on the fact that the ethical and moral focus is on violence and only violence. Both sides, regardless of which side has more power and has initiated the violence, are equalized because they both engage in violent activity. Pacifism thus attempts to create an alternate camp in every conflict that distinguishes itself primarily by condemning the violence of this conflict.Hence we end up with a politics of pacifism, the telos of its originators, that assumes the primary contradiction is between war and peace––between the war-mongers and those who reject violence altogether. A laudable politics in an abstract moral sphere, but a very naive politics in the sphere of the concrete. The hippy movement and its successors: give peace a chance, the commonality of humanity, and those who alwaysposition, where the heroes are war-resistors from both sides of the conflict who unite and demonstrate a solution to the conflict in their peaceful resolution. Brian K. Vaughn and Fiona Staple'srecently reminded me of this pacifist narrative where, perhaps in an attempt to comment on the violence of contemporary conflict, created a tale of equally powerful forces in a long war that are both challenged by two individuals from opposing sides who reject this war by, well,(indeed, a character even claims that "fucking" is the "opposite of war"), having a child, and embrace pacifism so as to demonstrate the problem of the war narratives of their respective sides. Human sentiment conquers violence, all is good in the world.notwithstanding (and, to be fair, it is very well written and