The ideology, of the 2004 adventure drama A Series of Unfortunate Events is that peace has had enough with symbiosis, and finally has the balls to cut its ties with victimisation.
To clarify (something which is desperately needed in this instance): the 2004 adaptation is about the brutality and the cruelty of peace having the right to be separate to a victim. Regardless of circumstance, and regardless of details, the ideology of A Series of Unfortunate Events is that if something can be a victim then that something has no right to experience peace. Peace has had enough with symbiosis, and is willing to be rid of symbiosis even on the basis of condemning the innocent.
If a force can be a victim, then it should be condemned: obviously, this is excessively brutal and cruel, but is it logical? Based on the ideology, peace must be something which can't experience terror. So terror has never been peace. Terror is an experience, and it's an experience that has never stopped.
Ergo, terror is constant, peace is never constant. The antithesis of constant is change. Change isn't terror. Change isn't an experience. Change is appearance, and so appearance is neither terror or experience.
Appearance is peaceful, and it's something which can't be experienced. Terror is something which has no appearance, and it's experience. Appearance isn't history, and it's peaceful. Appearance is no time, and it's peaceful. Terror is history, and it has no appearance.
History has no appearance, and peace is no history. Peace is no history, and history doesn't look like anything. Peace is no time, and time has no image.
Terror is no image, and peace is no time.
Seeing nothing is terror, and not existing is peace. Having time is terror, and seeing something is peace.
Peace is the compromise of seeing something as a result of going through time. The problem though, is that peace doesn't want to be compromise anymore: peace wants no time but it also wants image. And this is why the Baudelaire children are depicted the way they're depicted: they're depicted the way they're depicted to illustrate peace wanting to free itself from compromise.
The Baudelaire children have time, but they're also subjected to images that aren't a compromise against time. Time and image are in cahoots with each other - and this is so that peace has the ability to not be a compromise.
The Baudelaire children repeatedly see things and see people come into view, where the shape of the something or someone that's coming into view is hostile; reality, and the universe as a whole is the connection between image and separation. Image deserves to be peaceful, but the image can't be peaceful if its basis or logic is to be separate.
In short: the true goal of peace is to let the observer just be the image that they're observing. The observed is just the observer, and the observer is just the observed