F**k Peace

[mothandrust]

As one looks back through history is it not striking that leaders, all leaders, claim to be men of peace? Can you show me one who doesn't? The trouble is of course, it's their version of peace, peace on their terms. Whether Bush or Hitler, Sharon or Churchill, or Pope or Caesar no matter, all demanded peace. Peace through annihilation of opposition. Not acceptance of opposition. Never acceptance of opposition or alternative. They know best, or so they say.

Peace is a magic word, much like freedom or justice. They are words that appeal at an almost preconscious level – who does not want peace, or freedom, or justice? But, in themselves, without definition, these concepts are meaningless – what peace, and at what price?

In truth, let's face it, give anyone peace for more than 30 seconds and they want to switch the telly on! Peace on that level is boring. Of course, peaceniks and politicians will argue it means something more in relation to absence of war. Yet what that war might be becomes indefinable, from armed conflict to debt burden, or copyright or genetic modification or poverty or narcotics or environmental issues or... Do we make war on our environment through peace with our corporations? If so, that is no peace that i want. Give me jihad every time.

Jihad, now there's a word. In the west at least, has come to mean almost the opposite to peace. And, at their most fundamental that may well be true. Peace, in effect, signifying rest, acceptance, contentment, and jihad signifying struggle, change, advancement. None of which are inherently good or bad – they only become that when applied to particular situations.

Peace from such an angle represents death – as in, rest in peace – absence of change. And nothing can live without change: changing, as we do with every breath. So what is it about peace, or the idea of peace, that creates that warm fluffy feeling inside?

Here perhaps we must take a more esoteric, or conceptual, broad thinking perspective and ask do other species know peace? And to my mind the simple answer must be no. But then again, it also seem they cannot know not peace, or absence of peace. They only know what it is to be. Sure they know how to bring down prey or escape capture (at least until death), but as they enjoy their reward they know only life and survival. Being. Peace must be an anathema, yet, at the same time, inherent. Inherent in the joy of being, with no concern (or most minimal concern). The raw elements of peace, back beyond spoken language.

How did such a feeling become corrupted into its misuse today? One guesses, at a social level, lack of resources as humanity became the dominant (large) life-form and inter-tribal war. However, this is the social conception, where we're supposed to love our neighbours (and enemies) as ourselves, (because giving others peace was the surest way to find it) the preconscious stems back to satisfaction with life with one's needs met and no threat,

In our modern (western) world, theoretically, these needs are met (many, many times over, comparing to humanity in nature), yet, where is the peace, both internationally and personally?

Peace is an illusion, hankered after like a shiny new product – buy one, get one free. Except you can't buy peace, excepting the most superficial understanding (that of money (bribery) and violence (domination)). In any meaningful sense, that is of oneness and association with the Other, peace appears on neither political nor personal agenda.

Peace, in terms of hegemonic thinking and agenda, means eradicating dissent and building walls (law and war), to master challenge and annihilate fear. It is the peace of the psychopath, and doomed to failure – excepting through death.

Fuck Peace
i want change

[ephilution]

Quote:As one looks back through history is it not striking that leaders, all leaders, claim to be men of peace? Can you show me one who doesn't? The trouble is of course, it's their version of peace, peace on their terms. Whether Bush or Hitler, Sharon or Churchill, or Pope or Caesar no matter, all demanded peace. Peace through annihilation of opposition. Not acceptance of opposition. Never acceptance of opposition or alternative. They know best, or so they say.

Men like the ones you mention use peace solely as a buzzword since it works wonders through appealing to
the good morality of the people they direct their messages to. I think any person who's right in their mind wants to live in an habitat free from conflict and threat but ideally only when peace comes after collective happiness and absence of suffering. After all, what's left for people to fight for if they're happy?

As long as the concept of war serves as a tool in achieving political goals there will be no room for peace. At least not for the 'commoners', and while we still enjoy some measure of free will: the elite also.

Quote:Peace is a magic word, much like freedom or justice. They are words that appeal at an almost preconscious level – who does not want peace, or freedom, or justice? But, in themselves, without definition, these concepts are meaningless – what peace, and at what price?

In truth, let's face it, give anyone peace for more than 30 seconds and they want to switch the telly on! Peace on that level is boring. Of course, peaceniks and politicians will argue it means something more in relation to absence of war. Yet what that war might be becomes indefinable, from armed conflict to debt burden, or copyright or genetic modification or poverty or narcotics or environmental issues or... Do we make war on our environment through peace with our corporations? If so, that is no peace that i want. Give me jihad every time.

That is not real peace you're describing, at least not healthy or genuine peace. If someone prefers death, war and destruction over life, peace and construction than that person is seriously ill in the head, possibly brought forth by personal trauma or suffering. Unfortunately, history has shown that there are plenty of people who want to see blood, take the literally bloody theatre games of ancient Rome for example... This can be taken as an indication that society has serious pathological streaks. I suspect that the psychological mechanism underpinning this phenomenon is that people who experience pain and suffering find solace in the knowledge of other people out there suffering similar fate as theirs or even worse.

Quote:Jihad, now there's a word. In the west at least, has come to mean almost the opposite to peace. And, at their most fundamental that may well be true. Peace, in effect, signifying rest, acceptance, contentment, and jihad signifying struggle, change, advancement. None of which are inherently good or bad – they only become that when applied to particular situations.

Peace from such an angle represents death – as in, rest in peace – absence of change. And nothing can live without change: changing, as we do with every breath. So what is it about peace, or the idea of peace, that creates that warm fluffy feeling inside?

Peace is the idea of not having to struggle, not having to fear, not having to fight, the idea of living out lives to full potential without the possibility of someone screwing it up for you along the way. Stability of mind, heart and society. lives free from damaging interference from outside. Peace is inherently good so anyone with some sense of imagination can conjure up endless (poetic) descriptions of how society and man would be like if the world and all its inhabitants would truly be in a state of peace.

Quote:Here perhaps we must take a more esoteric, or conceptual, broad thinking perspective and ask do other species know peace? And to my mind the simple answer must be no. But then again, it also seem they cannot know not peace, or absence of peace. They only know what it is to be. Sure they know how to bring down prey or escape capture (at least until death), but as they enjoy their reward they know only life and survival. Being. Peace must be an anathema, yet, at the same time, inherent. Inherent in the joy of being, with no concern (or most minimal concern). The raw elements of peace, back beyond spoken language.

How did such a feeling become corrupted into its misuse today? One guesses, at a social level, lack of resources as humanity became the dominant (large) life-form and inter-tribal war. However, this is the social conception, where we're supposed to love our neighbours (and enemies) as ourselves, (because giving others peace was the surest way to find it) the preconscious stems back to satisfaction with life with one's needs met and no threat,

With the exception of young testosterone and ego driven young males everyone who has suffered during life longs for peace and rest. It's the natural attractor everyone mature enough identifies with. If one longs for war than that goes to show that government sponsored mindcontrol or just a psychopathic mindset has one in its grip.

Quote:In our modern (western) world, theoretically, these needs are met (many, many times over, comparing to humanity in nature), yet, where is the peace, both internationally and personally?

Peace is an illusion, hankered after like a shiny new product – buy one, get one free. Except you can't buy peace, excepting the most superficial understanding (that of money (bribery) and violence (domination)). In any meaningful sense, that is of oneness and association with the Other, peace appears on neither political nor personal agenda.

Indeed, peace is an illusion as long as there is suffering and people are in sway of their ego and not their true self. Listen to Michael Tsarion, he very aptly spells out the reasons why there's so much unhappiness and misery in the world. Most people live inauthentic lives, where your life is being lived by external agents instead of you living your life yourself, and the guilt complex people take on because of this is the root of a the bulk of the suffering of the world Tsarion contends. See red ice radio for interesting and enlightening interviews of Tsarion.

Quote:Peace, in terms of hegemonic thinking and agenda, means eradicating dissent and building walls (law and war), to master challenge and annihilate fear. It is the peace of the psychopath, and doomed to failure – excepting through death.

Fuck Peace
i want change

This statement seems to suggest that change is not brought about during times of peace. This in turn implies that change is brought about by a state opposing or conjugating peace, which is war. Although war brings about many changes I cannot bring myself to believing that a state of war is the sole agent responsible for change of the world/society. Surely history is replete with examples of a changing society without the interference of war. We only have to look at the endeavor of science for instance. Although I won't deny that great leaps of change or 'progress' may be achieved during times of war. You only have to look at the development of (arms)technology to help convince you of this contention.

Peace brought about by war can never be true peace. It's like someone constantly screeching and screaming in your face to stay at ease. How can you be so when someone is blaring in your face the whole fucking time? Peace by conquest is in illusion indeed. Peace by natural emergence not.

Cheers for the thought-provoking essay mothandrust...

[mothandrust]

thanks ephilution for your time and thoughtful comments - i suspect we are not too far apart in our thinking or motivation - just expression. i can't really disagree with any of your comments but i would like to make a few observation and perhaps clarifications (and perhaps justifications) given what your comments have sparked in my thinking.

i suppose you could say that the sub-plot to my post is questioning how "peace" is used and what it actually means, with the idea of showing that peace as a notion, as used by authority, is impossible and that personal peace (that engendered by removing personal conflicts) comes from within (and that i want nothing to do with the peace authority wants to impose).

Quote:Peace is the idea of not having to struggle, not having to fear, not having to fight, the idea of living out lives to full potential without the possibility of someone screwing it up for you along the way. Stability of mind, heart and society. lives free from damaging interference from outside. Peace is inherently good so anyone with some sense of imagination can conjure up endless (poetic) descriptions of how society and man would be like if the world and all its inhabitants would truly be in a state of peace.

well put! accepted. sounds a long way from our society though - and the direction it's heading in.

Quote:With the exception of young testosterone and ego driven young males everyone who has suffered during life longs for peace and rest. It's the natural attractor everyone mature enough identifies with. If one longs for war than that goes to show that government sponsored mindcontrol or just a psychopathic mindset has one in its grip.

can't argue against that, except to say "young males" may be simplistic - i think we all have elements of such in us, and i don't think anyone is entirely male or female.

Quote:Indeed, peace is an illusion as long as there is suffering and people are in sway of their ego and not their true self. Listen to Michael Tsarion, he very aptly spells out the reasons why there's so much unhappiness and misery in the world. Most people live inauthentic lives, where your life is being lived by external agents instead of you living your life yourself, and the guilt complex people take on because of this is the root of a the bulk of the suffering of the world Tsarion contends. See red ice radio for interesting and enlightening interviews of Tsarion.

i've seen Tsarion recommended a few times so i'll check him out - thanks (although i expect i'll find myself agreeing with him, and i prefer to look for challenges, rather than justification (one learns more through criticism than flattery).

Quote:

Quote:Peace, in terms of hegemonic thinking and agenda, means eradicating dissent and building walls (law and war), to master challenge and annihilate fear. It is the peace of the psychopath, and doomed to failure – excepting through death.

Fuck Peace
i want change

This statement seems to suggest that change is not brought about during times of peace. This in turn implies that change is brought about by a state opposing or conjugating peace, which is war. Although war brings about many changes I cannot bring myself to believing that a state of war is the sole agent responsible for change of the world/society. Surely history is replete with examples of a changing society without the interference of war. We only have to look at the endeavor of science for instance. Although I won't deny that great leaps of change or 'progress' may be achieved during times of war. You only have to look at the development of (arms)technology to help convince you of this contention.

Peace brought about by war can never be true peace. It's like someone constantly screeching and screaming in your face to stay at ease. How can you be so when someone is blaring in your face the whole fucking time? Peace by conquest is in illusion indeed. Peace by natural emergence not.

i see what you mean, re absence of change in times of peace but that was not my intention - i suppose its because i'm trying to think of peace (rest) and change (motion/agitation) in terms of theoretical absolutes - i accept one must have balance. And you're right, society is full of magnificent scientific discoveries that came about through imagination and contemplation, not war (but oh how often have they then been turned to war)(i'm not a Luddite).

And upon your last point i think we are also agreed.

(you wouldn't believe how long this post has taken me - getting to grips with the quoting format (not really used it before) but i'm sure a useful tool for the future.)

all the best,

jj

[Typhoid]

Peace does not, and can not exist in our world.

It is in our very animal nature, as men, to constantly seek power. There will always be a war, and there will always be an enemy. No matter what we do, no matter who we befriend, there will always be an enemy. Plato had it right.

Quote:Only the dead have seen the end of war

- typhoid

[mothandrust]

Quote:Peace does not, and can not exist in our world.

actually, regardless of all the old bollocks i wrote above, peace is quite simple

it is a state of mind

and it comes from removing conflicts

[monkeytribe23]

peace implies war?

[mothandrust]

Quote:peace implies war?

well, if you're going to try and impose your peace on me then it must mean war :wink: