|
April 14, 2003
A friend writes that her brother, a Professor Emeritus of Chinese History at the University of South Carolina, came across a student’s view of how to engage in discourse with a pacifist. ”…many of us will encounter "Peace Activists" who will try and convince us that we must refrain from retaliating against the ones who terrorized us all on September 11, 2001, and those who support terror. These activists may be alone or in a gathering.....most of us don't know how to react to them. When you come upon one of these people, or one of their rallies, here are the proper rules of etiquette: 1. Listen politely while this person explains their views. Strike up a conversation if necessary and look very interested in their ideas. They will tell you how revenge is immoral, and that by attacking the people who did this to us, we will only bring on more violence. They will probably use many arguments, ranging from political to religious to humanitarian. 2. In the middle of their remarks, without any warning, punch them in the nose. 3. When the person gets up off of the ground, they will be very angry and they may try to hit you, so be careful. 4. Very quickly and calmly remind the person that violence only brings about more violence and remind them of their stand on this matter. Tell them if they are really committed to a nonviolent approach to undeserved attacks, they will turn the other cheek and negotiate a solution. Tell them they must lead by example if they really believe what they are saying. 5. Most of them will think for a moment and then agree that you are correct. 6. As soon as they do that, hit them again. Only this time hit them much harder. Square in the nose. 7. Repeat steps 2-5 until the desired results are obtained and the idiot realizes how stupid of an argument he/she is making. 8. There is no difference in an individual attacking an unsuspecting victim or a group of terrorists attacking a nation of people. It is unacceptable and must be dealt with. Perhaps at a high cost. Lesson over, class dismissed.” Thanks to Professor Hilel Salomon for passing on this sound advice.
Posted at 04:44 PM by
 
|
I can only hope to have such an opportunity to apply this lesson in real life.
Posted by: AggieWhoop02 on April 16, 2003 04:21 PMInteresting - according to the description, the unprovoked attack of someone without warning is no different than terrorism - yet at least one person is eager to duplicate this. Does this mean that AggieWhoop02 is a nascent terrorist?
And what if the person objects that the evidence that Saddam support Al Qaeda is too unclear? Of argues that war *is* justified, but not yet (like the Catholic Chirch)? More importantly, what if the person struck does not retaliate with force but calls the police and has the rule of law cart your assaulting butt to the hoosegaw? As you are (nonviolently) arrested, (nonviolently) arraigned, (nonviolently) convicted and (nonviolently) fined for your illegal behavior, perhaps you will learn that their are very legitimate nonviolent answers to violence. They depend upon the *threat* of violence, but do not rely upon the use of violence in every case.
Posted by: Rick Stump on April 20, 2003 12:53 PMnaah...I still think you should punch them in the nose...
Posted by: Eric on April 20, 2003 07:40 PMToo bloody right, Eric.
Posted by: Keith on May 4, 2003 06:35 PMRepeatedly.Not to illustrate a point.Just because a nosebleed makes it so damn difficult to whine.......
Shalomkkll
Posted by: Lolita on October 11, 2003 09:13 AM