« BACK TO FORUM
 Author |
 Post
|
 |
|
Michael Newton-McLaughlin
Joined: Dec 2, 2001
Posts: 171 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Chatterbox
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Male & 28
Country: United States
Province/State: California
City: Berkeley
|
When do you cross the line of violence?
December 9, 2003 - 03:34 AM
|
|
I consider myself to be a non-violent person. Though I am not a pacifist. I would like to be, but I there is a threshold to where I would personally use and condone violence. I am generally more certain, probably less-critically, unfortunately, about my threshold regarding condoning others to use violence. Yet on a personal level, I struggle with where exactly the line of violence lays- and wonder if many others struggle with it.
To clarify the matter, it seems probable that many people have come accross 'state violence' whether 'legitimized' or not. This includes state opression through law enforcement, or military/government agencies. Furthermore, those with violent or harmful intent of their own that are not legitimate (such as rapists/kidnappers) are another factor.
Also, I'd like to differentiate between 'force' and 'violence.' Being forceful, or using force, I would generally consider to be something that could not lead to permanent or extreme harm (in itself a poor definition). I will try an example. For instance, I intervened in a domestic dispute where a man was slapping a woman around. I grabbed the man and threw him off, using force, though he would have sustained no more than a bruise. Luckily I seemed intimidating enough that the coward chose not to pick a larger fight, and the police were on their way as I spoke. Were I to, have instead, pulled out my switchblade that I carry from time to time and slit his throat, that would have been 'violent.' Both, yes, do use force and violence, but no matter what lexical name you give, I am trying to differentiate between two intentional actions.
On a personal level, I have only used a form of violence on someone thrice(and I am ashamed of it). The first was more an accident/substance induced. The other two were fights in my past, where I was literally trying to harm the other person as much as I could (no weapons).
It is not a proud thing, but indeed, a fact any way.
I have attempted to define violence, so it is clear what I mean. However, that does not explain my existing quandary: namely, when is it ok to use violence on others?
I have thought about this quite a bit. Being that I am both a leftist and a dissident, and have been arrested/detained and have seen or been subject to police assault/brutality here in the U.S. Furthermore, I have full record of (under the patriot act) being under survelience. In a country that is as... restrained and 'free' as the US is, I can only imagine what many people go through in countries with a lot worse domestic human rights records. When is it ok to fight back, to commit violence instead of 'taking' it? Does resistence also include planned attacks in self defense?
Again, I seem to be more willing to say, 'yes, you have a right to fight back against violence being done to you.' On a personal level, I would indeed probably be very violent if a loved one was being threatened. If Ruth ever got into 'hot-zones' or was with me during civil disobedience and she was treated like many have, I am positive I would go down swinging and kicking and most definately do some jail time. As well, if 'legitimized' or 'illegitimized (cop vs. robber) entities came into my home or not in conjuncture with trying to stop me from commiting a crime and threatened me or loved ones- especially under a more repressive government- I would react. The response to the 'legitimized' entity is what troubles me the most.
I firmly believe that most law enforcement officials are generally good people, who want to help others. I have police officials in my extended family, and myself was in Air Force reserves for alturistic motives - to help others (heh). I would like to believe that most law enforcement, at least that I have known, have the intent to keep order. However, they are on the 'side' of the government and have been used as a tool many times to be very violent for, what I feel, were acts of social injustice. For instance, repression of labor, and violence against civil rights workers was a mainstay tactic in years past. Immortal Techique, a progressive artist, has a stanza that reads:
"concrete jungle guierrla war in the streets" - which makes me think about open conflict with the police, with the guardians of power who will do whatever they can to hold onto that power.
When is it ok to fight back? At what point can one justify self defense against 'state legitimized' 'terrorism'? There are times where I feel I could pick up a gun and off a cop who just beat a 90-pound girl at a protest. Yet I know that, some how, that would not be a good thing - and certainly not something I want to do. I think violence is terrible. Yet I realize there is a difference between violence of the oppressed and of the oppressors. At some point, though, both of those often become muddled in conflicts. Concurrently, I refuse to just sit down and either get killed myself or watched loved ones get killed or seriously injured. Is that me being selfish in the greater cause of peace? Or is it a visceral reaction that is built into us for survival? Yet if it is... what is the difference between aggression in the name of self-defense that ends up in 'gain' of something, and self-defense that is only defends but does not increase in the 'gain' of any thing but... I do not know.
Knowing when to cross the line of bloodshed is not an random decision.. but it is also something that seems like it must be decided at that time period. My problem with this dilema, is that deciding at a time that may or may not require violence usually is irrational... and thus the probability of going throw with violence seems more apparant. Do others, around the world struggle with this quagmire... or is it a much simpler answer.
Peace is not just a word.. it is a guiding principle to me. Sadly, principles often get thrown out the window when you're just trying to survive.
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Luke Lieberman
Joined: Feb 13, 2003
Posts: 3007 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Blabbermouth
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Male, 33
Country: United States
Province/State: California
|
Re: When do you cross the line of violence?
December 9, 2003 - 01:28 AM
|
|
Honestly Jedi - I suggest you study a martial art - it will become clearer - it will also become clearer how to use force without creating permanent damage - it is all about control. ("control control you must learn control"
At burning man a drunk started getting very sexually aggressive with a girl who clearly did not appreciate his advances - in the old days I would have simply decked him - from there he might have gotten up and we would have fought -
- instead I executed a simple hand technique attacking his wrist - I created a grappling situation where I had all the leverage and inflicted just enough pain for him to know I was serious. I could have broken his wrist if I needed to (if he pulled a knife) but in the meantime just controlled the situation and had his undivided attention as I explained how a gentleman should act.
I let him go when he had calmed down and agreed that his behavior was wrong. The situation ended and no one was hurt.
If I was in a situation where I felt some close to me, or my own, safety was seriously threatened - I would just break something on the opponents body as fast as I could - the longer a fight goes the greatest chance you have of getting hurt.
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Michael Newton-McLaughlin
Joined: Dec 2, 2001
Posts: 171 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Chatterbox
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Male, 28
Country: United States
Province/State: California
City: Berkeley
|
Re: When do you cross the line of violence?
December 9, 2003 - 07:40 AM
|
|
Originally posted by luke
Honestly Jedi - I suggest you study a martial art - it will become clearer - it will also become clearer how to use force without creating permanent damage - it is all about control. ("control control you must learn control"
At burning man a drunk started getting very sexually aggressive with a girl who clearly did not appreciate his advances - in the old days I would have simply decked him - from there he might have gotten up and we would have fought -
- instead I executed a simple hand technique attacking his wrist - I created a grappling situation where I had all the leverage and inflicted just enough pain for him to know I was serious. I could have broken his wrist if I needed to (if he pulled a knife) but in the meantime just controlled the situation and had his undivided attention as I explained how a gentleman should act.
I let him go when he had calmed down and agreed that his behavior was wrong. The situation ended and no one was hurt.
If I was in a situation where I felt some close to me, or my own, safety was seriously threatened - I would just break something on the opponents body as fast as I could - the longer a fight goes the greatest chance you have of getting hurt.
Totally... I went through brown belt in karate as a kid... I know how to fight. Unfortunately, I did not fully gain that patience/control aspect.
But, Luke, while knowing how to employ force better without violence does not really address my overall question. When is it ok to use that violence, more specifically, against state legitmized authority? When is it ok to fight back against a cop or soldier? Under what conditions? Also... martial arts only works against people with guns if you're an expert.. most of us do not that that luxury.
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Luke Lieberman
Joined: Feb 13, 2003
Posts: 3007 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Blabbermouth
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Male, 33
Country: United States
Province/State: California
|
Re: When do you cross the line of violence?
December 9, 2003 - 08:41 AM
|
|
In this country - never. Let your lawyer fight your battles with authority - this is a democracy. The second you attack a cop it authorizes him to use what ever force is at his disposal - even lethal force.
If you live in a dictatorship perhapes the situation is different - it's not just getting into a fight with a cop, it is uprising against an illigtimate government.
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Fatema
Joined: Jan 2, 2004
Posts: 3 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Tongue-tied
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Female, 27
Country: Bahrain
|
violence
January 5, 2004 - 06:34 AM
|
|
"Violence".. its a very serious and dangerous word.. we always give excuses to use it and to show our point through it.. but this isnt necessary, all we need is to control ourselves, use our minds and to act in the right way.. we shouldnt fight violence with violence, because we are going to be just like them, because we used what they had used (violence) and that's the wrong way to handle violence, we shouldnt let our emotion play a part in this, because if we let it go, we are going be wrong as much as they are, so its important to control our emotions and let our mind handle it not our hand.. didnt we learn from the past and the present, how to handle violence, so we can succeed in whatever we want to do? didnt we learn from Ghandi..this clever leader, who fought the colonization with his mind and with one principle "Non-violence", so he could send his land and poeple to freedom, which he had succeed in.. he was just one poor slim and educated man, who refused to use violence and insisted on "no violence" principle and he won by that his land and poeple freedom and the most important the respect of the settler, his poeple and the whole world. He absorbed his settlers anger and made them think about the violence they are using against his poeple.. he made them regret it and feel sorry about it and made them conclude that violence isnt going to give them the land or whatever they want... we have to learn from this and act by it.. dont you agree with me????
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Cicero
Joined: Feb 1, 2004
Posts: 1020 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Blabbermouth
User is
Offline
Country: United Kingdom
Province/State: London, City of
City: London
|
Re: When do you cross the line of violence?
February 21, 2004 - 01:25 AM
|
|
Violence is a way of life we dont need to emphasise. It is not a creative one and makes more harm than use.
Violent sentiment must be changed (coz its energetic) into sentiment of work and creation. Thats best way to waste too much energy in person
Ave Futuria
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Angelo Embuldeniya
Joined: Sep 11, 2003
Posts: 3 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Tongue-tied
User is
Offline
 Virtual Volunteer
Gender & Age: Male, 28
Country: Bahrain
|
Re: When do you cross the line of violence?
February 21, 2004 - 05:41 AM
|
|
Criminals aren't born, criminals are created, likewise violence doesn't appear from nowhere... it occurs dur to sparks from some provocative event.
I have found non-violent, non-cooperative techniques in order to protest an unfair stance by anyone very effective!
And i hope that the youth in many private junior high schools in Bahrain see that violent protests during organized rallies by Peace Groups over here just backfires on the original cause.. and i guess that goes for anyother nation's youth!
But the word violence, is a violent term, oui?
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Allie
Joined: Jan 12, 2004
Posts: 8 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Soft-spoken
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Female, 22
Country: United States
Province/State: Pennsylvania
City: Philadelphia
|
Re: When do you cross the line of violence?
March 7, 2004 - 05:24 AM
|
|
I don't think harming another person unless that is the only way out of a life-threatening situation can ever be justified.
Jedimike-You seem way to eager to harm people in a dangerous situation. The focus should be on getting away, not inflicting harm out of anger or to get revenge.
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Fatema
Joined: Jan 2, 2004
Posts: 3 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Tongue-tied
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Female, 27
Country: Bahrain
|
violence
March 31, 2004 - 01:21 AM
|
|
Violence isnt a way of life .. we shouldnt use it .. we should use our mind because violence creats violence or cause it .. so i think violence is unjustified issue no matter how the ugly the situation .. what u think??
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
|
Display posts from:
|
|
