Peace, at What Cost?

Someone recently wanted me to state that “peace” was my goal. It isn’t.

Sure, peace can be nice, but liberty is better.

After all, no one is more peaceful than a corpse.

Bad guys who want to violate you without risk to themselves want you to be peaceful. They want you to go along to get along, and let them do what they do. They don’t want you to fight back or defend yourself from them. Peace always depends on what someone else is doing. No matter how compliant you are, there’s no peace if you are being violated. So, peace isn’t really up to you.

You can, however, choose liberty. Exercising it won’t guarantee peace, in fact, in this Era of Authority, it will pretty much guarantee the opposite. That’s not your fault. You can’t let the bad guys set the tone for your life.

So, yeah, peace is OK as long as you don’t sacrifice yourself on its altar. It isn’t worth it.

Save as PDFPrint
Liked it? Support this contributor on Patreon!
Kent McManigal

Written by 

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
5 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
H. Rearden
H. Rearden
3 years ago

I don’t describe myself as anti-war or pro-peace per se because I am not a pacifist. If one is not a pacifist one is not anti-war or pro-peace because one believes that there are situations in which war is an acceptable or the necessary course of action. I believe if someone is bent on murdering someone the person who they are trying to murder has a right to kill them in self-defense and that killing in self-defense may very well be the only way they can prevent that person from murdering/killing them. This is why I am not a pacifist… Read more »

H. Rearden
H. Rearden
3 years ago
Reply to  Kent McManigal

I don’t agree with your definition of war. There have been wars fought that did not involve states. In the past and to a far lesser degree today in some places people lived in tribes. Tribes waged war against other tribes. Take for example North American Indians, although Indians have been described and they themselves refer to their collective groups as nations I have never heard people refer to Indian as Indian states. Prior to Europeans establishing permanent residence in America there were wars between Indian tribes. Some tribes were nomadic and they did not establish states. Thus they lived… Read more »

H. Rearden
H. Rearden
3 years ago
Reply to  Kent McManigal

I don’t think of wars as being good or bad but rather necessary or unnecessary. War is a great waste of resources and treasure and lives and thus should be avoided from an economic point of view if possible. There is the question of morality to consider. I believe that war is immoral unless it is necessary to defend one’s self or those in the geographic area that is under attack by an enemy or that has been threatened in terms of a declaration of war or statement that war is going to be waged on them. An example of… Read more »