This post has nothing to do with the questions for possible blog posts on Peace Shall Destroy Many but my own response to the book. Here, I am going to focus more on one idea in the book: World War II.
I was quite surprised at Annamarie, specifically with what she has said in the book. Whether or not she was stepping up for the soldiers fighting in the war or is being sarcastic is irrelevant to me. I am surprised with what she says, giving the fact that she is Mennonite and is supposed to be a pacifist.
On page 46, Annamarie says, "If only the minority can say, 'It is against our conscience to fight because we must love enemies as well as friends,' and the majority must say, 'We must fight to protect pacifists so that they may have the right to think as they do,' then the majority, the nonbelievers, die so that the minority, the believers, may live." From what I have seen during the national anthem conflict, specifically when the discussion was taking place on the opinion board outside of the Leaf Raker, pacifists have forgotten that it is the soldier who protects them, keeping the pacifist alive and giving them the right to preach their pacifist ways. Burger Dairy, a gas station right next to the trailer park where I live, has the board where things are written on it. For the past few months, possibly since school started in September, it has said the same thing: "Thank the troops for your independence." Without the soldiers, we most likely will not be living in the country in which we currently live in.
On page 105, Annamarie says, "...Sometimes our refusal to have anything to do with the War means only, 'Well, I'm doing the right thing and am bound for heaven--let the rest of the world go to hell as it wishes.'" Yeah. If you're supposed to love your enemy and not thank the soldiers for your life and freedom and not care whether or not they go to hell just so long as you go to heaven, how in the world can you call yourself a Mennonite? If you don't care about them going to hell just as long as you go to heaven, you're farther along being an idiot than I expected.
To go even farther, on page 48, she says, "Wars can only be won with some fighting, so we divide the job: I supply you with bacon to eat and boots to wear and you go kill the Germans--for the good of both of us... Only, we have the better part. We don't take any risks--and grow rich besides." She is right in what she says. For those of us who are not in the military, we go to college and find excellent jobs, earning tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars a year with some of us earning millions or billions of dollars a year. Us, we are rich compared to the soldier. The soldier earns, if I recall, about $50,000 or so a year, no matter his or her rank, no one making money into the millions.
In my personal opinion, Thom is having an internal conflict throughout the book on whether to join the military or not. I can't go through the entire book to find examples for you, but one example I recall is the Canadian Recruiting poster. I think that, there, Thom is wondering whether or not to join the military. With his call on the horizon, he is wondering whether or not to join. I think that it would be interesting to know if Thom does join the military.
For my next post, I am going to post a personal essay paper that I had to write in Feature Writing a couple of months ago.
Jamie, thanks for highlighting this important conflict in Peace Shall Destroy Many. Annamarie voices on of the most important challenges to pacifism in the book. You use textual evidence extremely well here--quoting the exact passages in the book. You are absolutely right in saying that Thom has an internal conflict throughout the book on whether or not to join and serve in the military when his call comes up. Perhaps Rudy Wiebe left the conflict unresolved because he want the reader to keep thinking about the questions.
ReplyDeleteThese are really provocative and interesting ideas, Jamie--thanks for bringing them up.
ReplyDeleteI've had similar questions about pacifism and resistance as I read Katya. Anabaptists have always been pacifists, but this has always been an ideal--it has never really been a real possibility for the rest of the world that we actually end all wars. So while Anabaptists can protest war, they still have the benefit of being guaranteed the defense of the military, without having to act strongly on their beliefs. I do want to point out here that groups like the Christian Peacemaker Teams really do act and take risks for peace--they are living their peaceful beliefs out with the same strength that soldiers live out their beliefs. But I also wonder if Anabaptists' opinions would shift at all if we ever did actually abolish war? Would they reconsider at all?
Jamie, thank you for this thoughtful post on a hard topic. I'm glad that you found a character (Annamarie) who represents some of your own critiques of the pacifist stance. In the novel, Annamarie is depicted as thoughtful, wise and mature for her age - she seems more intellectually together than Thom does.
ReplyDeleteI think it's amazing how relevant the pacifism-during-wartime issue still is today. In that way, Peace Shall Destroy Many feels like a very modern book.