The pacifists dilemma is parasitic: their perpetual inactions depend on the sustainable actions of others. Without surfaces to repel off, they just float untethered useless.

A relative once dodged the draft by starving himself. On the surface it seems like proud protest worth applauding. But take two countries having a war away, and it’s just another asshole in a developed country not eating. Means nothing.

So they critique the actions of others while simultaneously needing these same actions to exist. And of course, someone else has to carry their weight for them.

The pacifists I know make great enablers, evading interventions or discussions entirely. Eventually, this failure to intervene leaves the problems for someone else to solve; a cowardly out. They also notoriously try to dictate the mental health of others, while expertly evading theirs.

Passive aggressive acts against others are another great example of the pacifistic dilemma in action: the substance of their efforts must be extrapolated from passive inaction in order to exist. Silent treatment, discrete social slights, inadvertent humiliation, and the infamously quiet and sneaky undermining passive attacks included. Keeping in mind: passive aggressive is still aggressive. Passivity just allows the coward to inflict harm without bearing the burden of reaction or accountability within. At least directly disrespectful people operate with honesty.

Nothing is not something, it’s nothing. My opinion of course… Which is something. 🙃

Read Also:

Recent Posts

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *