Pacifist response to Orwell. Construct an argument for pacifism’s morality, even in the face of unwarranted aggression.
Pacifism’s morality should be free from intolerance, irrational behaviors, and should not be susceptible to manipulation based on cynical ideas. Ideally, pacifism’s morality should not be based on the disdained rigid beliefs of power-hungry politicians who only rely on punishment and deception because they can bar the attainment of international freedom (Orwell, 1942). Therefore, in the face of aggression of world-renowned politicians like Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler, physical force is the best tool to counteract the influence of despotic governments (Orwell, 1942). This way, the homicide of innocent individuals will cease based on diverse conflicting moral constraints and considerations. The concept of moral pacifism depicts rather non-absolute war-specific principles that promote self- and other-defense to curtail further killing of innocent souls through modern weaponry on a large scale basis (Orwell, 1942).
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
How Orwell’s arguments about pacifism during World War II apply to other military conflicts. Are the arguments specific to evils represented by Hitler?
Orwell’s perspectives about World War II greatly relied on pacifism as the only solution to bringing the battle to its end. However, he believed that only rational-minded individuals who could reason with their rivals could appropriately apply fascism to end the war. Therefore, he believed in antifascism during the Second World War, a fact that led to wrangles between him and the liberal pacifist movement. Notably, Orwell’s arguments have been generalized to fit the contexts of various armed conflicts because he asserts that hampering the battle effort of a single side, then you will inevitably support the opponent (Orwell, 1942). Typically, Orwell emphasized the fact that we should employ the use of physical force in attacking the enemies because pacifism could only give the rivals excess powers. In most basic terms, he believes that adhering to the pacifist ideas have led to defeats in many historical wars experienced in the past. Following Hitler's actions, war is crucial in defeating evil and facilitating the establishment of global peace; hence, its inhumane nature should never be considered if the ultimate expectation is peace.
Orwell’s argument in the just war tradition
Orwell argues that the military strategies should cause little or no intrusive effects as they attempt to bring victory. He meant that war does not require destruction because one can always win the battle without necessarily fighting the opponent. The best possible course of action, however, is to destroy the enemy’s strategies and tamper with its alliances rather than directly engaging the rival’s army. This implies that the just war tradition promotes the attainment of complete victory by simply subduing the opponent without necessarily applying military force in the battle (Orwell, 1942). Therefore, the just war tradition requires that the generals of various states should protect their territories instead of harming them based on the deference to military leaders as pertains military issues. This implies that victory is possible if the commanders of various forces can understand when and to fight. If commanders can clearly understand the enemies both themselves and their enemies, then victory is possible as opposed to leaders who do the contrary who can only expect defeat.
The morality of pacifism in the war on terror, and the war on drugs
The morality of pacifism requires that leaders must embrace the mobilization of masses and sustenance of domestic, international, and the media if indeed they need to succeed in the war on terror. As part of a moral pacifism, they need to operate within the recommended ethical framework; specifically the criminal justice and the just war, to obtain the necessary support to win terrorism. Orwell's ideas greatly apply to this concept because the concept of just war allows for the use of instruments of national power against the opposing forces (Orwell, 1942). Therefore, Orwell’s concepts apply in the war on terror because it denies terrorists the legitimate powers but when they meet given criteria, then the US forces will intervene to give full support against the protracted war.
Reference
Orwell, G. (1942). Pacifism and the War. Print.
