacious calm in the face of adverse conditions. It’s nothing like what you’re saying.

        Your view is harmful because you’re saying that someone without tranquility (with covetousness, ill-will, sloth, agitation, and compulsive questioning, without rapture), will be better equipped to deal with worldly problems, but the exact opposite is true: tranquility creates the space to deal with worldly problems more effectively. It’s harmful to advocate for hindrances because you claim that means people “care” more.

        • MentalEdge
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1
          edit-2
          4 hours ago

          We are using different definitions of the word.

          You explain what your definition is, which affects mine (being the dictionary defintion) in no way whatsoever. We have nothing to discuss.

          What you describe I would call stoicism, competence, composure or equanimity.

          Most simply, level-headedness.

          But not tranquility. Tranquility, by definition, being a state free of turmoil, cannot be maintained, if dealing with turmoil.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            13 hours ago

            Tranquility, by definition, being a state free of turmoil, cannot be maintained, if dealing with turmoil.

            Right, but it can and should be maintained while dealing with tumultuous events.

            • MentalEdge
              link
              fedilink
              English
              1
              edit-2
              3 hours ago

              Stoicism, competence, composure, equanimity or level-headedness, can be.

              Tranquility, not being a quality of the human mind, but rather a feeling or state of being, cannot be. The dictionary definition of tranquil (free from disturbance) is mutually exclusive with a mind that is actively dealing with concerns of any kind. Because then you are not free of disturbance, are you?

              You can remain calm and in control, but if there is force of any kind that you must interact with in any way, you cannot be tranquil.

              Can you get there by ignoring any current troubles for a moment, simply not thinking about them for a minute? Yes, but that’s still temporary.

              What you are claiming, is like saying silence is the ability to ignore noise.

              Or that silence can be “maintained” at a concert. That by refusing to let the music make you dance, you might prevent it being played.

              Can you still plug your ears? Sure. But you can’t listen, while doing that.

      • @HowManyNimons
        link
        English
        2114 hours ago

        The more I know, the less fucking tranquil I am.

        • MentalEdge
          link
          fedilink
          English
          5
          edit-2
          14 hours ago

          Well, yes.

          But by all-knowing, I meant the kind of view an omniscient god would have, accompanied by complete control of the universe.

          Essentially, religious figures typically get to exist, knowing for sure that everything is going and will go according to plan.

          It’s EASY to be tranquil, then. Even easier if you’re just a human, who genuinely believes such an entity exists.

  • Codex
    link
    English
    3214 hours ago

    I’ve expressed a similar sentiment as “it’s easy to be enlightened up on a mountain.” As in, big whoop to all the wise hermits who fled society to find peace: that’s not being above the problems of the world (except literally), it’s hiding from them and pretending that ignorance can be bliss again. The real work is maintaining peace and wisdom in the face of monstrous injustice.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      24 hours ago

      The absolute state of the religion-understanders in this thread.

      If you’ve never read one work about finding peace thru mysticism, why voice an opinion about it? I’m not here voicing an opinion on Finnish politics.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    8
    edit-2
    10 hours ago

    It’s complicated.

    As elsewhere stated, outward tranquility doesn’t necessarily indicate internal state. And even still, it is possible to exert some control over your emotions, it’s a skill that gets more effective with practice.

    I myself am a fairly tranquil person. This is likely precisely because of very non tranquil conditions growing up. I’d wager this is the case for most counterintuitively calm people. You learn not to succumb to the initial stress response of panic or anger: take a breath, look at your situation calmly, determine an effective course of action, execute that course of action calmly and deliberately. Anger clouds your judgement, encourages you to make rash decisions. Whatever your problem, tranquility helps you to solve it cleanly without creating new problems.

    Additionally, as your empathy grows, you have less and less anger towards individuals, as you recognize their transgressions are themselves symptoms of their own panic and anger. It’s hard to be angry at scared, lost, and lonely people clutching at ideologies designed explicitly to prey on their insecurities.

    I think it’s best portrayed in The Invisibles where, after spending the entirety of the story building up an epic ideological war between the forces of authoritarianism and freedom, we’re told “We lied. We are not at war. There is no enemy. This is a rescue operation.” Daryl Davis fights intolerance without anger towards his potential converts.

    So what does that leave us? Righteous anger at abstract ideologies and systems that ensnare insecure people into a web of hatred and vitriol. But anger isn’t useful against abstract ideologies and systems, they are cold and emotionless. Some might claim it is, but they’re conflating anger with resolve; anger can help maintain resolve, but it isn’t necessary. It is quite possible to be tranquil and resolutely opposed to tyrannical and hateful ideology. Personally, I think it’s more effective than visibly brimming with rage.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      0
      edit-2
      9 hours ago

      Well said. We don’t have control over a lot of things but we do have some control over how we respond to our emotions. Finding peace amidst the chaos is not easy. Creating peace from chaos is even harder.

      Helping others find peace might not be pacifism. I don’t know what you’d call it. I dont really care what you call it. But I do know that often the catalysts of change are not the most downtrodden, but rather those who have been empowered to effect change. Thus, change begins by overcoming yourself.

      Anger is a poor long-term motivator. What we are looking for is, indeed, resolve.

  • @Zachariah
    link
    English
    2615 hours ago

    Tempered rage might come across as tranquil, but it would be nice to have hints in the narrative. Reminds me of this line about Bruce controlling the Hulk: “That’s my secret, Cap: I’m always angry.”