Bin Laden

[Michael Bailey]

 Richard Ryan wrote:
> Proposition A:  Violence has never produced Peace.
> Proposition B: Non-violence has never produced Peace.
>
> If Props A and B are both true (and I think they clearly are)

how so?  Peace is the absence of violence.

If you mean that an unwillingness to initiate violence has never
produced peace, I'd disagree: the general reluctance to commit
violence - on some level it just doesn't feel good - is why we have as
much peace as we have.  People have to be stirred up, programmed from
outside or disturbed inside, before they will generally do violence.

if you're saying something like "one person expressing a general
dislike for violence is laughable" then to some extent I agree, but
isn't that somewhat of a straw person?

Nonviolence has a hefty lexicon, numerous manifestos, and lots of
competent practitioners.  It's a useful addition to the world's sheaf
of philosophies!

> then the
> only logical conclusion is that violence or non-violence has nothing
> to do with the establishment of peace. Which explain why the pursuit
> of justice (for example) yields better results than either the pursuit
> of violence or non-violence.
>

sure, let's go after justice.  whether you rule out violence from the
start or not, the pursuit of justice eventually will lead away from
violence!