jump to last post 1-13 of 13 discussions (13 posts)

Does violence really ever solve anything?

  1. CWanamaker profile image99
    CWanamakerposted 6 years ago

    Does violence really ever solve anything?

    And what about wars?

  2. Ken Barton profile image58
    Ken Bartonposted 6 years ago

    I guess it depends on which side of the violence you're on at the time.  If you're the violent one using your violence to get your way then I guess it accomplished whatever the intent was.  Then again, if you're using violence to stop a violent person from succeeding in their plan, then again I guess it worked.  Ultimately, we would all like to live in a peaceful, happy go lucky world, but we don't, so it is often necessary to stand up for ourselves either violently or passively.

  3. onegoodwoman profile image77
    onegoodwomanposted 6 years ago

    Sometimes, it does.

    It is not that I recommend beating up your neighbor, or shooting at him.  I am far from that position.

    There is however, the unpleasant task of dealing with bullies, be it at the bus stop, in the neighborhood, or on a world wide arena.

    There DOES comes a point, that we have no other other resource, when discussions have failed, to say, " I forbid you", and I have the aresenal to back me up.

    Sometimes, it  really is, when all else has failed, that t he spoils belong to the victor.

    When the neighborhood bully can not be talked  down, you really do need to call in your big bother to kick his ass.  It is the only language that some will understand.

    Yes, it is ugly.......but it is effective.

    I have 6 big brothers.  That fact alone,  has spared me much.  They were quick to defend me as a kid, as a married woman, I have NEVER called the troops in............still they are there.

    As a nation..........do not dismiss your support system.  It is a bad play!

    There are no memorable battles that did not involve some degree of violence.

  4. LuisGabriel2 profile image59
    LuisGabriel2posted 6 years ago

    No. I'm the kind of person to back away from violence because there is no point in that. But there are times when I was growing up my parents always said "If you are getting bullied you should stand up to the bully and gain respect.". In a way violence would resolve the problem but in the other way you are just expressing anger. (Maybe if parents would take responsabilty on what they let their children watch on tv; Maybe there wasn't too many violence nowadays)... And wars, No. I don't think killing innocent kids and people is worth fighting for money, gas, land, or whatever. It is not up to us to decide which lives we should take. Only God decides.

  5. profile image0
    Valoric Fireposted 6 years ago

    On a political level or historical perspective based on total recorded human history..the short answer is yes.  The existence of the military industrial complex and the insane amount of tax payer funds supports this assumption, that violence does have it's merits in the world arena.  Look at the rape of Nanking,  Spanish Inquisition, Crusades, Armenia genocide via Turkey, Stalin starving some 10 million Ukrainians or the Rwanda Tutsi & Hutu conflict, Haiti and the south American "banana republics"  and of course the 3 wars of US current hegemony.
    What about religion and militant or radical beliefs whether they are based on Islam or fundamentalist Christian.  The end result is a message of hate followed by violence to instill fear.

    On a personal level, living is a violent society, it is mandatory to insure your own self preservation and protection.  Reality teaches us there are no real heroes as portrayed by Hollywood. Think of Joesph Campbell and the Hero Myth and why as a society media has indoctrinated us into being passive sheep or apathetic and dehumanized from addressing our own personal potentially violent environment.  It is everyone's responsibility to develop street smarts and awareness and learn how to properly defend themselves.  Every dojo, boxing gym and firearms range should be packed with responsible adults who accept the reality that their lives are worth preserving, and that no save the day scenario with false protagonists heroes like Bruce Willis or Steven Segal will magically appear to save our collectives asses from the proverbial bad guy.

    In martial arts there is an old adage, train how you fight and you will fight how you have trained. Train with limitations and you will fight with limitations.

    "So long as governments set the example of killing their enemies, private citizens will occasionally kill theirs."
      ~Elbert Hubbard

  6. nightwork4 profile image61
    nightwork4posted 6 years ago

    yes it does. if we didn't use violence to solve certain confrontations, the opposing party would never learn their lesson.

  7. Matt in Jax profile image69
    Matt in Jaxposted 6 years ago

    I'm personally not a man of violence, but violence can assuredly solve some issues.
    There are times when some people will never learn a lesson until you knock some sense into them, especially if they've never been challenged in their lifetime.

  8. DannyMaio profile image60
    DannyMaioposted 6 years ago

    I have to say most definitely NO. there isn't any point in it! I believe it will actually cause more problems and Karma is a Bitch

  9. micahjoy profile image56
    micahjoyposted 6 years ago

    No!  Violence has "achieved" certain things, but it certainly has never "solved" anything.

    Its completely ridiculous to think that because you won a war or kicked someones ass that they "learned their lesson". violence has never changed anyones mind. violence has never solved the deeper issue. has it shut people up for a time? has it forced people to retreat or give up land or power? yes. but it never solves what the real issue is, because the people who were doing/thinking "wrong" are going to continue to think and feel that way whether you "win" a war or a fight. Just because you have won, does not mean you have changed anything, you have not changed the persons ideas and thoughts that caused them to fight in the first place. in fact, violence usually only angers people more and incites people to believe more deeply in whatever they believed before... they just might do it a little more quietly.

    The issue is that no one wants to take the time and energy to actually make real change, or solve the deeper issues... thus we will always keep going around in circles and violence will be never ending.

  10. zduckman profile image61
    zduckmanposted 6 years ago

    Violence begets violence, and doesn't solve anything. It only creates more disharmony. Love is the answer. Martin Luther Kink Jr and Gandhi had the right idea, and are examples to this day.

  11. mathsciguy profile image60
    mathsciguyposted 6 years ago

    Absolutely.  I am not personally a violent man, but I think it is a bit naive to argue that violence does not solve anything ever.  Neither self-defense nor perspective nor "teaching someone a lesson" have anything to do with it.  Of course, it can be argued that violence only causes more problems; I think that is probably true.  However, as far as being at least a temporary solution to some problems, I say violence does fit the definition.  Should violence be used to solve problems?  Not if there is another alternative.  Can violence be used to solve problems?  Of course.

  12. DonDWest profile image60
    DonDWestposted 6 years ago

    Violence, I'm afraid, is the only solution in dealing with certain individuals who have a God complex and act upon such narcissistic feelings causing harm to others. If you kill them; they can't be a God or an idol, now can they?

  13. Wayne Brown profile image84
    Wayne Brownposted 6 years ago

    Violence per se only begets violence.  The reason for that is easily explained.  If one person decides to attack another physically, the person who is attacked is immediately robbed of most of their alternatives which may include escape.  They may only be left with one choice...to fight back.  Now, if I am attacked as a person or as a country and you cut off my finger or blow up my fuel storage, at what point do I make the decision to reciprocate?  Time is of the essence.  Do I wait until you have cut off one of my arms to decide that it is high time that I reacted?  That's the point.  That's also not to say that it is in our best interest to go around handing out violence as our first step in solving anything but as a defensive measure you can be sure of one thing, "no one ever bargained with anyone else from a position of weakness". WB