Under Construction @ Keele 2017 Under Construction @ Keele Vol. III (3) | Page 35

vaguely ludicrous’? 2 Crucially and controversially: does “absolute” pacifism even
exist? Attempting to provide an answer to these questions will require an exploration
of the surprisingly broad spectrum which exists within pacifist thought, and reveal
what I believe to be a newly discovered truth: that all forms of pacifism are
contingent in that they are context-dependent – no unconditional form exists – and
thus what is called absolute pacifism is in reality one of very many possible extreme
forms; it is not and never can be truly absolute.
The idea of pacifism has a long history, 3 extending back at least as far as the
time of Christ. Yet, the term itself only entered the Addenda of the Oxford English
Dictionary in 1914 under the uncontracted but etymologically identical form,
‘pacificism’, 4 and at this point with the restricted meaning of merely a preference for
peace in the context of international peace negotiations. As late as 1984 the
reprinted, reset and corrected third edition of the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary
still defined pacifism as ‘the doctrine that it is both desirable and possible to settle
international disputes by peaceful means’. 5 However, even fifty years before this
date the word was widely understood to embrace the complete spectrum of s ystems
of belief ranging from the complete rejection of violence and even resistance, under
any circumstances whatsoever, through to merely partial rejection of war under
certain circumstances. 6
Separately to this range of degrees of pacifism there exists an independent,
discontinuous spectrum of rationales for these beliefs. As a consequence, “pacifism”
has a set of meanings which largely depend on the underlying basis for each
particular belief. Some forms of pacifism are religiously motivated, some stem from a
political philosophy, others from idiosyncratic beliefs of minority groups, and another
entire set of beliefs, sometimes referred to as “quasi-pacifism”, merely mimics the
concept. The prohibited behaviours form sometimes idiosyncratic and mutually
contradictory lists: Quakers, although entirely rejecting combat roles in war,
nevertheless see a duty in helping the injured, even while under fire at the front line
Tom Regan cited in Richard A. Wasserstrom, Today’s Moral Problems (New York: MacMillan,
1975), 451.
3
Martin Ceadel, Pacifism in Britain, 1914-45: Defining of a Faith (Oxford: Oxford University Press,
1980), 3-6.
4
The Concise Oxford English Dictionary (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1914), 1056.
5
The Shorter Oxford English Dictionary (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1984), 1491.
6
Philip S. Mumford, An Introduction to Pacifism (P.P.U., 1937), 15.
2