Culture War Pacifism

Truth without "Truth Bombs"

I recently read a wonderful article by Professor Adam Smith on Front Porch Republic called Waging Culture Wars Justly. He takes principles from the Christian just war theory and applies them to contemporary culture war debates. I would like to highlight some of the most interesting points of the article and then take up the topic with which he ends the article, culture war pacifism.

So, what are the principles of the just war theory and how do they apply to today’s culture wars?

A Just Cause

Smith notes that the culture war is not just a war of words about a particular cause, but a war on behalf of words. To co-opt words in service of a cause, to politicize words, is a form of violence that must be resisted. But is it possible, Smith asks, to wage war on the violent use of words without being violent oneself? “If we are just warriors, we must by definition believe that it is possible to fight a war for reasons other than the pursuit of power.”

Last Resort

This criterion of a just war insists that we must have exhausted all other means to win the other over before resulting to the fight. What are the other options? We can use the power of action and example to persuade the other of the error of his or her use of language. This can be done without speaking, by the way we live our life, as well as by speaking differently than the one who would use words abusively. We can use what Smith calls “the language of silence, of listening” to try to understand the other.

Proper Authority

In the just war tradition, the war as last result for the sake of a just cause must be declared by the proper authority. Is there an authority that is not already fighting that can send us into the war on behalf of language? How can we tell whether we have already been taken up in the war and are abusing language in a partisan way from the beginning? We remember here that the just cause is not the cause itself but the use of language. It is possible for both “sides” in an argument to abuse language and therefore each other. Another way to ask the question of proper authority is to ask if there is a non-ideological sending into the culture war?

Right Intent

Smith states this simply: “It means being motivated by the just cause mentioned above, not by some other, ulterior motive.” This is another way of saying that not all is fair in the culture war; there is a way of using words that harms human dignity, no matter how “right” the cause one is fighting.

Reasonable Chance of Success

If we do engage in the culture war, we must have some confidence that we can be successful in persuading the other. Persuading the other would not mean “destroying” or “owning” or whatever other term we might be tempted to call success. Another part of just war theory is that war is always fought for the sake of peace. If we could have success, would that success foster a relationship with the persuaded party after the battle of words. Success, then, means that the other has changed his or her mind. There are some fights where this is possible and others where this is not. We must choose our battles carefully.

Proportionality

Proportionality follows from the end that a just culture war is trying to obtain. Smith reminds us, “Justice in the culture war is about choosing tactics that do not destroy a relationship of real or potential equality and friendship, which, if it is or is to become a relation of genuine friendship, does not depend entirely on agreement.” The abusive use of words destroys relationships. A war fought for a cause, using abusive tactics, would not be proportional if we won the cause but lost the enemy. Smith offers “playfulness” as a tactic in a just culture war, a reminder that, as Chesterton says, life is too serious to take ourselves seriously. Playfulness is a form of humility and a call to the other to be humble as well.

So, is it possible to wage a just culture war?

Smith offers a description of the culture war pacifist that I find intriguing. I offer it and my reflection here not because I have already made up my mind, but because I find it helpful as I approach the upcoming 2024 Election as a priest, as a man who has to use words all the time. I want to use words justly, even if that risks being reviled by both “sides” of our cultural fight. Here is Smith’s description:

The culture war pacifist will be the one who limits himself to those other means: to showing with his life rather than telling with his words and to listening with his ears rather than speaking with his mouth. The culture war pacifist will also commit himself not to finding the bland “middle ground,” but to standing with and between people who are trying to persuade each other, in a kind of principled silence which aims to prevent what he fears: that the effort to persuade will turn into something else, that words meant to defend language from being reduced to tools of power will be reduced by that very effort to tools of power.

Pacifists also are willing to sacrifice themselves, or things they love, rather than resort to violence. This means leaving arguments unanswered, not in order to avoid conflict, but in order to show that there is another way. It means being willing to look like a coward or fool, like someone who cannot compete in the arena or is too afraid to do so. It means being willing to look like a coward or a fool to both sides, the other side and your own. It means also being willing to look like a traitor to your own side, like someone who, by his silence, is helping the enemy. It means forgoing the thrill of victory, even just victory, because you do not trust yourself to handle that victory without being corrupted by it.

Let me get real for a moment. The other day I received a letter from a parishioner praising my Easter homily (which I loved to hear) and then warning me that silence about abortion, LGBT issues, and woke ideology is as good as a vote for the other side (meaning the Democrats). “You have to speak out!” There were a lot of things in all-caps in the letter.

I was upset by that part of the letter, because it assumed that there is only one way to fight the culture war. And how has that way worked out for the Catholic Church in this country? Is there no other way than to “fight fire with fire” (as the first track on Metallica’s 1984 album Ride the Lightning puts it)?

I prefer to build communities and places where people can encounter each other in a genuine way, where true belonging can happen. I want to get out of my head and connect with real people, and not remain in the virtual, faceless world of words. I have seen too many people, on both the left and the right, use words abusively and break off too many relationships. I have definitely known people who could not handle victory “without being corrupted by it.” I am not deaf to the political rancor that splits my cathedral parish.

For a long time—those who know me know this—I thought that to be a priest was to be a culture warrior. Since I was not interested in being a culture warrior, I thought that meant that I could not be a priest.

The pacifist refuses violence not because he is a traitor or a coward but because he does not trust that he can use violence well. To put it simply, the pacifist thinks it impossible not to “overdo it.” The same can be said in the use of words in the service of a cause: I do not think I can use words in the service of a cause without using them violently or abusively. And I do not think that the violent use of words will bring anything like a true victory.

A priest friend of mine once said something really beautiful. He said that he could imagine spending his whole priesthood trying to get the pendulum to stop swinging, trying to calm one side or the other, to stay balanced, to help the different sides listen to each other. This is another way to fight. It does not mean that I do not take a side. It is clear that I stand with the Catholic Church. It does mean that I think there are other means to gain a victory that is a real victory, one that does not destroy the other side, but brings the other side into relationship, brotherhood, truth.

I am not sure whether I am a pure pacifist, like Dorothy Day, when it comes to war and self-defense. But I am pretty sure that I am a culture war pacifist, that I want the truth to win, but without throwing “truth bombs.”

For fun: