Do you think that violence can sometimes be a justifible form of protest against the government?

Question

Why or why not?

Answer 1

Interesting question.  It would seem that you are trying to ask if violence can be a justifiable means to promote change within a government.  Protest, as has already been stated in other answers, cannot be considered in a violent context.  

Protest implies a means of communication, and communication requires both a response.  If you chose violence as a medium then you must accept a similar response, and just like that you are no longer protesting you are rebelling and subversive (not to mention a probable terrorist–as has already been mentioned).

That being said, I think if you consider violence as a justifiable means of change then you can probably make that argument.  However this does not equal a "blank check" to permit violence with impunity.  Simple choice of cause does not automatically allow course of action.  Too often a good cause can become a hypocritical extension of supposed justice.

Answer 2

It seemed to be a good idea in 1776.  The US government has no problem using violence as a justifiable form of protest.  History shows us that it's often the first choice.  Kent State comes to mind. I would not want to take up arms against my own government, but history shows me that they are willing to use them against me.

Answer 3

There will never be a place for violence anywhere in our democracy, violence only achieves hatred by victims of that violence. The old adage make love not war is a wise saying that all of us should note.

ATB Red

Answer 4

No. It's beyond people's right to express their ideas. If you know Jose P. Rizal (Philippine National Hero), he made his protest through writings.

Violence hurts people. It could be an effective way to scare the government but I don't openly approve of it. And besides, how would you prove that you have good foundations of protest through violence?

Answer 5

Not only is it justifiable, our country (US) was founded with the understanding that the people had AN OBLIGATION to revolt whenever the government became tyrannical.  The number of writings supporting this statement is in the hundreds if not thousands of the founders of this nation.  

Jefferson for one said that rebellions were necessary.  He stated that every generation, patriots and tyrants would die so that freedom would be secure.

The option for rebellion is THE ONE reason why the Second Amendment to the Bill of Rights, called the cornerstone of the Bill of Rights, was essential to the ratification of the Constitution.

The Declaration of Independence was a statement of the reasons why violence was necessary against the current (British) rule.  I suggest you go and read it for an illumination of reasons when our forefathers believed it was necessary.

What has happened to our learned people, our scholars, our historians?  Whatever happened to the treasured memories of the many who lost their lives to end tyrannical rule within these shores (US) so that we could enjoy the freedoms from tyrants that we in fact enjoyed until the creation of the Federal Reserve in 1914?

In the 20th century alone, 56 million people exterminated because their guns were taken away by their government.

Australia took away the guns of their citizens and after twelve months of the experiment: homicides, up 3.2%; assaults, up 8.6%, armed robberies, up 44%.

Noah Webster stated it succintly: "The Supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of people are armed and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States... and the jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to be unjust and oppressive."

Now who can argue with that?  I assure you that to resist tyranny and violence with an equal degree of response is neither immoral nor unjust, and that to do so is a civic obligation imposed on us as caretakers of the experiment of freedom, inherited from the heroes of this Republic.  They had doubts as to whether we their descendants would be worthy of this gift and at times wondered if we would make the sacrifices thus required, but to be called "Americans' we would not bend our knee and accept slavery and tyranny without a fight!

Let every man be armed!

Answer 6

I think these opinions from the past speak volumes to why and when violence is justifible against the government.  I beleive that if our forefathers were alive today.   They would lay seige to DC.  Tar and feather all the politician and hang them right on the steps of the buildings as a reminder of what happens to those that s***w Americans!

      But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."

This is quoted from the American Declaration of Independence!

"When ancient opinions and rules of life are taken away, the loss cannot possibly be estimated. From that moment we have no compass to govern us, nor can we know distinctly to what port to steer."

     Edmund Burke

Government is not reason, it is not eloquence. It is force, and like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. Never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action.

       George Washington

Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence. The church, the plow, the prairie wagon, and citizen's firearms are indelibly related. From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurrences, and tendencies prove that to insure peace, security and happiness, the rifle and the pistol are equally indispensable. Every corner of this land knows firearms, and more than 99 99/100 percent of them by their silence indicate they are in safe and sane hands. The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference; they deserve a place with all that's good. When firearms go, all goes; we need them every hour.

      George Washington

"The liberties of our country, the freedom of our civil constitution are worth defending at all hazards; and it is our duty to defend them against all attacks. We have received them as a fair inheritance from our worthy ancestors: they purchased them for us with toil and danger and expense of treasure and blood, and transmitted them to us with care and diligence. It will bring an everlasting mark of infamy on the present generation, enlightened as it is, if we should suffer them to be wrested from us by violence without a struggle, or be cheated out of them by the artifices of false and designing men."

          Samuel Adams

If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin.

      Samuel Adams

"... whenever any form of government becomes destructive ... it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it..."

        Thomas Jefferson

"I hold it, that a little rebellion, now and then, is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical."

           Thomas Jefferson

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure."

           Thomas Jefferson

"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."

      Thomas Paine

      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government.

      Edward Abbey

We must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt.  We must make our election between economy and liberty or profusion and servitude.  If we run into such debt, as we must be taxed in our meat and in our drink, in our necessaries and our comforts, in our labors and our amusements, for our calling and our creeds…  we will have no time to think, no means of calling our miss-managers to account, but we will be glad to obtain subsistence by hiring ourselves to rivet their chains on the necks of our fellow suffers…  And this is the tendency of all human governments.  A departure from principle in one instance becomes a precedent foe another… till the bulk of society is reduced to be mere automatons of misery…  And the fore-horse of this frightful team is public debt.  Taxation follows that, and in it’s train wretchedness and oppression.

      Thomas Jefferson  1743-1826

Answer 7

Decode this lyrics " Don' t know much " - about misery.

When living human kind were living in misery with communication problems.

Luke 9.55-56

Exodus 22. 21

Exodus 23.9

Leviticus 19.33-34

Leviticus 4. 13,22

Luke 6.39-40,41-45,46-49

Luke 24.44-45

What do you think?

Answer 8

difficult question.   i do not think that we as a people could fire our government / ask them to leave and they would just do so peacefully.  we can't control them .   most average americans do not approve of the war right now, yet it continues.  it's too difficult to impeach the leaders / therefore we wait and package them out.     violence is used to control / restore order at times.    sometimes other people come to the aid of a country when they are having a civil war internally.   lots of countries have and are dealing with corrupt governments.   when other countries get involved ..seems they have financial motives for getting a "new government " LOL .   in any violence , there are people that will be hurt/ killed.   it is not a good method to pursue.   i value human life a great deal.

Answer 9

then its not protest, its violence. You then move from the arena of possibly having a valid complaint to being a common criminal.Violence solves nothing and merely causes the other side to stop listening in order to deal with you violence.

Answer 10

As a protest, no, absolutely not.

In a free society, no one may initiate violence against anyone, and that includes property that belongs to someone else, including the government.

There does come a point where the government's initiation of violence could legitimately be resisted with force, but as a "protest", no.

Answer 11

Violence toward who?  

Violence directed at innocent people as a protest against the government is called terrorism.

Answer 12

Of course.

I think some people on here are not grasping your question, and they think you are asking if violence against citizens is acceptable protest against a government. That is never acceptable. It is not only acceptable but a mandatory duty of all free citizens to resist any government by any means including force as soon as that government claims it has powers not granted to it by the people it governs.

I wonder the version of the revolutionary war the people who responded "no" to your question understand. Of course this nation only exists because citizens of Britain resisted a tyrannical government with force of arms. It is pretty obvious if you can make it to the second amendment of the bill of rights that there can be no mistake of its purpose. There can only be one reason to have citizens armed to protect the freedom of a state.

One guy on here thinks a government owns property. He does not understand a government has nothing. The national government is nothing but a place for all the states to send a rep. to vote on matters and is so bloated and out of control it seems to be taking on an entity of its own, however in a republic everything belongs to the citizens who are the supreme power. The only money the government has it what it takes from us, the only power it has is by our consent, the instant the IRS was foisted upon Americans through the misapplied 16th amendment and shadowy, unconstitutional Federal Reserve Act in 1913 it was time to end the current government, now its almost 100 years overdue.