¶ … Martin Luther King explains that it is vital that mankind learn to put aside war-making in favor of active peace-making. His argument is in some respects firmly set in his historical era, as he is arguing against the Vietnam war. However, there are many ways in which his arguments are uncannily modern as well, and might be applied just as easily to the current world situation. He suggests that nation-states, like individuals, should embrace the way of non-violence which is active in trying to make and build peace through consensus and service. King understands that the problem of modern war, which he describes as inherently futile and self-destructive, are more complicated then to be solved in a simple and instantaneous fashion. Personally, I think he is right in this, but that he fails to go far enough. King believes that by making a "peace race" for the creative ability to improve life, science and cultural advancement can save the world; after all, he suggests, who would want war when their own society provided all they need. As he allegorizes: "When Orpheus sang,...

The truth of the matter, in my humble opinion, is that the majority of people would not prefer the sound of peace, so long as they were not personally at risk. Martial music has often been preferred to pastoral. One cannot help noticing how America flocked to get behind Bush once there was a war on, even though his approval ratings had been low before 9/11. War is exciting. It sells movies and books and politicians. Even apes make war. King himself admits that there was a time when it was necessary, and though he rightfully claims that times have changed and war is obsolete, our aggressive genes and our warlike culture have not changed. No one really wants peace. King writes, "It is necessary to love peace and…