...

Lately I’ve encountered more young Americans who identify openly as pacifists. Which, in the context of the many ongoing wars the United States has been waging senselessly for years—but most recently and most in the spotlight the war on Iran—could be read as a distaste for war, perhaps a mild disagreement with the idea or fact of war. On the one hand, it seem understandable that during moments of global militarism and upheaval, pacifism also gains in popularity by attracting those who feel alienated from the violence and enthusiasm for war. Without war, pacifism loses some of its salience. It hibernates within certain religious and spiritual traditions across cultures, but as far as secular pacifism goes, I’m not sure it can be said to exist outside of times of war. What distinguishes it from cowardice or powerlessness? Quite possibly it is indistinguishable from these other positions, and what matters more is how one displays that opposition. Is one a quiet, subdued pacifist? Does one haughtily condemn others who use violence or force as a means of self defense or self determination? Does one try to embody peace in their daily interactions, to the extent that they can?