关于 non-violence的argument essay

这篇paper讲诉的是，当越来越多的人意识到我们周围的暴力问题日益增长的趋势的时候,我们应该解决这个问题。这个问题没有统一的答案,由于不同的人有不同的背景和价值观，所以不同的人持有不同的观点。作者认为，防止暴力事件的发生是非暴力的最好方法。

As we are surrounded by a growing awareness on the issue of the growing trend of violence around us, we are supposed to deal with it with great care. There is no universal answer to this question, so various people can hold conflicting opinions due to their distinct backgrounds and values. Some would say people shall be like Gandhi, while others claim “Deal with a man as he deals with you”. As far as I concern, my favor goes to being kind to the majority, and deal extreme cases with special treatments.
I. Is non-violence the best way to prevent violence from happening?
I think non-violence is the best way to prevent violence from happening due to following reasons. First of all, let’s take a close look at the term “non-violence”. It is the personal practice of being harmless to self and others under every condition. It comes from the belief that hurting people, animals or the environment is unnecessary to achieve an outcome and refers to a general philosophy of abstention from violence based on moral, religious or spiritual principles (Sharp, 2011). It came into being when Gandhi was leading a people’s campaign against British colonist and fighting for civil rights of his own people. Nonviolence is a valuable creed because of these two reasons, the first one is it believes every single civilian is equally virtuous and kind-hearted deep inside, and second, no matter what one have suffered from the perpetrator, no matter how reasonable the premise of violence sounds, either hurting someone physically or mentally goes against doctrines of all religions and faith on earth. So firstly we shall regard non-violence a worthy attitude.
On the other hand people have to realize the non-violence attitude has its particular applicable conditions. Gandhi used it and won with it because he was fighting against the British government, which stood for British people. He knew if the blood of those non-violence practitioners was shed, it would bring too much negative influence on the government’s reputation and that’s a burden the Great Britain could never endure. With the pressure from both people of India and the United Kingdom, Gandhi knew this non-violence creed could lead him to his final success and set a good example to all humanity based on the fundamental belief of mankind, that is, it’s never good to harm. However when it comes to our everyday life, such pure and relatively extreme actions are mostly not the best choice, because certain non-violence reactions could be understood as performances of cowardice and provocation. Considering being safe and preventing more loss are our first priority, so we should take different approaches due to certain circumstances, and do our best to abide by our non-violence tenet.
In conclusion, non-violence is a faith worth possessing. Instead of sticking to the dogma all the time, particular behaviors should be expressed due to different circumstances.
II. Is there a time and place where violence is appropriate?
According to the discussion in part one, it’s easy to see that non-violence is a strategy worth taking most of the time. We shouldn’t replace one tyranny by another because we have the appropriate weapon, that is law, to protect our legitimate rights. However are there any places where violence is appropriate? Yes sure there are.
Movies, which stand as an abstract art form, love taking the defects of the legal system as a subject. Among them there is a prominent example, the “Law Abiding Citizen” casted by Gerard Butler and Jamie Foxx. It tells a story about a man named Clyde Shelton was forced to witness the rape and murder of his wife and young daughter in a violent home invasion, and the major murderer James Darby managed to evade death using loopholes in the law. Ten years later after Darby’s bail, Shelton has to do what was supposed to do by the court years ago. At the same time he taught everyone a ruthless lesson about justice (Gray, 2009).
There are artistic components involved in the film, such plots can hardly exist in the real life. But there are a lot of violent revenge events happening around the world. When the governmental compulsory acquisitions of land and other private properties happen, after all legal means failed, there are always sanguinary stories in which individual stands against the regime. More generally, all bloody revolutions are violent responses to violence.
Now we may draw on the conclusion in which case violence is appropriate. Which measure we should take mostly based on the people we are dealing with. If the purpose is to persuade someone reasonable, just try to fulfill what was needed by those potential perpetrators. Like in the article “Defusing violence” written by Alex Kotlowitz, what Cobe did to Flamo, asked him out for lunch, listen to his sincere voice. “It became apparent that the one constant for those like Cobe and Flamo, for those who were able to emerge from the wreckage of their lives and their neighborhoods, for those who were able to walk away from a potentially violent encounter, was to have someone in their lives with high expectations for them, someone who treated them with a sense of dignity and decency.” (Kotlowitz, 2012). On the other hand we have to admit there are absolutely impenetrable cruel people torment others for pleasure. If they are suffering from a mental illness, let psychologists take care of them. Otherwise, let’s go violent!
III. How to deal with violence non-violently?
How can people deal with violence non-violently? As stated in the readings and videos, there are several ways to follow. But what’s most, the first thing to do, is to hold your counterattack impulse as soon as you were violated. Hold your breath and listen to your heart beating in your chest, you will understand everyone has his own sores. Perpetrators are mostly more pathetic than the victims. When someone can not only understand this view but also comprehend it from the inside, you are approaching Gandhi. If you don’t have such compassion, do something may help you forget the unpleasantness and release pent-up emotions. Just remember to be happy and never let anything influenced your normal life.
The origin of the non-violence is humanity and our mental evolvement. Like what was said in the video “Slap her”, “Girls shouldn’t be hit, not even with a flower.” Bully the weak is the behavior of savage beasts. We are human because the strong are willingly to protect the weak and taking it as a responsibility and an obligation. Restoring to force when facing problems is actually a direct sign of crippledom. After realizing this, there will be no more unnecessary violence. However when one is facing someone hurting others for fun, there is another saying for this moment. “Forgiveness is between them and god. It is my job to arrange the meeting.” (Scott, 2004)
In conclusion, what I believe is, we shall be gentlemen in front of ladies, and devils when facing animals. The reason that I have analyzed in the above argument should at least make people aware of the complexities of the issue under discussion.
Works Cited:
[1]Law Abiding Citizen. Dir. F. Gary Gary. Perf. Jamie Foxx, Gerard Butler. The Film Department, 2009. Film.
[2]Man On fire. Dir. Tony Scott. Perf. Denzel Washington, Dakota Fanning. 20th Century Fox, 2004. Film.
[3]Sharp, Gene. Sharp's Dictionary of Power and Struggle: Language of Civil Resistance in Conflicts. New York: Oxford University Press, 2011.
51Due网站原创范文除特殊说明外一切图文著作权归51Due所有；未经51Due官方授权谢绝任何用途转载或刊发于媒体。如发生侵犯著作权现象，51Due保留一切法律追诉权。