Thinking maybe I am more of a pacifist these days. It appealed to me a bit as a kid but it didn't match my contentious nature. But now I think those spiritual wimps were right; pacifism is the only consistent good political philosophy. And its not impractical like its cousin anarchism.
That is to say, war and the state are tightly linked but not quite the same thing, and opposing them is not the same thing. An anarchist, who opposes the state in toto, has to answer the question of what replaces it, or performs the social funcitons that the state is usually responsible for. The anarchist answers tend to be either unconvincing or end up smuggling everything hated about the state back in.
The pacifist, on the other hand, is not opposed to the state as such, only its violent and evil actions. He doesn't have to replace anything. The state is composed of human beings, and if those human beings awaken their human comapassion, it will not be as violent and aass
Hm maybe it is just a unpretentious form of anarchism. Instead of opposing the state, which makes more war, oppose war, which is something the state does instead of its more positive functions.
How did I get to pacifism? By looking over this dispute between me and Levitt and realizing I am not on his side, because he being contentious and I am seeking peace.
Ken might get it, war is made in the human heart and can only be unmade there.