Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Pacifists versus Militarists, who would win?

Page 1 of 2 [ 18 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

03 May 2011, 12:53 pm

Here's a hypothetical situation: you have a group of pacifists and a group of militarists. In hyper-simplified form, the pacifists arbitrarily and absolutely want peace and the militarists arbitrarily and absolutely want war. If the militarists went to war with the pacifists, who would win?

Now, let's say that the pacifists don't actually care about peace so much as they care about having some high sounding ideology to bludgeon the militarists with so as to posture themselves as superior in their own minds. If the militarists went to war with the "pacifists" would the "pacifists" maintain their stance on pacifism or would they throw out their ideology of posturing in favor of defending themselves?



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

03 May 2011, 12:56 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Here's a hypothetical situation: you have a group of pacifists and a group of militarists. In hyper-simplified form, the pacifists arbitrarily and absolutely want peace and the militarists arbitrarily and absolutely want war. If the militarists went to war with the pacifists, who would win?

Now, let's say that the pacifists don't actually care about peace so much as they care about having some high sounding ideology to bludgeon the militarists with so as to posture themselves as superior in their own minds. If the militarists went to war with the "pacifists" would the "pacifists" maintain their stance on pacifism or would they throw out their ideology of posturing in favor of defending themselves?


the Warriors would wipe out the pacifist yellow bellies in a day.

ruveyn



JakobVirgil
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2011
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,744
Location: yes

03 May 2011, 1:11 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Here's a hypothetical situation: you have a group of pacifists and a group of militarists. In hyper-simplified form, the pacifists arbitrarily and absolutely want peace and the militarists arbitrarily and absolutely want war. If the militarists went to war with the pacifists, who would win?

Now, let's say that the pacifists don't actually care about peace so much as they care about having some high sounding ideology to bludgeon the militarists with so as to posture themselves as superior in their own minds. If the militarists went to war with the "pacifists" would the "pacifists" maintain their stance on pacifism or would they throw out their ideology of posturing in favor of defending themselves?


there is no conflict here. the warriors could just fight each other and the pacifist could plant poppies for their graves.


_________________
?We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots??

http://jakobvirgil.blogspot.com/


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

03 May 2011, 3:25 pm

JakobVirgil wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Here's a hypothetical situation: you have a group of pacifists and a group of militarists. In hyper-simplified form, the pacifists arbitrarily and absolutely want peace and the militarists arbitrarily and absolutely want war. If the militarists went to war with the pacifists, who would win?

Now, let's say that the pacifists don't actually care about peace so much as they care about having some high sounding ideology to bludgeon the militarists with so as to posture themselves as superior in their own minds. If the militarists went to war with the "pacifists" would the "pacifists" maintain their stance on pacifism or would they throw out their ideology of posturing in favor of defending themselves?


there is no conflict here. the warriors could just fight each other and the pacifist could plant poppies for their graves.


Warriors use the bodies of pacifists for target practice.

ruveyn



Vexcalibur
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,398

03 May 2011, 4:46 pm

has been done before: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peloponnesian_War


_________________
.


Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

03 May 2011, 4:50 pm

Vexcalibur wrote:
has been done before: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peloponnesian_War


Athenians? Pacifists? :lmao:


_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do


Vexcalibur
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,398

03 May 2011, 4:54 pm

Yeah I know, but I have always liked the contrast between them and wanted to make the thread more entertaining than the silly question.


_________________
.


Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

03 May 2011, 4:58 pm

Vexcalibur wrote:
Yeah I know, but I have always liked the contrast between them and wanted to make the thread more entertaining than the silly question.


lol fair enough. I'm with JV though, they'll be there to plant the poppies on their graves [militarists], as it always goes, except for those of them murdered in cold blood


_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do


blunnet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Apr 2011
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,053

03 May 2011, 5:12 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Here's a hypothetical situation: you have a group of pacifists and a group of militarists. In hyper-simplified form, the pacifists arbitrarily and absolutely want peace and the militarists arbitrarily and absolutely want war. If the militarists went to war with the pacifists, who would win?

Now, let's say that the pacifists don't actually care about peace so much as they care about having some high sounding ideology to bludgeon the militarists with so as to posture themselves as superior in their own minds. If the militarists went to war with the "pacifists" would the "pacifists" maintain their stance on pacifism or would they throw out their ideology of posturing in favor of defending themselves?

Hypothetical situation: Do the pacifists have allies and do the militarists have other allies? The most agressive, strongest and intelligent group or side will win, not much to do with ideology, next question?



iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

03 May 2011, 5:33 pm

blunnet wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Here's a hypothetical situation: you have a group of pacifists and a group of militarists. In hyper-simplified form, the pacifists arbitrarily and absolutely want peace and the militarists arbitrarily and absolutely want war. If the militarists went to war with the pacifists, who would win?

Now, let's say that the pacifists don't actually care about peace so much as they care about having some high sounding ideology to bludgeon the militarists with so as to posture themselves as superior in their own minds. If the militarists went to war with the "pacifists" would the "pacifists" maintain their stance on pacifism or would they throw out their ideology of posturing in favor of defending themselves?

Hypothetical situation: Do the pacifists have allies and do the militarists have other allies? The most agressive, strongest and intelligent group or side will win, not much to do with ideology, next question?


Nope, this is simplistic: The militarists declare war on the pacifists.



leejosepho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,011
Location: 200 miles south of Little Rock

03 May 2011, 10:54 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Here's a hypothetical situation: you have a group of pacifists and a group of militarists. In hyper-simplified form, the pacifists arbitrarily and absolutely want peace and the militarists arbitrarily and absolutely want war. If the militarists went to war with the pacifists, who would win?

The militarists wanting war would lose altogether because there would be no war. At best, there would only be a massacre.

iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Now, let's say that the pacifists don't actually care about peace so much as they care about having some high sounding ideology ...
If the militarists went to war with the "pacifists" would the "pacifists" maintain their stance on pacifism or would they throw out their ideology of posturing in favor of defending themselves?

The armament-free pacifists would likely just run like hell and make things more interesting for the militarists.


_________________
I began looking for someone like me when I was five ...
My search ended at 59 ... right here on WrongPlanet.
==================================


Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

03 May 2011, 11:00 pm

If militarists/war hawks/'x race' trash fools/whatever decided to declare war on pacifists it would be cold blooded murder. And since the voices of reason would be removed from the world, or go into hiding (more likely), they would soon turn their blood lust on each-other, leaving the world to people not interested in Antiquity-style morality. So, the end result would probably be peace on Earth, until the Pacifists start having kids, mistreating a few of them (intentionally or unintentionally, or only in the eyes of the child), and leaving the new generation with many individuals with pent up childhood rage to take out on others, and thus the cycle would continue until nuclear weapons come out. Unless nuclear weapons were used in the beginning, in which case the militarist factions will have a grand old time killing each-other for mouthfuls of non-irradiated water. Look at my signature quote from Thomas Hobbes. That would be the world they would be left with


_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do


Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,903

03 May 2011, 11:04 pm

It depends. If the militarists are technological simpletons who have only invented Muskets and the Pacificists are able to enclose themselves in a bullet-proof force field, than a stalemate could ensure depending on Food supplies.


_________________
http://www.voterocky.org/


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

03 May 2011, 11:08 pm

Master_Pedant wrote:
It depends. If the militarists are technological simpletons who have only invented Muskets and the Pacificists are able to enclose themselves in a bullet-proof force field, than a stalemate could ensure depending on Food supplies.


The militarists include the engineers who design, invent and implement the weapons. I am a militarist. I spent ten years designing and testing weapons of mass destruction. Some of my babies (cruise missiles) have killed thousands so indirectly I have blood on my hands up to my armpits..

The arms makers are just as much militarists as the warriors. John von Neuman the most brilliant mathematician of the 20th century was a militarist. So was Edward Teller. And so was Richard Feynman. In his younger days he helped make nuclear bombs for destroying hundreds of thousands of people.


ruveyn



Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,903

03 May 2011, 11:11 pm

ruveyn wrote:
Master_Pedant wrote:
It depends. If the militarists are technological simpletons who have only invented Muskets and the Pacificists are able to enclose themselves in a bullet-proof force field, than a stalemate could ensure depending on Food supplies.


The militarists include the engineers who design, invent and implement the weapons. I am a militarist. I spent ten years designing and testing weapons of mass destruction. Some of my babies (cruise missiles) have killed thousands so indirectly I have blood on my hands up to my armpits..

The arms makers are just as much militarists as the warriors. John von Neuman the most brilliant mathematician of the 20th century was a militarist. So was Edward Teller. And so was Richard Feynman. In his younger days he helped make nuclear bombs for destroying hundreds of thousands of people.


ruveyn


The problem is that Iamnotaparakeet isn't talking about existing pacificists and militarists, he's talking about hypothetical ones. And, hypothetically, the pacificists could be a Vulcan-like society that's emerged in it's present state after centuries of a militaristic ethos run amok and have had time to develop technology to thwart militaristic advances. The militarists could be completely different.


_________________
http://www.voterocky.org/


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

03 May 2011, 11:14 pm

Master_Pedant wrote:

The problem is that Iamnotaparakeet isn't talking about existing pacificists and militarists, he's talking about hypothetical ones. And, hypothetically, the pacificists could be a Vulcan-like society that's emerged in it's present state after centuries of a militaristic ethos run amok and have had time to develop technology to thwart militaristic advances. The militarists could be completely different.


Maybe so, but they would still stomp the yellow belly pacifists into jelly.

ruveyn