The Killers and the Dead An Exploration of the Viability of and Alternatives to Lethal Warfare

Is “lethal warfare ” a tautology? It is not. In this paper I propose a re-evaluation of lethal warfare in favor of approaches using non-lethal weapons and practices. Further I examine the apparent universal societal acceptance of death as the primary tool of warfare. This paper explores the relationship between war and death and ultimately attempts to answer the question: can war be fought without death? I begin with the premise that conflict is inevitable but that death in conflict is unnatural. Of all competitive entities – governments, corporations, team sports, unions – only governments retain the right to lethal warfare. Why does humankind make this exception and what can we do to change this? I propose a gradual paradigm shift away from deadly conflict. In our time, this can be accomplished by supplying the military with alternatives while simultaneously educating civilian populations in human universalism. In this paper I explore both goals and the importance of their coinciding acceptance. For the military, I demonstrate present and future technologies which may eliminate death from the practice of war. These technologies include psychological operations (PsyOps), weapons acting on the physiognomy of man, and denial of access weapons. I will show the benefits of integrating non-lethal weaponry into existing warfare tactics. For the civilian, I explore our definition of the “enemy ” and outline what is necessary to redefine him. Lethal warfare depends on the labeling and misunderstanding of an “other”. The promulgation of an understanding and acceptance of universal human interests such as family, commerce, and independence will make it harder to justify the killing of that “other”. Finally, I will propose methods which might help all factions accept that lethal warfare itself is our common enemy. When we have accepted peace, war will not be acceptable