Causesof Political violence
Political violence is like a festering wound, in that, without the aid of antibiotics the wound has the potential to depress the immune system and eventually overwhelm the individual, leading to death. In this analogy, antibiotics could represent forces that are always looking for the rogue virus's bent on the destruction of the whole body (society). I often wonder why people resort to violence, of any kind, to solve a particular problem. Questions can be asked of the individual(s) involved in carrying out the attacks, but the questions never seem to be answered in a way that will show why violence is needed to resolve conflict. Rather, excuses are rendered in the hopes that by the logic used in explaining why conflict must be resolved, this will justify the actions. This leads, though, to a sort of circular argument. For example, in the case of Saddam Hussein (put aside the fact that he is the president of a nation) is an idiot. Why exactly he felt it was justifiable to invade a country, who at the time had an OK relationship with the United States, and then think the US and/or other countries would allow him to forcibly occupy that country. Whatever his logic, his actions were not justifiable. I believe his logic was as follow
I do not believe that sheer misery will cause revolutionary change; there needs to be a gradual process downword and that revolt will not occur once conditions hit rock bottom. s: Something happened to his country (economically, socially, politically etc. Hussein decided to adopt the "eye-for-an-eye" approach to conflict resolution. It was done in the past, so shall it be done in the future. This thesis though, like the killer ape thesis, is circular in its logic. The misery thesis does explain a reason for why violent expression is necessary for political change. The insanity thesis does, however, explain to what extent inclines the discontent to violent expression. It seems that every, or nearly every, state in the world will resort to brute force to make a point. This then begs the question of, why? I will explore some of the popular assumptions for why people act as they do and try to come to some sort of agreement which we may all universally agree upon. Such as anti-social disorder, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, acute depression, retardation, or autism. Conspiracies are used as a tool for a revolt that is already in progress, not a revolt that wants to be started. This thesis does explain a type of politic used in revolutions but stops short of everything. That is, we are violent because of, say, where we live or the era in which we grew up or the economic status we hold. Finally, the last of the theses put forth by Sederberg is the "Conspiracy Thesis", which "at least puts 'politics' back into political violence and revolution" (Sederberg 108).
Common topics in this essay:
Insanity Thesis,
Conspiracy Thesis,
England Ireland,
Ape Thesis,
,
Saddam Hussein,
Gulf War,
Pie Thesis,
political violence,
cherry pie thesis,
cherry pie,
pie thesis,
violent expression,
killer ape,
killer ape thesis,
ape thesis,
revolutionary change,
thesis explain,
label attached,
College Press,
insanity thesis,
label attached disorder,
attached disorder disorder,
violence revolutionary change,
|
Acceptance Essays
