Curious: I think you are focusing on specific words at the expense of the
overall sense of Squire's (and also Tolkien's) point: "Pacifists
cannot survive by themselves. They have a use, but they need protecting."
Whether that point is cynical or not is in the eye of the beholder, but
ultimately irrelevant.
And CHOOSING moral superiority is not at all the same as SEEING YOURSELF as
morally superior. It's the difference bewteen sanctity and sanctimony.
I agree with Squire that, putting aside the quote from the Tolkien letter,
there is nothing particularly pacifist about Bombadil in the text of LOTR to
suggest that he is the model for Frodo's post-Ring behavior. He certainly
never renounces violence with the same directness as Frodo. Moreover,
Bombadil is unburdened, happy-go-lucky and innocent. His isolationism is
part of his nature. Frodo is guilt-ridden, melancholy, and his isolation
within the shire is an unnatural effect of the Ring. Tom's pacificism, to
the extent it's there, arises from (or is co-extensive with) his
innocence. Frodo's arises from his experience with
evil.
