# Does violence solve anything? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 11, 2004, 7:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-violence-solve-anything/259330 "2004-08-11T07:02:01Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 19\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![ruadh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/d2c977/32.png) [@ruadh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ruadh)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2004, 2:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-violence-solve-anything/259330/21 "2004-08-13T14:44:37Z")
> [@Martin Hyde](#): > > Those weren’t policy matters but were rather personnel level mess ups that were part of policy SNAFUs. As I recall there was pretty compelling evidence (published in a number of British newspapers, though mostly ignored by the US press) that the bombing of the Chinese embassy was quite intentional. ---
**Author:** ![Shade](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/2bfe46/32.png) [@Shade](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shade)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2004, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-violence-solve-anything/259330/22 "2004-08-13T16:11:20Z")
I think the quote is intended to mean “Violence is always the worst way of solving anything.” So, if you’re a private citizen, violence is almost always inferior to calling the police, talking it out, firing the guy, or whatever. Even without the safety net of a society (two men on a desert island, two superpowers), coming to an agreement is better, because then you don’t have a black eye or 30mil dead to get to the same result. However, if you disagree so fundamentally, or are cut off from help, that no other solution is possible, you have to. Of course, you can argue whether this meaning is true, but I think you are meant to exlude situations where you’ll definitely die without violence, etc, and if so, I tend to agree. ---
**Author:** ![smiling\_bandit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9a140/32.png) [@smiling\_bandit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smiling_bandit)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2004, 4:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-violence-solve-anything/259330/23 "2004-08-13T16:56:57Z")
The problem here is that violence is not abnormal. It is supernormal, perhaps the natural state of man. People want or need things. Other people want or need the same things or opposed things. Fact of life. If one of these groups wants their goals badly enough, there are no solutions other than violence. I suppose the only alternative to this is selfish nihilism - if no one believes in anything, there’d be no reason to go to war. of course, that would be a depressing, miserable existence, so… ---
**Author:** ![scule](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/4af34b/32.png) [@scule](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scule)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2004, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-violence-solve-anything/259330/24 "2004-08-13T17:50:58Z")
Perhaps what can be reasonably argued here is that the quote “Violence never solved anything” that your mother told you all when you were little is really taken to mean, yes, you may get somewhere by hitting someone, but is the end result for the better? Only very rarely is the answer to this question yes. Generally, since it takes at least two for there to be violence (leaving aside the question of self-mutilation or suicide), it can be safely argued that violence is only necessary in response to other violence. If the originator of some form of violence did not enact their aggression on the recipient in the first place, then there would be no need for a response. For example, if Hitler didn’t invade Poland, Austria, etc, or start killing off Jews and other so-called “undesirables”, it seems to me that the Allies would have ever needed to attack him. Whatever problems would have arisen could have been dealt with by diplomacy. But he acted violently initially, and so got what he deserved. So I would say the quote is valid, insofar as people continue to act peacefully to each other for the greater good. Yes, there are debates on what that is, but leaving those aside, I don’t think it’s a stretch to argue that using violence rather than discussion and debate is better in the end. Also, **Dejan** , welcome, and good summary. I hope you stay on the board. My father is a Bosnian Croat, and though Croats and Serbs don’t often get along (that’s just a _bit_ of an understatement), I could care less for ethnic differences and he hates all Slavs equally 😉 . It would be really nice to see some views from your part of the world, though, and anything that contributes to the diversity on this board is a good thing. The SDMB is a brilliant place, and one can learn a _lot_. ---
**Author:** ![scule](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/4af34b/32.png) [@scule](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scule)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2004, 5:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-violence-solve-anything/259330/25 "2004-08-13T17:54:13Z")
> [@](#): > > I don’t think it’s a stretch to argue that using violence rather than discussion and debate is better in the end. :smack: :smack: :smack: Is _not_ better in the end, of course. Gotta proofread. ---
**Author:** ![Silocke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/3ec8ea/32.png) [@Silocke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Silocke)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2004, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-violence-solve-anything/259330/26 "2004-08-14T20:29:51Z")
> [@](#): > > Problems solved by violence: > > 1. Taxation without representation. > > 2. Slavery. > > 3. Nazism. 1. American War of Independance 2. American Civil War 3. World War II (where America saved the rest of the world’s ass) The United States of America is infallible in the use of it’s superior military power. That’s all you need to know for now. ---
**Author:** ![Askia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/96bed5/32.png) [@Askia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Askia)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2004, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-violence-solve-anything/259330/27 "2004-08-14T20:44:48Z")
**Silocke.** Jingoism is the mother of many [stupid statements.](http://www.historychannel.com/exhibits/military_blunders/mb_iasd.html) ---
**Author:** ![Earthworm\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f07891/32.png) [@Earthworm\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Earthworm_Jim)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2004, 9:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-violence-solve-anything/259330/28 "2004-08-14T21:11:57Z")
> [@Silocke](#): > > 1. American War of Independance > > 2. American Civil War > > 3. World War II (where America saved the rest of the world’s ass) > > The United States of America is infallible in the use of it’s superior military power. That’s all you need to know for now. 1. A collection of British farmers vs. the British crown. There was no American military power in this conflict. 2. The Americans vs. The Americans. Not much chance of the Americans coming away without a win… 3. The US was [not exactly the #1 military power in the world](http://www.learner.org/biographyofamerica/prog22/transcript/page02.html) when we entered WWII. > [@](#): > > But Americans needed time to bury Germany, and that was provided by the Russian army on Germany’s eastern front, which suffered more than three million casualties in 1941 alone. Who saved whos ass? All in all, I have to disagree with your assessment. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2004, 9:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-violence-solve-anything/259330/29 "2004-08-14T21:19:48Z")
> [@Shade](#): > > I think the quote is intended to mean “Violence is always the worst way of solving anything.” So, if you’re a private citizen, violence is almost always inferior to **calling the police** , talking it out, firing the guy, or whatever. But that’s just another form of violence, no? You’re calling the professionals in the expectation that they will use violence if needed. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2004, 9:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-violence-solve-anything/259330/30 "2004-08-14T21:38:59Z")
> [@scule](#): > > My father is a Bosnian Croat, and though Croats and Serbs don’t often get along (that’s just a _bit_ of an understatement), I could care less for ethnic differences and he hates all Slavs equally 😉 He’s a Croat and “he hates all Slavs equally”? Including Croats? ---
**Author:** ![Plan\_B](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3ec8ea/32.png) [@Plan\_B](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Plan_B)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2004, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-violence-solve-anything/259330/31 "2004-08-14T21:46:02Z")
I used to be a pacifist. I even read A. J. Muste and all that. Then I went to visit the Anne Frank house in Holland to confirm my views about the evils of war. Saw something funny there. Her dad had a map of Europe showing the advances of the American and British forces. They were quick enough for him too slow for Anne. Maybe if there hadn’t been so many pacifists in Great Britain between the wars Anne Frank would be a 70 something broad in Amsterdam playing with the grandkids or whatever. ---
**Author:** ![RandomLetters](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/8edcca/32.png) [@RandomLetters](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RandomLetters)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2004, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-violence-solve-anything/259330/32 "2004-08-15T01:51:48Z")
Remember that violence is the last resort of the incompetent. The competent use violence well before their is any need for last resorts. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Carter\_of\_Mars](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/2bfe46/32.png) [@John\_Carter\_of\_Mars](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Carter_of_Mars)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2004, 4:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-violence-solve-anything/259330/33 "2004-08-15T04:19:41Z")
> [@RandomLetters](#): > > Remember that violence is the last resort of the incompetent. The competent use violence well before their is any need for last resorts. Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winnah…! No, really, that’s probably real close to the truth of the matter. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2004, 5:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-violence-solve-anything/259330/34 "2004-08-15T05:59:20Z")
**Martin Hyde** Our involvement in Somalia was not an “invasion,” but more to your point, _it was not Bill Clinton_. Troops were sent into Somalia by George Bush Sr before he left office. They were already there when Clinton was sworn in. For some reason I see this meme a lot from right wingers. I even saw Bill O’Reilly get this wrong once. But facts are facts. Bill Clinton did not send troops into Somalia. ---
**Author:** ![Starving\_Artist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/aeb1de/32.png) [@Starving\_Artist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Starving_Artist)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2004, 7:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-violence-solve-anything/259330/35 "2004-08-15T07:05:49Z")
I seem to be repeating this a lot lately, but I read a quote (I forget by who) to the effect that: “People sleep warm and safe in their beds at night because rough men stand ready to do violence in their behalf.” ---
**Author:** ![Starving\_Artist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/aeb1de/32.png) [@Starving\_Artist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Starving_Artist)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2004, 7:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-violence-solve-anything/259330/36 "2004-08-15T07:13:31Z")
Okay, I just Googled it and it appears that it is arguably attributed to George Orwell, although Orwell scholars disavow that he said it. And the wording is slightly different, i.e. “People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.” ---
**Author:** ![ruadh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/d2c977/32.png) [@ruadh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ruadh)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2004, 9:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-violence-solve-anything/259330/37 "2004-08-15T09:56:32Z")
> [@Earthworm Jim](#): > > 1. A collection of British farmers vs. the British crown. There was no American military power in this conflict. A lot of those who fought on an American side would have been born and raised in America. Of course most of them were _descended_ from the British, but they weren’t British themselves. There were also plenty of American Indians fighting, on both sides. ---
**Author:** ![Clothahump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/51bf81/32.png) [@Clothahump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Clothahump)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2004, 3:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-violence-solve-anything/259330/38 "2004-08-15T15:50:39Z")
> [@Paulies](#): > > I always though violence never solved anything. That it would only lead to more problems and that the world should exist in peace. Then I came across these two quotes: > > Anyone who clings to the historically untrue - and thoroughly immoral - doctrine ‘that violence never settles anything’ I would advise to conjure up the ghosts of Napoleon Bonaparte and of the Duke of Wellington and let them debate it. The ghost of Hitler could referee, and the jury might well be the Dodo, the Great Auk and the Passenger Pigeon. Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than has any other factor, and the contrary opinion is wishful thinking at its worst. Breeds that forget this basic truth have always paid for it with their lives and freedom. ~ R. Heinlein > > “War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.” - John Stuart Mill > > How much truth is there in these quotes? They sound dead on point. A good debate should put the issue in perspective. What do you guys think? They are absolutely accurate. Peace is always preferable. Every effort to secure peace should be made. But every once in a while, there comes a time when you just have to kick ass and take names in order to ensure that peace. And when that time comes, you have to do it with 100% conviction and committment. ---
**Author:** ![scule](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/4af34b/32.png) [@scule](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scule)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2004, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-violence-solve-anything/259330/39 "2004-08-16T14:19:04Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > He’s a Croat and “he hates all Slavs equally”? Including Croats? Yes, even Croats. I exaggerated there, hence the 😉 , but there is a grain of truth in the statement. It’s more of a lack of patience he has for them, or a general distaste. If you ever have to deal with people from the former Yugoslavia for any extended length of time, you will come to understand that logic and reason are far less preferable to screaming and vitriol. I personally have no grudge, since I was born and raised here and did not grow up among the deeply ingrained hatreds of the Slavic peoples (of the former Yugoslavia), but my father has been rebuked and criticized and even “cast out”, if you will, by his ethnic brethren enough to reinforce his existing distaste for them. There’s a reason he is here and not there. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-violence-solve-anything/259330.md?page=1)