?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Violence

Those of you who know me well understand that I abhor violence although I would reluctantly use it as a means of self-defense. Despite my aversion to violence, the topic is nonetheless a grey area for me. Does self-defense include pre-emptive violence? What about retaliation as a means of deterence? I have no clear-cut, satisfying answers to these questions.

Last night we watched Munich. The film reinforced my opinion that there are no good guys and no bad guys in conflicts amongst Middle Easterners. There are simply groups of people who lack athe imagination to solve conflict without violence. Everyone is a loser.

This morning I am pondering violence as a solution to inequality of resources. Someone inherits a fortune because he was lucky enough to be born into a family of billionaires. The laws of the land say that the money is legally his. So he controls an obscenely large amount of resources without needing to work a day in his life while thousands who are born into poor families work their asses off just to stay alive. This doesn't seem fair to me. But how would you convince the wealthy to abandon the status quo without taking their resources with violence or the threat of violence? By saying pretty please?

Comments

( 6 comments — Leave a comment )
slyfoot
May. 20th, 2006 03:25 pm (UTC)
Now, see, this is just the sort of thing that got Marx in trouble! Next thing you know you'll be advocating revolution and the outlawing of opiates for the masses!

Heh :)
hostirad
May. 20th, 2006 06:20 pm (UTC)
Smiley duly noted. Seriously, though, I was thinking about Marx when I wrote my post. I doubt that I would ever advocate violent revolution. Yet, while I am certainly not suffering materially, I can understand how those who are suffering would rise up.
queenlyzard
May. 21st, 2006 02:22 am (UTC)
Actually, Marx had some pretty darn good ideas. There was really only one flaw in his theory, and it was a major one. He believed that Communism would change human nature. Now, human nature can be controlled, contorted, and educated against, but it cannot be changed. At least not without resorting to high-tech manipulation of things like the human genome, which opens up a whole new can of ethical worms....

I haven't seen either movie, by the way, but I'mfamiliar with the type of ethical dilemma of which you speak.
hostirad
May. 21st, 2006 03:35 pm (UTC)
You hit the nail right on the head about Marx and human nature.
anan_ab
May. 20th, 2006 04:28 pm (UTC)
Have you seen the movie Syriana? It came out around the same time as Munich and I think they deal with some similar issues.

Anyway, if you enjoyed Munich, you may enjoy Syriana as well.
hostirad
May. 20th, 2006 06:14 pm (UTC)
I don't know if enjoy aptly describes my reaction to Munich. Disturbed is more like it, although I do rather like being disturbed by films that make me think. I just read the synopsis of Syriana on the official web site and I am putting it on my list of to-see films.
( 6 comments — Leave a comment )