Wednesday, February 13, 2008
I disagree with Johnson that we can make a blanket judgement that will condemn all forms of violence as being unjustifiable. Because there is a good possibility that there may be situations that will occur that Johnson never considered when he made his judgement, it is possible that there can be an alternative argument. I think that because we do not live in a perfect world, there are situations that may arise where violence is justifiable and possibly even necessary. I think that it is naive to flat out say that violence should never be a person's response to a situation. I think that the decision of the Allmuseri to react violently against the awful situation that they were put in was better than to remain enslaved in horrifying conditions. Although the result of this action was their eventual death, we can look at this not as a direct result of their use of violence but as a result of Johnson's attitude toward the use of violence. I think the fate they would have suffered had they not rebelled would have been worse than death. When people are placed in an intolerable situation with no other alternative than violence, they are justified in having to resort, unfortunately, to violence. There are few things that have been accomplished in history without the use of violence as a catalyst for change, and while this is unfortunate, where would we be without these changes? I'm not trying to say that if we lived in a world where there was an agreement among everyone that violence was not the way to solve problems that we should still be resorting to violence, its just that in the world we live in people should not be punished to resorting to a basic level of human nature.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment