There's no reason to stop enforcing laws. Arrests need not be violent, at least more than a bare minimum. I think that even to a pacifist, there's a difference between a small (and minimized) amount of force used in law enforcement and a military action. While I don't support violence at any scale, it becomes a more case-by-case basis as you drop down to individuals. Some people are dangerous wihout their being able to help it. Other people cannot be brought to justice without some small quantity of force, or at least the implication of it.
I can understand why you would think that applies to the larger scales as well, and I don't have arguments that could seriously attack that belief. It certainly is consistent with the historical record.
I diverge from absolute pacifism, you're right. This is not consistent with an absolute ban on all use of force in all situations. My reasoning is that it is much easier to gauge the concequences of one's actions; while a war ripples throughout history in waves that nobody could forsee all the concequences of, small crimes are much more likely to be basically isolated incidents. Basic non-violence is still important. That which can be solved without force should be, and we must make as much of an attempt as possible before resorting to violence.
Of course you don't hear about wars that don't happen. Where would you hear about them? The only example that even appears on the list would be Tibet, and the jury's still out on that one.
Jester
I can understand why you would think that applies to the larger scales as well, and I don't have arguments that could seriously attack that belief. It certainly is consistent with the historical record.
I diverge from absolute pacifism, you're right. This is not consistent with an absolute ban on all use of force in all situations. My reasoning is that it is much easier to gauge the concequences of one's actions; while a war ripples throughout history in waves that nobody could forsee all the concequences of, small crimes are much more likely to be basically isolated incidents. Basic non-violence is still important. That which can be solved without force should be, and we must make as much of an attempt as possible before resorting to violence.
Of course you don't hear about wars that don't happen. Where would you hear about them? The only example that even appears on the list would be Tibet, and the jury's still out on that one.
Jester