Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The article presents a socio-philosophical analysis of pacifism and anti-pacifism in secular and religious discourses on war. It traces the evolution of conceptions of violence from its sacralization in religious tradition and its rationalization in the theory of just war to contemporary concepts of nonviolence, moral realism, and the ethical-political critique of the cult of power. Particular attention is paid to the relationship between pacifist and anti-pacifist positions in Christian thought, specifically in the Catholic and Protestant traditions, as well as their correlation with secular concepts of power, war, and political responsibility. Based on an analysis of Judith Butler’s works, the study argues that nonviolence should be viewed not as a manifestation of passivity or moral idealism, but as an active ethical-political practice capable of countering structural violence, affirming social equality, and fostering new forms of solidarity. It is shown that recognizing human vulnerability, interdependence, and the value of every life creates the foundation for rethinking the politics of peace beyond the logic of domination and coercion. The Ukrainian context is analyzed separately, in which the current war has prompted a reevaluation of the relationship between pacifism, the right to self-defense, and civic responsibility. It is demonstrated that today, the discourse on war and peace in Ukraine is shaped by a complex interplay of nonviolent practices, concepts of just war, and the ethics of protecting human dignity. It is concluded that active nonviolence, based on the principles of solidarity, responsibility, and ethical acknowledgement of the Other, can serve as an alternative to both the absolutization of violence and passive pacifism.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Roman Kharchenko (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: