Angry Pacifist

The contrast of this confuses a lot of people and hasn't done my popularity any favours, good job I consider popularity over-rated really. This will be full of generalisations, I know all generalisations are wrong but if I state not all are like this every time it is going to get more than a little ridiculous.

The simple question I get asked is how someone embracing peace can justify getting angry. Something that shows an outstanding ignorance to the world around them and what it really means to be a pacifist.

There are the hippy pacifists who chuff away on their cannabis declaring peace wearing their designer tie dyed CND t-shirts, you may have guessed I am not a fan.
Cannabis, the peace drug. Yes it does make people more sedate in most cases and does such a good job of suppressing the nervous system that long term use means they tend not to get it jump started again. However the trade itself is far from peaceful, local and international violence are rife within the trade of every illegal drug, so using it to maintain peace shows incredible lack of understanding.
CND, the pathway to peace. Yes I would like CND (complete nuclear disarmament) I cannot think of anyone who can count above their IQ who relishes the idea of dying in a nuclear winter. But a quick look around the world and you will see there is plenty of war going on without the use of a single nuclear weapon. A look in the history books shows that in the thousands of recorded years before we split the atom there was plenty of war and millions died in it.

Hypocrisy. I describe my stance as a pacifist as being incredibly hypocritical and feel that refusing to accept this really haven't thought it through.
I have the right to be a pacifist because others have fought and died in wars for me to be allowed this. So without war I wouldn't be allowed to embrace peace. this is the worst but there is more.
Oil, aka the real WMD from Iraq, they found it and there is such little doubt that this was the true cause for the latest hostile takeover the US and UK have combined forces for. I use it and many of the other things wars have been fought over. Even if I didn't drive the fact I eat means food has been transported, the fact i am dressed means the chances are i am wearing clothes made by people kept repressed in militarised countries.
Priorities. I have a wife and son and I know if they were to be taken from me in a violent manner the person(s) doing so would need to be arrested for their protection. We all have our pressure points and my family is my life so without them I truly wouldn't care. Reality is this is so unlikely I can safely declare it isn't going to happen. The point is still valid, my pacifist ideals have a limit.

Main targets of anger. I was brought up in a military town and can say with some authority there are a number of military personnel who enjoy their job and prospect of killing too much. They are however the minority, except where chefs are concerned, because most know that going to war means they are as likely to be wearing this seasons latest fashion in body bags as the enemy. So much to the shock of many I don't actually have a lot of anger at the military itself, I wish we didn't need one obviously, but we do and people wanting to fight, kill and die for the illusion of ideology used to cover true intent are entitled to do so.
My anger is further up the chain of command. Where people who will never fire a shot make decisions that cost lives they don't care about in order to give them more money, power etc. This isn't new, so if anyone reading this thinks it's a gripe about the latest profit maker please consider history is one of my passions.
Let's have a look at a couple of well known wars from the early part of the 20th century.
World War 1 started when the Austia-Hungarians decided the best way to honour a man who said not to go to war against Serbia during his life was to do this exact thing after he was shot. Once war started it became predominantly an issue between Germany, Belgium, France, England and Russia considering the royalty in charge of Germany, England and Russia were all cousins it isn't a massive stretch to say millions died as a result of a family disagreement.
World War 2, the inevitable result of a rushed and badly managed end to the first. One my grandfather fought and killed in. He is one of many decorated killers in my family, one who declared that we were too easily trained for that type of work. This wasn't a man of great education, in fact he was illiterate until he met my Gran, but he was far from dumb. He realised after the war had ended and he was working for peanuts watching those in authority get rich that the liberty he believed he'd been killing for was just another power struggle were he and others were considered disposable.
Bringing things up to date we had Blair declaring terrorism as the 'new evil of our time' as we partnered up with the Americans to invade a country using a blatant lie as a smoke shield. I know terrorists are officially people acting in a military manner without uniform so our troops weren't terrorists, but I would say the act of entering someone's country to take their resources without appropriate sanctions is using terror to get what they wanted. Sick part that makes me angry, is I have to pay for this out of my taxes, so I am funding an unjust war I never wanted without choice.

Realism. I know there is no way I will ever see this world at peace, it doesn't stop me wanting it. We live in a world where might is worshipped and ignorance is embraced and encouraged by people who profit from it. However things are changing, information is more freely available than ever, of course you need to filter through a lot of trash to find it but more people are starting to see through the bull and realise the cost isn't justifiable.
I am not confident enough to say there is peace in our future, but as more people start getting angry about wholesale violence as I do the chances increase. Who knows.