True pacifism has never been tried
Jack Daly
Class of 2025
(11/2021) The scenes of World War One need no introduction. The images of the British Tommies climbing from their trenches to near certain death on the muddy, shelled-out fields of Flanders are indelibly etched into the Western mind. It was, of course, the most devastating event the world had yet seen, and the peace for which so many longed did not follow. As the anniversary of the war’s end quickly approaches, it would be wise for Americans to remember our past and future conflicts that manifest in wars, such as the one from over a century ago, and how they will remain a part of human history, so long as there is human history.
During the First World War, many people, especially among the Allies, adopted a millenarian outlook on the conflict. It was a call to action, which at last pulled the European elite from the prevailing ennui. One of these excited intellectuals was British author H. G. Wells, who is responsible for perhaps the biggest misnomer in history. Hoping to invigorate national morale, he famously dubbed the struggle, "The war that will end all other wars." This title gained a popularity that Wells could have never imagined, even being repeated by U.S. President, and progressive visionary Woodrow Wilson as he outlined his plan for a lasting peace. It was an expression of the hope that civilization could emerge from the war changed, and free of that age old horror.
Change certainly came, and brought with it the machine gun, artillery bombardment, and poison gas, as well as the old hardships attendant to war: cold, disease, and hunger. But the most dramatic change was the change in the soldiers’ attitudes. The Roman poet Horace had said, "It is sweet and fitting to die for the homeland," but when the poet Wilfred Owen reflected on the suffering and death of a comrade, the antique motto was no more than "The Old Lie." To men like Owen, the tradition of exalting those who had served heroically was simply how the foolish perpetuated the deaths of the na've.
The post-war intelligentsia reflected this exasperation in their new, and not all together glorious, ways of thinking about life and art. They had no will to fight, and could see no reason for fighting. It was insisted that peace had been achieved. Violence dragged on in Central Europe; they must have not gotten the memo. Millions died in the USSR. Surely peace would continue. Storm clouds gathered in Italy and Germany. Never again should there be a battle like Verdun, like the Somme!
It goes without saying that war is a temperamental subject, and so, feeling that the opinion of a callow writer might be inadequate for a topic of such gravitas, I reached out to a couple of Mount-community members I know who are directly tied to the matter.
My great-uncle, Fr. Jerome Daly is a graduate of the seminary on campus, but before his call to the priesthood, he served as a Lieutenant Colonel in the Vietnam War. Like the First World War, Vietnam has become known for the various social movements that surrounded it which called for peace, even on the enemy’s terms, and the reimagining of society.
Fr. Daly, however, is of a different persuasion than the anti-war protesters, saying that he views his time in the military, "very well." In response to my asking for his outlook on war, he replied that it is necessary: "as a last resort, when diplomacy fails, as it often does." He said further that the public’s tendency to swing between isolationism, and calls for action following attacks is nothing new, and that while everyone has a right to their opinions, combat is something that the civilian population generally does not understand. Speaking on the prospect of future conflicts, he remarked that war is not inevitable but takes morals to avoid.
The Mount also has a robust Reserve Officer Training Corps program, through which many students train diligently as they are shaped into new officers. Among them is Lorenzo DiVentura, who I had the pleasure of sitting down with in order to discuss the perspective of those in his station.
When I asked what had drawn him to the military, Lorenzo stated that it was something he’s always wanted to do, a sentiment not unlike the throb of the heart ancient poets sang of, which calls a young man to war. Speaking of the likelihood of conflict in the near future, the cadet said that he "can’t help but see it on the horizon," and yet even in light of recent complications, he is confident in the country’s ability to wage war as the geopolitical focus shifts to "peer threats."
Though war has remained, the nation can take heart in the knowledge that the character of the American fighting man has remained just as well. In both conversations I had, there was a remarkable similarity. Both the men cited international struggles as being an incurable part of human nature, something which can be traced back to the fall of man, from Eden. There remains a strong determined idea that war, with all its horrors, can be used to keep evil in check.
Today, people are still craving change, for the old devil, war, has remained in all his new and adapted ferocity. Many today would still insist that peace is simple. They say that if we stop fighting, our enemies will stop fighting, that no one actually wants to go to war, and so if we only sufficiently curb our aggression, peace is guaranteed. Even as reports of the terror and barbaric cruelty unleashed in Afghanistan after our withdrawal surfaced, countless believed peace had finally been secured, as though we are the only country that has ambitions, and the others merely react to the upsets we cause in the world.
Winston Churchill aptly summarized the folly of present-day pacifists when he said of those in his own day seeking to appease the ambitions of Adolpf Hitler: "You were given the choice between war and dishonor. You chose dishonor and you will have war."
Read other articles by Jack Daly
