ALIA K. NARDINI

Pacificismo: un'alternativa originale al pacifismo

N. 207

Summary — This essay aims at explaining the key points in the evolution of just war theories, and introduces a new political concept: pacifism. The article starts with a brief outline of the Just War thought tradition. Highlighting the innovative concepts in the work of Martin Ceadel (Thinking about War and Peace, 1987), the a. identifies what Ceadel calls "an astonishing deficiency" in contemporary political theory: a systematic sketch of the different attitudes regarding war, i.e. not only why people and countries fight, but also why they consider it justifiable. What will emerge from the first section is the difficulty which lies in comparing alternative conceptions of war and peace (militarism, crusading, defencism, pacificism and pacifism), because of the deep moral relativism about what constitutes a "legitimate" justification for (not) fighting. The essay then examines the issue of pacifism: an innovative suggestion still relatively known in Italy, but already prominent in the tradition of UK political philosophy. The concept of pacificism is explained in details by Ceadel, and analysed further by Richard Norman in his Ethics, Killing and War (1995). The political aim of pacificism is to provide a more viable alternative to pacifism, in relation to society, politics and ethics. Though fundamentally opposed to defencism and just was tehories, which seek war justification principles instead of conflict resolution, its heart is liberal. In fact, pacificism believes in free individuals, who are able to make rational and informed choices regarding their present and future options within society. The theory moves along the lines of Kantian perpetual peace, although it puts less emphasis on the economic ties between powers, and deeply values international political cooperation. Summing up, the a. presents pacificism as a different perspective on conflict analysis and resolution theories, in order to open up further the contemporary moral and political debate on what may define a just war.