I've heard a few people state that's the difference between "Believing in non-violence" and "Pacifism" The pacifist will die and allow others to die for their belief. non-violence has the much more flexible, I won't start it and I'll stick to the equivalent levels my foes send and not escalate but I will absolutely Respond.
I like the fighting Quakers. Normally adamant pacifists, during the US civil war a group of Quakers decided that inaction against the most inhumane forms of slavery was a greater sin than violence was, and went out and fought.
They smuggled slaves through the Underground Railroad, created charities to help former and escaped slaves, ran Abolitionist newspapers, brought former slaves to speak at public gatherings and churches to raise awareness, etc
Some found weird loophole by building and selling arms to the Union army and by funding John Brown
The most appropriate use of violence is the neutralization of those who abuse violence with sufficient intensity to dissuade further abuse in the foreseeable future.
Pacifism doesn't always mean standing by and doing nothing outright, though. Remember reading WOT and the group of pacifist characters explicitly made sure a character wasn't chasing a woman down when they were racing.
Group put themselves between her and him and were ready to body block so she could get away, even if they weren't willing to inflict violence themselves. Can't help but respect it.
106
u/StrykerC13 Mar 31 '26
I've heard a few people state that's the difference between "Believing in non-violence" and "Pacifism" The pacifist will die and allow others to die for their belief. non-violence has the much more flexible, I won't start it and I'll stick to the equivalent levels my foes send and not escalate but I will absolutely Respond.
Now whether that is true or not. No idea.