More handpicked essays just for you.
The Contradictory Treatment Of Violence
Violent protest in civil rights
The importance of non-violent protests for the civil rights movement
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The Contradictory Treatment Of Violence
“The use of violence can never be legitimate”
While some events justify and legitimize the use of violence, too many acts are overshadowed and overthrowing the idea that violence is legitimate.
Violence is legitimate in times of self defense or protecting another person, during civil rights protests and to prevent further death or genocide of peoples. Self defense or protecting another person with violence is legitimate as it can prevent assault to yourself or another. Violence during civil movements can be legitimate as it can bring attention to the issue and further the cause. Violent intervention in atrocities or genocides is legitimate due to its ability to save civilian lives and potentially shut down a harmful group, potentially saving
¬¬¬Though most American people claim to seek peace, the United States remains entwined with both love and hate for violence. Regardless of background or personal beliefs, the vast majority of Americans enjoy at least one activity that promotes violence whether it be professional fighting or simply playing gory video games. Everything is all well and good until this obsession with violence causes increased frequency of real world crimes. In the article, “Is American Nonviolence Possible” Todd May proposes a less standard, more ethical, fix to the problem at hand. The majority of the arguments brought up make an appeal to the pathos of the reader with a very philosophical overall tone.
A society that presumes a norm of violence and celebrates aggression, whether in the subway, on the football field, or in the conduct of its business, cannot help making celebrities of the people who would destroy it, (Lapham, 1985). Unfortunately, such acts of rampage have become a prevalent factor in the Canadian culture. As a result of endless media coverage, Canadians now are constantly bombarded with countless images of violence. Many of which often portray a victim avenging their opponent by force. Thus, indoctrinating individuals to believe that it is only through aggression that problems are resolved. Rather than being punished for acts of violence, those who commit such offenses are often praised for their “heroism”. In addition, the success of films like The Godfather, Gladiator, and Troy further aid in reinstating we live in a society that praises violence. Furthermore, this ideology allows for people to partake in violent acts with little or no backlash from ones community. However, when an person strays away from the “norm”, they are likely to then be viewed as a deviant. Such cases of rejection within a society, are often seen in the portrayal of serial killers. Although our society tends to condone violence when it is directed towards a specific individual(s), it does not allow the killing of innocent bystanders. Instead, crimes that are targeted against a number of people over a long period, entail the harshest forms punishments under the law. Sadly, in executing the law for said crimes, those in charge often face much public scrutiny. Such occurrences were apparent in the faulty murder investigations of Canada's most notorious serial killer Robert Pickton. This is due to the fact that, the negligence of the Vancou...
To begin, this powerful essay focuses everything on violence and how it is being used by games, movies, and even the most influential people such as the president. The author, Barbara Kingsolver central point is to let readers understand the wrongfulness of the violence being shown and done by humans especially in schools. How can the
In the creation of a better society, violence is justified, but only to the point the protection of yourself and your rights. If violence is used for personal satisfaction or gain, then it is no longer justified. Regarding the French Revolution, the violence was justified as it was necessary to improve conditions for the people, until the death of Louis the XVI, and Marie Antoinette during the “Reign of Terror” (The French Revolution: A New Republic Is Born in Blood).
The Outsiders by S.E. Hinton proves the point that violence can be justified if necessary. To inflict change in their lives people often fight with violence instead of peace to evoke change. The world strives for change everyday whether or not you like it. How the people create a change in society whether they use peace or war, it is up to them to decide how to modify our ever changing world. Violence and fight between the Socs and Greasers tells us that both can be justified if it inflicts positive change in society. ‘
Once we understand what violence is the question that is raised is how does one decide the difference between a legitimate and an illegitimate act of violence? Since violence is bringing harm to others whether that is individuals, property or organizations why would violence be considered permissible or legitimate on some occasions but not others? Universally, the idea of legitimacy is “that something is right, proper, or appropriate within the bounds of a system of norms, values, or beliefs” (Schoon 779). Since norms and values are changeable depending on the culture, legitimacy can be “shaped by the availability of alternatives to that which is being evaluated” (780). While legitimacy is not solely based on cultural norms and values, it is also based
Now that we have seen the shortcomings of two popular views of violence, Coady proposes his positive account; namely, that we ought to adopt a restricted definition. He begins with a dictionary definition (physical force with intent to damage/injure another), but he then observes that this is too restrictive and that we ought to include some psychological considerations. A restricted definition, Coady argues, is less morally loaded than the other two views given that it allows us to call an act a violent one without being committed (at least not as committed as the other views) to a certain ethical
Violence causes a great deal of suffering and harm in the world today and yesterday (Cross 2013). Peace and conflict researchers are undeniably justified in their selection of inter and intra-state violence as objects of study because the social context for both the performance and understanding of violence is of central importance (Cross 2013). However it is surprisingly rare to find a definition of violence (Moore 2003). Thus uncertainty prevails as to whether violence is limited to physical abuse or includes verbal and psychological abuse (Moore 2003). Agreeing with Moore (2003), Galtung (1969) said it is not important to arrive at a definition of violence because there are obliviously many types of violence. Violence is not
Research Paper Rough Draft: Police Brutality Police misconduct is as rampant as ever in America, and it has become a fixture of the news cycle. Police brutality is the use of any force exceeding that reasonably necessary to accomplish a lawful police purpose. The media is inevitably drawn toward tales of conflict, hence why there are so many crime and police stories on the news. Despite the increasing frequency of misbehaving cops, many Americans still maintain a high respect for the man in uniform. Still, police misconduct is a systemic problem, not just an anecdotal one.
...ens should have more faith in the established institution’s ability to deliver justice over that of a vigilante serial killer, but for many, that is not the case. Second, Darkly Dreaming Dexter demonstrates that there is not as clear of a barrier between what is morally right and wrong as North American society sometimes believes, seeing as murder, which is usually regarded as undeniably wrong, can sometimes be justified and placed in the spectrum of acceptable behaviour. Blindly dividing actions up into right and wrong, then, is not only irresponsible, but also dangerous, as it can lead individuals to inappropriately oversimplify complex situations. Ultimately, then, a society that unwaveringly opposes all forms violence can be just as problematic as one that condones them.
Violence in America is a problem, and it is a problem that should be addressed. However,
“See, people with power understand exactly one thing: violence” (Chomsky). The history of the world is full of blood, greed, and violence. There has only been wars instigated by the rich, powerful and greedy. Violence often lead to more violence which will cause pain everywhere or somewhere in this world (Solter). Just as Issac Asimov once said, “Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent” but things tend to heat up and move up to the next level. Violence, especially in wars, only leads to further violence due to many different elements, especially vengeance, political and economic greed.
In order to impede mass acts of violence one must look at the root cause and fix what caused the person to commit such acts of violence, and create change
The presence of violence is not really the issue though. What we see is that often those protests have little effect. Violent protests are met with stronger resistance from law enforcement or military. Non-violent protests are often completely ignored, or even countered with violence (look at Standing Rock now for evidence of
When the citizens of a country are about to be killed, the country as a whole should be able to resort to military force. It's about defending your way of life, not going to bed and dying without a fight. Fighting for borders, freedom, security, and happiness is certainly one of the reasons for using violence and armaments as a means of peace, even if it sounds like a contradiction. During the Second World War, the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor for “American interference