Quote:
Originally posted by Charlatan
Sure Hitler (Saddam, Pol Pot , insert any so-called evil dictator's name here) was stopped. But did we stop racism, genocide and the like? No. We still have all of those things.
Perhaps violence is a part of what it means to be human. I'm not convinced. I think we should strive to solve our differences in non-violent ways. Only through striving to overcome violence will be be rid of it...
The problem is that as long as there are barbarians who believe that an eye for an eye is the *only* way to solve differences there will always be violence. The problem for most people who jump to violence is that it is usually a faster "solution" than other methods. People love instant gratification. Real solutions take longer.
|
Stopping Hitler may not have stopped all Genocide, but it certainly ended the Holocaust. Diplomacy will not work when your opponent refuses to cooperate; your "barbarians" will simply laugh and continue on.
I disagree with your idea that people instinctively jump to violence first. Violence is typically a last resort, and often an act of desperation. In the case of this child (who I do believe is a hero for defending himself), he saw no alternatives. Earlier pleas for assistance had failed, and the child decided to defend himself with what he had. I would do the same, and I expect my children to do the same as well. Then again, I also would not have kept my child in such a blatantly harmful environment.
My problem with the path of nonviolence is the constraint it places on ones actions. Violence should always be a last resort, but to call people who execute it in those situations "cowards" and "simpletons" is foolish. As much as I would like to live in a world where all problems can be solved democratically, in reality I feel such a simplistic view is harmful.