And the winner is … Peace Prizism

Peace-prizism is an interesting phenomenon that has not gone unnoticed by the author. Here is a brief summary of peace-prizism and the peace-prizists. Approach them with caution.


On social and political issues, everyone wants to be seen as the ‘good guy.’ No one wants to interfere with someone else’s ‘fun.’ To be seen as liberal, as someone moving with the flow of things, open-minded, upholding the rights of minorities … this is an image that many in the world today would seem to be desirous to cultivate.

And what’s wrong with that, you may ask? Why not leave everyone do what they want, live happily, lift all boats, and hey, if you don’t like it, you don’t have to take part in it.  We can all live in just one big night club. You can attend, you can desist from attending. You are free to attend or not to attend.

Yes, such is the lunacy of today’s chattering classes, a lunacy which has totally affected the entire body politic. This tendency of thought will be dubbed ‘Peace-Prizism.’ Peace-prizists are people who dream of receiving public acclamation for their contributions to the latest political fashions. What are some of the characteristics of Peace-Prizists?

Peace-prizists believe that history is bunk and that we don’t need the past in order to learn from, not only our mistakes, but also our success stories.

Peace-prizists are big into ‘science,’ but not when it goes against their prejudices, especially relating to family values.

Peace-prizists are big into deconstruction. They want to deconstruct societies, histories, religions … in fact any way of life that may have a traditional basis or one that they can’t fit into their reductionist box.

Peace-prizists are big into finding out who is ‘repressed,’ regardless of whether there are either moral or prudent reasons for not allowing everyone live exactly the lifestyle they desire.

Peace-prizists love spectacles like revolutions. Order is always a bad thing.


And really, when you get down to it, you find that peace-prizists think that we are all just consumers and life is just one big market where we can have whatever we want, free of any consequences for us or for those down the line. This is in opposition to the line they usually peddle which is that they are the protectors and maintainers of human rights, freedom, tolerance, etc…

Of course it is a myopic idea that everything can be tolerated merely  on personal choice or that individuals can judge exactly what is good for themselves. The argument is almost too simple and basic to make; if we had within ourselves (on a mass scale) the ability to get on with everyone else, then we would have no law or government. Instead law and government are pervasive, not because of some wickedness of power, but because people demand structure and regulation to their lives. The very existence of law and government is sufficient to prove that people need to be regulated for either moral reasons or for very practical ones, like the need to forge a common identity within an enclosed space.


Pandora’s box?

We can’t imagine that society is one big night club because it isn’t. In any society, there have to be those practices which are discriminated against and those which are tolerated. (Peace-prizists hate words like ‘discrimination’) That means by implication that some individuals and groups must be discriminated against. This occurs because actions are committed by individuals and groups.

In conclusion, no man is an island. In any enclosed space regulated by laws and government, my fate is bound up with your fate. To live together is not to tap-dance to the tune of the latest peace-prizist fad, but to secure grounds for a common good.

P.S. Now, I haven’t mentioned the names of anyone who might be considered a peace-prizist. I’ll let you figure it out.

Currently, I am researching a book on Carl Schmitt who would have shared my antipathy towards peace-prizists. I have already authored one book Mysteries of State in the Renaissance. My Amazon page is here.

Image Credit (Groupthink) “WilliamHWhyteJrGroupthinkFortuneMarch1952Page114” by Source. Licensed under Fair use via Wikipedia – http/

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s