Danger Ace wrote:
No, it is not. It is the act of granting non-reciprocal concessions to demonstrated or potential enemies in order to maintain peace.
You make me giggle.
With appeasement the reciprocation to the concession(s) is supposed to be peace.
I have even checked a few different sources and "non-reciprocal" hasn't appeared in any of the definitions for appeasment (so please cite a credible source for your expanded definition).
giggles aside, Sci
is correct here. Appeasement is NOT the same as a concession, otherwise you could never have negotiations. Appeasement has the connotation of a non-reciprocal concession made out of fear or out of weakness in order to avoid conflict.
Appeasement is giving your lunch money to the bully so he doesn't beat you up. It's NOT the normal "give and take" of diplomacy.