Here's a number of things I've written on the subject of peace activism:
If there's one thing I've certainly noticed, it's that pacifists
in general have no objection to enjoying the benefits of civilization
but're unwilling to take the measures necessary to defend it from
foreign and domestic barbarians. Such as the National Socialists, the
Soviet Socialists, and the home grown Socialists of the Democratic
Party. Contrary to their general delusion of virtue, pacifists are in
effect, moral and political parasites upon civilized society.
Peace in the real world is simply the absence of those, such as Socialists, who seek to deprive you, I, and our fellow citizens of our
own Life, Liberty, and Property. Real peace can only be achieved by the
physical isolation or outright elimination of those who seek to
subjugate, plunder and murder us. This can only be done through the use
of physical force. In short, true peace can only be achieved only
through the possession of superior firepower and the moral will to use
it.
The narcissistic trash that makes up the membership of the so called Peace Movement simply don't care whether you and your children live, or
die, or suffer under the yoke of an unwashed barbarian. They plaster
their cars with bumper sticker, carry signs, bang on drums, throw
Frisbees, and perform other useless rituals so that they can feel good
about themselves and show the world how morally superior they are. Never
mind that they openly deny the fundamental fact which is the foundation
of all valid moral law, that Human Life, life as a rational being in
control of one's own life, is the standard of all moral values, and
that those who'd damage or destroy Human Life must be removed from
human society, and if necessary be destroyed. The adherents of pacifism
have so inverted their own mental processes that they look upon the
perpetrators of mass slavery and mass murder as good and those who take
up arms to defend the society of consent as the most depraved evil.
Now there're some folks, who regard themselves as morally superior
beings, who question why the other bastard has to die. The answer of
course is that the other bastard is attempting to impose his will, or
the will of his leader, upon you by force. It's the act of coercion by
force that makes what General Patton called the other bastard an enemy. Peace is simply the absence of enemies. But they're some folks, who
pretend to be morally superior beings, who'd have us believe that
"peace" could be achieved by submission to the will of the other
bastard. In reality this is not peace, it is slavery. There're some
well meaning people, some of whom that I respect, who believe that there
are times that one can't have both peace and freedom at the same time. I have to disagree. Liberty is simply the condition of existence in
which the person is free to live his own life in accordance with his own
rational judgment. This does of course require the absence of some
other bastard who's attempting to impose his will upon the person by
force. In practical terms real peace and real freedom are inseparable. I
will go further is saying that to a civilized person, peace, freedom,
and security, are simply three words that can be used to describe the
identical condition, the absence of another bastard imposing his will
upon the civilized person. Contrary to what those who describe
themselves as peace activists would have us believe, and as General
Patton has ably demonstrated, the path to real peace invariably takes us
over the real dead bodies of those other bastards who insist on
violently imposing their will upon us. Unfortunately this process is by
no means a safe one. Let's take this day to remember those who died
on the path to real peace.
A rational study of the real world would show that a real state of Peace
is effectively indistinguishable from a state of Liberty and
Security. Peace, Liberty, and Security are simply three words that a
rational person uses to describe the same condition, the rightful
ability to live one's own life without coercive interference by others. A rational study of actual history would show that the state of Peace
for the citizens of a free nation is the result of the violent
elimination of the would be conquerors and their pet quislings. If we
rationally examine those who constitute the membership of the so called
Peace Movement we find that virtually every one of them is an open
advocate of the coercive subjugation of the productive members of the
Human Race. The occasional exception being a self blinded fool who isn't
paying attention to what they're ideologically in bed with. In short, a
"peace activist" and the "peace movement" are in fact enemies of Peace.
Peace is only an affirmative value to those who live in the condition of
Liberty, that's being rightfully in charge of one's self and able to
set the goals for one's own life. Peace can't be a value to the
subjects of a Totalitarian state. To the victim of such a
state, the ordinary worker who's bullied by a commissar, the inmate
of a slave labor camp, or the occupant of a darkened cell awaiting
murder at the hands of the local chekists, war, either an internal
uprising against the Totalitarian masters, or an invasion by an army of
liberation, is in fact the positive value.
Actions always have consequences. But other people pay the consequences
of peace activism.
I could go on about what I really think of Peace Activists but I'll keep
it short by paraphrasing Keith Richards: I don't have a problem with
shooting Peace Activists, I only have a problem with the police.
I stand by what I said.
