By the time my brother Jerry was about twelve years old, he had shot up to a height of over six feet. His size made him a target of every wannabe bully in Chesapeake City. Jerry could have easily knocked out any opponent who challenged him, but he was and is a gentle soul who hates conflict. But what really did him in was my parent’s pacifism, which they based on what they considered biblical principles, especially the admonition to "turn the other cheek." They abhorred the idea of fighting back and taught all of us kids not to fight.
Well, I still remember being treated to the sight of Jerry the giant being beaten up by the likes of Larry White, a skinny, pimple-faced redneck kid who was one half my brother’s size. Larry methodically and rhythmically pounded Jerry’s head against the sidewalk and only quit when he got tired. Jerry, who had done absolutely nothing to offend Larry, stuck to his "Christian" principles, and eventually got up and staggered away.
But as everyone knows, that’s the way it is with dedicated pacifists. They won’t fight back even if it almost kills them.
And sometimes it does.
Pacifism can kill a nation, even such a strong nation as the US.
It kills by vitiating our justice system.
It kills by sucking the guts out of our military.
It kills by victimizing perpetrators of violence.
A killing radical pacifism, though usually unnamed and therefore almost always undetected, is behind the several travesties of justice which have recently occurred in our country, the most recent one being the prospective court martial of the Navy SEAL who punched out a captured terrorist.
For those unfamiliar with the story, SEALS captured one Ahmed Hashim Abed, the jihadist leader who helped kill, light on fire and mutilate four American non-combatants working in Iraq. During the take down, Abed was punched in the mouth. Now, along with two other SEALS, the SEAL who hit Abed faces court martial.
You may wonder why Abed joins the protected brigade of 9/11 terrorists who will be tried in New York City and Major Hassan, the Army psychiatrist who gunned down his fellow comrades in arms.
But the term "in arms" is the key phrase as to why there is a perverse protectionism for those who commit violence against our soldiers and our nation. For those inhabiting the left wing of liberalism, what I term "radical pacifism" prevails, and being "in arms" is against their idea of peace. Their reasoning goes something like this.
1. No violence is ever, ever justified.
2. If someone acts violently toward you, YOU are the problem. You either instigated the fight, or you deserved punishment for past transgressions or you hold some latent hostility your accuser rightly detected.
3. Violent acts are individual criminal transgressions which can and must be dealt with solely through negotiation and the courts.
In the radical pacifist’s mind, the precepts outlined above mean that armies are unnecessary accouterments of societies who are backwards in their thinking. Armies are the absolute acme of violence, especially since soldiers, sailors and special forces are actively trained in perpetrating violence with weapons such as guns, bombs and the like. Armies should become vestigial, rather like the "legs" found in some snakes--if they are to exist at all. Any law and order should never exceed the force of London’s "bobbies," who are virtually forbidden to use their night sticks.
It follows that those who are members of the military are automatically worthy of condemnation just by being in the military. Similar reasoning applies to paramilitary organizations deemed "unpeaceable."
Since the SEALS belong to a military organization, they are suspect; doubly so since one of them committed a violent act by punching a terrorist in the face. The SEALS are perceived to be the problem, not the antagonists they fight. So the SEALS, like brother Jerry, get beaten up.
Our present administration is in the grip of radical pacifism. The results of this insane view of human nature and justice are apparent every day as we see the topsy-turvy world it has created, in the case of the SEALS.
But it gets worse if one considers the broader context: The extreme politically correct, radically pacifist ideology has infected and distorted our administration’s attitude toward our own military and is at the core of our president’s foreign policy. Radical pacifism is partly what all the bowing and scraping are about.
While we all are required to live peaceably with all as much as is possible, in the meantime, parents with common sense–I like to think I had some small measure of sense–will not teach their children to allow themselves to be beaten up like Jerry was. They will teach their children that there are always predators who love to pick on the weak. And they will teach their children to fight back with everything they have if they are attacked.
These simple precepts about human nature and self-protection should apply to our national security as well. When our military is sent to fight a sworn enemy who is determined to annihilate them and us, they and we should fight and punch back with everything they have.
They shouldn’t have to let a Larry White beat their heads against the sidewalk.
And they should not have a leader who rescues Larry and blames them for the fight.