View Poll Results: When is violent protest justified?

Voters
59. You may not vote on this poll
  • Always

    2 3.39%
  • Never

    24 40.68%
  • Under certain conditions (please explain)

    33 55.93%
Page 8 of 18 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 173

Thread: When is violent protest justified?

  1. #71
    Global Moderator
    The Hammer of Chaos
    Goshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Dixie
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:06 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,190

    Re: When is violent protest justified?

    Quote Originally Posted by joG View Post
    In any event the justice system failed in one of its main functions. It was not seen to have been served. And if the people do not believe that justice will protect them, they revolt.


    Why should people believe that the justice system will protect them, if they get stopped by a cop after robbing a store and then apparently resist arrest?

    Fiddling While Rome Burns
    ISIS: Carthago Delenda Est
    "I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."

  2. #72
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,075

    Re: When is violent protest justified?

    Quote Originally Posted by ThePlayDrive View Post
    Note : While I understand that everyone will respond to this thread through the lens of their experiences, I ask that everyone do their best to put aside any emotions, prejudices or non-intellectual motives that may color how they present their ideas when responding to the thread question and to other posters.

    In light of the violent protests in Ferguson as well as the calls for peaceful protests by some Americans, I believe that the question of when violent protest is justified has become a very important one to consider, if not fully answer. Given this importance, I pose the question to the members of DP : When is violent protest justified?

    Before you answer the question, I think it's fair for me to do that myself, though I should note that my position on this topic is still developing. In short, I believe that violent protest is justified when two conditions are met : 1. When the human or civil rights of the protesters have been threatened. 2. When all or most nonviolent means of protest have failed to secure the human or civil rights that have been threatened.
    Do you mean violence as in rioting,looting and destroying privately owned property as in the case with the Ferguson protesters rioters? The **** no that is never ever justified. If you mean attacking government forces as an attempt to overthrow the government then sure that can be justified but I do not see it as a protest turning violent, I see that as a revolt.
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  3. #73
    Sage
    faithful_servant's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Beautiful Central Oregon
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    10,700

    Re: When is violent protest justified?

    Quote Originally Posted by ThePlayDrive View Post
    Note : While I understand that everyone will respond to this thread through the lens of their experiences, I ask that everyone do their best to put aside any emotions, prejudices or non-intellectual motives that may color how they present their ideas when responding to the thread question and to other posters.

    In light of the violent protests in Ferguson as well as the calls for peaceful protests by some Americans, I believe that the question of when violent protest is justified has become a very important one to consider, if not fully answer. Given this importance, I pose the question to the members of DP : When is violent protest justified?

    Before you answer the question, I think it's fair for me to do that myself, though I should note that my position on this topic is still developing. In short, I believe that violent protest is justified when two conditions are met : 1. When the human or civil rights of the protesters have been threatened. 2. When all or most nonviolent means of protest have failed to secure the human or civil rights that have been threatened.
    First of all, what is happening in Ferguson is not violent protest, it's theft, vandalism and arson. there is no protest, just a bunch of thugs using this situation as an excuse to run wild.
    Our nation has not always lived up to its ideals, yet those ideals have never ceased to guide us. They expose our flaws, and lead us to mend them. We are the beneficiaries of the work of the generations before us and it is each generation's responsibility to continue that work. - Laura Bush

  4. #74
    Educator Flamethrower's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Last Seen
    01-13-15 @ 10:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,043

    Re: When is violent protest justified?

    The best justification for a violent protest was when American rebels demanded freedom from British rule in 1776.

    Anyone who has voted for Obama twice and not regretted their actions are the very same people who would justify burning and looting in Ferguson over a clear cut case of justifiable homicide.
    “Egotist, n. A person of low taste, more interested in himself than in me.”
    ― Ambrose Bierce, The Unabridged Devil's Dictionary

  5. #75
    Sage
    faithful_servant's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Beautiful Central Oregon
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    10,700

    Re: When is violent protest justified?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gaius46 View Post
    In a society of laws with mechanisms to change said laws violent protest is never justified.
    Well said, but I would add one caveat to that: When the gov't prevents the legal processes that allow this to occur from happening and a large percentage of the population finds themselves completely cut off from legal avenues to address the situation, then it's time to take the gov't down. Not burn cars in the streets, but to confront the GOVERNMENT with the necessary level of violence needed to stop it from further violations of the law.
    Our nation has not always lived up to its ideals, yet those ideals have never ceased to guide us. They expose our flaws, and lead us to mend them. We are the beneficiaries of the work of the generations before us and it is each generation's responsibility to continue that work. - Laura Bush

  6. #76
    Haters gon' hate
    MarineTpartier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Last Seen
    01-04-16 @ 04:58 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    5,586
    Blog Entries
    8

    Re: When is violent protest justified?

    Quote Originally Posted by ThePlayDrive View Post
    Note : While I understand that everyone will respond to this thread through the lens of their experiences, I ask that everyone do their best to put aside any emotions, prejudices or non-intellectual motives that may color how they present their ideas when responding to the thread question and to other posters.

    In light of the violent protests in Ferguson as well as the calls for peaceful protests by some Americans, I believe that the question of when violent protest is justified has become a very important one to consider, if not fully answer. Given this importance, I pose the question to the members of DP : When is violent protest justified?

    Before you answer the question, I think it's fair for me to do that myself, though I should note that my position on this topic is still developing. In short, I believe that violent protest is justified when two conditions are met : 1. When the human or civil rights of the protesters have been threatened. 2. When all or most nonviolent means of protest have failed to secure the human or civil rights that have been threatened.
    When human rights have been violated, I can see violence being an option ie the Holocaust, etc. Civil rights? No, I do not believe they warrant a violent encounter. Being told you will not be given the same access to something as someone else, etc is something that should be protested, not something to kill another human being over.
    “Mr. Speaker, I once again find myself compelled to vote against the annual budget resolution for a very simple reason: it makes government bigger.” ― Ron Paul
    Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of Liberty. – Thomas Jefferson

  7. #77
    On Vacation
    joko104's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    12-16-17 @ 04:30 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    31,569
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: When is violent protest justified?

    I voted no because there is a difference between a "protest" and a violent revolution against force. A violent "protest" is never justified. However, a violent revolution could be.

  8. #78
    On Vacation
    joko104's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    12-16-17 @ 04:30 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    31,569
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: When is violent protest justified?

    Quote Originally Posted by MarineTpartier View Post
    When human rights have been violated, I can see violence being an option ie the Holocaust, etc. Civil rights? No, I do not believe they warrant a violent encounter. Being told you will not be given the same access to something as someone else, etc is something that should be protested, not something to kill another human being over.
    The holocaust doesn't work as an example because then use of violence would be acts of self defense. Violence is justified when it defensive - even if proactively -against assaultive violence.

    Did the American Revolution begin as a violent "protest" or violent "revolution?"

  9. #79
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: When is violent protest justified?

    Quote Originally Posted by ThePlayDrive View Post
    What, in your view, are the elements of modern violent protests that make it improper?
    Typically that it tends to include and promote the looting and destruction of private business and community.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  10. #80
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Last Seen
    11-17-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    19,610

    Re: When is violent protest justified?

    Quote Originally Posted by ThesisQuasar View Post
    I had considered elaborating further on that point of consideration, but since you asked, I will.

    It heavily depends on a variety of factors and new considerations:

    How rigged is the democracy that is present in a given society? Are there any peaceful loop holes that are reliable enough to create positive change? What is the degree of oppression to necessitate violence? What type(s) of oppression are present?

    I think that if a democracy is not able to handle or meet the basic necessities of its citizens, Or lacks basic infrastructure for its citizens, Or is actively committing negative actions against innocent citizens (Such as genocide, enforced slavery, etc) then a controlled form of goal-driven violence is justified, just as long as the violence is funneled for the goal of making conditions better. Violence without a goal, or that ultimately does not help towards a goal to justify itself, is both pointless and unethical.

    If a democracy prevents people from having basic rights and/or liberties, then the circumstances that would justify goal-driven violence aren't nearly as urgent, given that the prevention of rights isn't preventing someone from meeting their basic needs and necessities. As long as the democracy isn't severely rigged enough to prevent change democratically or through peaceful protest, and the aforementioned, then Violence can be deemed unnecessary. Violence in this second set of circumstances would most-likely almost never have to considered, and should only ever be considered if absolute stagnation is persistent on a permanent basis.
    Okay, I understand your position better now. I think we're pretty much on the same page. Thanks for clarifying the nuances.

Page 8 of 18 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •