Pacifism: A Critical Perspective devry tutorcom essay help essays

“If we had neither weapons nor soldiers, what would we do if an enemy tried to conquer us,” asks Liane Ellison Norman in her essay, Nonviolent Civilian Defense. “What would we do if our government suspended civil liberties, imprisoned, tortured and executed people like us?” (McCarthy, ed. 189). Advocating the pacifist principle, Norman goes on to contend that the modern state does not need a conventional army to protect itself. Nonviolent defense strategy, Norman goes on to argue, provides an effective defense mechanism that surpasses that of conventional armies, the cause of so much chaos and destruction throughout history. Relying on the principle that the “conquer is meaningless unless the conqueror is able to govern,” and evoking the beliefs and practices of Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Norman and other pacifists argue that the methods of nonviolent civil disobedience “strikes, marches, sit-ins, etc.” can replace modern warfare. It is therefore argued that the use of violence by the state, under any circumstances, is unethical and counterproductive.”