AT WHAT POINT?
We need to be concerned about exactly where, when, why and how pacifism becomes appeasement.
There is, to me, a very fine line across which one might easily pass without being aware of the fact that he or she has, in the very act of doing so, may have infringed upon the rights of others who do not think in essentially the same pattern and arrive at essentially the same conclusion.
To assume that yours is the only valid solution to the problem facing all of concerned is naive, immature and even foolish. Such a lone stance invites critical analysis, which your argument may or may not withstand in its formative state. If your plan has merit such attributes will be shown to best advantage when contrasting claims are made by others. To toss one's better trump card holdings upon the playing table area too early can be costly.
I quite often have the feeling that much political and social protest is mis-handled in this same profligate manner.
To often, far too often, elements of disagreement are given a shiny, but has hastily concocted coat of colorful holy glory and set forth for the ignorant beings who have not handled it, to be accepted without question as being Holy Writ or a sort. Nothing turns me “off” more quickly than a would this Holy Joe attitude.
Don't think, for one, fleeting and overly-pious moment, that you are the first or only person to ever really think about “Peace”, for instance, being better than - “War.” Given the words with which to do so, the small child on the side of the war torn roadway could tell you more about that thought, a thousand times over, than you can every concoct with all your special advantages. To march forth into public places with others thinking pretty much the same as you do, or even less in your modest opinion, is not so much a symbol of “valor” as it is of “vanity”.
How can we forget the pathetic figure of Neville Chamberlain deplaning in England after conferring with Adolph Hitler and knowing, at the time, he had given the dictator what he wanted in central Europe. He waved a piece of paper and said words about ”peace in our time.” He may well have been thinking of the legacy he would leave the world, perhaps, and it is quite different from what he had hoped it might be. He was thinking of the well-being of the very same people, Winston Churchill would lead into - and through - the war years. As so often happens in history, leaders sometimes see the term ”appeasement” as being the same as a “solution” but the chief synonym proves to be something akin to “temporary treatment.”
For the common good of the nation, we, as individuals sure we know what is in our own hearts. If you allow others to decide that important element is going to be , you are surrendering one of man's greatest treasures.
It is called self-respect, and you earn it. You do so by accepting responsible actions in times of crisis, rather than seeking paths which you may think will make it possible for you to avoid them.
A.L.M. December 27, 2002 [c-549wds]
