Is violence ever justified to achieve political ends?

Question

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacifism

Answer 1

Diplomacy is always the end means, so violence doesn't work.

Answer 2

Its a tricky one - generally no, never outside of a general warfare situation but if you have no other means of achieving your aim available to you maybe its justified.

For example in apartheid South Africa you might argue it was justified or in the various anti-colonial struggles around the world, or some (SOME - I'm not saying its necessarily right) might feel that way about the situation of the Palestinians currently. If say it was in the UK it wouldnt be justified for Scottish Nationalists to use violence as there is a democratic system of government available to them and so they should be able to convince enough people to vote for independence

Answer 3

Glad my parents' generation didn't take that attitude with the Nazis, or we wouldn't be round having this discussion now.
Ditto when the Armada came breezing up the Channel, or when a French Army ex-corporal from Corsica tried the same. Also glad the USSR believed we would have retaliated had they invaded.

'War is an ugly thing but not the ugliest of things; the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feelings which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.'
~ John Stuart Mill

Count the thumbs down from the defeatists who'd sit back and watch their wives/mothers/daughters get raped give THIS one!

Answer 4

Only when fighting tyranny.
That's because you have NO Legal alternative.
If representation is legitimate and available but the answer to a legitmate petition is NO, you better accept the answer.
To say violence is NEVER the answer is not correct.
We live in a society where NEVER should be the correct answer but options are available HERE. If there are NO options, then we have another ball game!

Answer 5

The violence is justified to achieve political ends in democracy whereas in dictatorship everything is justified.

Answer 6

That would depend upon whether or not you are able to distinguish the political from the economic and the sociological. Seems like an almost impossible task and I guess it's all motive-based, but I'd say that 999 times out of 1000, the answer is no.

Answer 7

No, I don't think it is justified nor do I think it is effective in the long-run - as Crushinator says, it only creates more violence and resistance in the long-run.
The problem is that historical injustices or past violence are usually used to justify fresh political violence - which I suppose underlines Crushinator's point.

Answer 8

contained in the French revolution the area replaced into no longer violence hostile to the authorities yet violence by the authorities it replaced into no longer justified in any respect. What Robespierre did replaced into to fireplace up thoughts to the point of tension- and use it to kill any oponents- actual or imagined- interior of their own ranks. Many extra revolutionnaires died contained in the phobia than "aristocrats". therefore the declaring that "the revolution devours its toddlers" Is violence hostile to a authorities justified? relies upon on the authorities. "authorities" like Mao? Stalin? PolPot?

Answer 9

Justification is easy, doing what is right is harder... and even then violence is ultimately sometimes necessary, you may not wish anyone any harm but if they wish you harm then you should defend yourself as necessary. Of course the first and best defence is not doing things that are so unreasonable and offensive that other's are right to wish you harm. America is usually the aggressor which is why some people tend to resort to extreme measures, rightly or wrongly that's what people do if you threaten and bully them enough.

Answer 10

No. There is no reason whatsoever that justifies violence against innocent people. Anyone that commits violence, for religious, economic, political or any reason against innocent people is dangerous and has no place on this earth.

Answer 11

I think not. But persistent unjustified violence against one,
that could not be resolved by any other means, might have
to be met by violence as the last resort. But, this should be
the exception.