“How many dead does it take to prove that pacifism doesn’t preserve peace?”

A moving reflection on the antisemitic hate-crimes (and particularly the shooting in Pittsburgh) from
The Ultimate Answer to Kings. “Who will be the guardian*?”

I’ve said it before: I have nothing against American liberal Jews and don’t understand people who do – but I’m equally perplexed by the Jews themselves. How many dead does it take to prove that pacifism doesn’t preserve peace?

I’m sure it’s very pleasant to sing Kumbaya and imagine there’s no psycho hater just outside the door. Sounds great. Until he comes inside.

Hat tip to Claire Wolfe, and her Thursday Links, which you should definitely take a look at.

2 thoughts on ““How many dead does it take to prove that pacifism doesn’t preserve peace?”

  1. I do have something against non-religious jews. They worship the state, they seek to limit and circumvent my liberties. Therefore they are in the same group as any that is against individual freedom, responsibility and opportunity. Further, these groups all hate Western civilization and seek to erase the history of the West. Has Schumer not championed the importation of millions of Muslims? Has Feinstein not called for open borders? Has Cumo said that the US was never great to be cheered on by the left?

    The time has ended for ignorning the threats we face and those who are dedicated to destroying everything Americans cherish and honor.


  2. Betsy, while I take your point I don’t think it’s useful to identify those people by their ethnicity. I despise Feinstein and Schumer right along with you but my attitude toward them would be no different if they were Episcopalians. Ted Kennedy was Catholic and I disliked him so much that I still expend effort not to make the anniversary of his death an excuse for an annual anti-Ted post on my own blog. But I don’t blame Catholics in general for him.

    Judge people by their actions, not by the ethnic group they were born into.


Comments are closed.