"The fight against violence" or "The war to end war"

Amake · 11-24-2011, 05:41 AM

World War 2 was going to end all need for war forever, in case you forgot. In this thread we imagine ways to end war that aren't balls-in-vise stupid.

Let me share some of my personal beliefs with you. I think war is bad. I think violence is bad, and it would be better if people didn't hurt and kill each other as much. I think that's ultimately more important than any amount of socio-economic injustices. (Hi, Wall Street thread!)

Is that too big a dream, you think? Can people never stop being violent? Can we never change? Of course not, not if you keep up that attitude.

People like to bring up the fact that violence has worked in the past. Violence has the power to change the world. But now violence is facing its greatest challenge. . .itself! How often do we have to punch the world in the face before we figure out that we're really just punching ourselves, and as long as we keep punching we're just going to keep punching?

I was going to construct a clever metaphor here but I don't think anyone needs help to figure out that violence is never going to be the way to fix violence. We need alternatives. All I've got is for people to slowly grow to realize that violence can only perpetuate the cycle of violence no matter what shallow and short-sighted victories it may give and then try to find better ways. What have you got for me?

Professor Smarmiarty · 11-24-2011, 05:50 AM

So you'd rather the killing goes on in the background as people die because they don't have enough money to feed themselves or keep themselves healthy.
Socioeconomic justice is violence on gigantic scale. That is why people advocate violence for change. You need some violence to end the current violence. THen you can advocate peace. By advocating it now you are basically saying the socially and legally acceptable forms of violence we carry out now are ok because they are directed at poor people but violence against rich people is bad.

E: Also war and violence stem from socio-economic disparity. Fix them you also fix the cause of the vast majority of violence/war. Tada.

Meister · 11-24-2011, 05:51 AM

Quote:

"The fight against violence" or "The war to end war"

Please don't you start doing this too.

Amake · 11-24-2011, 05:59 AM

No I don't like that poor people are dying. But I don't think "ending the current violence" with violence means anything other than continuing to use the same violence against different people.

But by all means, elaborate on exactly when we should stop using violence. I'm not advocating any time frame beyond "as soon as possible".

Professor Smarmiarty · 11-24-2011, 06:31 AM

Remove socioeconomic disparity and the outstandingly major cause of violence and war is removed.
But in the short term saying we should stop "violence" is not tenanble and a position that trivilases the plight of billions of people and is deluded at best, at worst evil.

Amake · 11-24-2011, 06:40 AM

It works out either way, doesn't it? Ending violence includes removing inequality; removing inequality helps to end violence.

Professor Smarmiarty · 11-24-2011, 07:46 AM

But how are you going to end violence?
You said in the first thread that you don't think violence can fix violence, that protests shouldn't fix violence.
Is it just going to magically go away?

Amake · 11-24-2011, 08:00 AM

That's what we're here to figure out, I think I said.It's tricky. I don't expect anyone will be able to answer that today. If we can just get to a point where we consider if it might be possible to end violence, rather than assuming things will always and forever have to end in violence, that might be enough to begin with.

Professor Smarmiarty · 11-24-2011, 08:07 AM

Plenty of people have ways to end violence. That economic inequality gives rise to pretty much all violence is fairly well founded as is the malleable nature of "human nature" for those who argue its human nature to commit violence.
But you're ignoring that the path to economic equality involves violence.
Pelople have ways to end violence you are just ignoring them.

Like I can give you books to read and shit but they are all going to say we need to use violence to get to this point.

Amake · 11-24-2011, 08:22 AM

Not ignoring it as much as trying to think of something better. Like if you say we need to use violence and there's never going to be any other way, I'd say you're not thinking outside the box.

I get that you want to make everything better, cause that's what nice people do, but why can't we improve the ways we make things better too?

11-24-2011, 05:41 AM	#1
Amake Keeper of the new Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: A place without judgment Posts: 4,506	"The fight against violence" or "The war to end war" World War 2 was going to end all need for war forever, in case you forgot. In this thread we imagine ways to end war that aren't balls-in-vise stupid. Let me share some of my personal beliefs with you. I think war is bad. I think violence is bad, and it would be better if people didn't hurt and kill each other as much. I think that's ultimately more important than any amount of socio-economic injustices. (Hi, Wall Street thread!) Is that too big a dream, you think? Can people never stop being violent? Can we never change? Of course not, not if you keep up that attitude. People like to bring up the fact that violence has worked in the past. Violence has the power to change the world. But now violence is facing its greatest challenge. . .itself! How often do we have to punch the world in the face before we figure out that we're really just punching ourselves, and as long as we keep punching we're just going to keep punching? I was going to construct a clever metaphor here but I don't think anyone needs help to figure out that violence is never going to be the way to fix violence. We need alternatives. All I've got is for people to slowly grow to realize that violence can only perpetuate the cycle of violence no matter what shallow and short-sighted victories it may give and then try to find better ways. What have you got for me? __________________ Hope insistent, trust implicit, love inherent, life immersed

11-24-2011, 05:50 AM	#2
Professor Smarmiarty Sent to the cornfield Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: K-space Posts: 9,758	So you'd rather the killing goes on in the background as people die because they don't have enough money to feed themselves or keep themselves healthy. Socioeconomic justice is violence on gigantic scale. That is why people advocate violence for change. You need some violence to end the current violence. THen you can advocate peace. By advocating it now you are basically saying the socially and legally acceptable forms of violence we carry out now are ok because they are directed at poor people but violence against rich people is bad. E: Also war and violence stem from socio-economic disparity. Fix them you also fix the cause of the vast majority of violence/war. Tada. Last edited by Professor Smarmiarty; 11-24-2011 at 05:58 AM.

11-24-2011, 05:59 AM	#4
Amake Keeper of the new Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: A place without judgment Posts: 4,506	No I don't like that poor people are dying. But I don't think "ending the current violence" with violence means anything other than continuing to use the same violence against different people. But by all means, elaborate on exactly when we should stop using violence. I'm not advocating any time frame beyond "as soon as possible". __________________ Hope insistent, trust implicit, love inherent, life immersed Last edited by Amake; 11-24-2011 at 06:02 AM.

11-24-2011, 06:31 AM	#5
Professor Smarmiarty Sent to the cornfield Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: K-space Posts: 9,758	Remove socioeconomic disparity and the outstandingly major cause of violence and war is removed. But in the short term saying we should stop "violence" is not tenanble and a position that trivilases the plight of billions of people and is deluded at best, at worst evil. Last edited by Professor Smarmiarty; 11-24-2011 at 06:35 AM.

11-24-2011, 06:40 AM	#6
Amake Keeper of the new Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: A place without judgment Posts: 4,506	It works out either way, doesn't it? Ending violence includes removing inequality; removing inequality helps to end violence. __________________ Hope insistent, trust implicit, love inherent, life immersed

11-24-2011, 07:46 AM	#7
Professor Smarmiarty Sent to the cornfield Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: K-space Posts: 9,758	But how are you going to end violence? You said in the first thread that you don't think violence can fix violence, that protests shouldn't fix violence. Is it just going to magically go away?

11-24-2011, 08:00 AM	#8
Amake Keeper of the new Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: A place without judgment Posts: 4,506	That's what we're here to figure out, I think I said.It's tricky. I don't expect anyone will be able to answer that today. If we can just get to a point where we consider if it might be possible to end violence, rather than assuming things will always and forever have to end in violence, that might be enough to begin with. __________________ Hope insistent, trust implicit, love inherent, life immersed

11-24-2011, 08:07 AM	#9
Professor Smarmiarty Sent to the cornfield Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: K-space Posts: 9,758	Plenty of people have ways to end violence. That economic inequality gives rise to pretty much all violence is fairly well founded as is the malleable nature of "human nature" for those who argue its human nature to commit violence. But you're ignoring that the path to economic equality involves violence. Pelople have ways to end violence you are just ignoring them. Like I can give you books to read and shit but they are all going to say we need to use violence to get to this point.

11-24-2011, 08:22 AM	#10
Amake Keeper of the new Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: A place without judgment Posts: 4,506	Not ignoring it as much as trying to think of something better. Like if you say we need to use violence and there's never going to be any other way, I'd say you're not thinking outside the box. I get that you want to make everything better, cause that's what nice people do, but why can't we improve the ways we make things better too?