Political violence

Nature

The use of violence to achieve political ends, the overthrow of an oppressive regime, the abolition of unjust laws, the modification of an discriminatory society, and the elimination of institutionalized violence is likely to end in an equally oppressive, unjust, discriminatory, and violent society. The means, in these situations, lead, as often as not, to civil war. The chief victims of violence are not those who advocate it but, thousands if not millions of innocent civilians caught in the cross fire between the establishment and those in revolt. Those leaders who are attempting to bring about change without resorting to violence are undermined. Any lasting attempt at violent confrontation with a government requires massive support from outside forcing the rebellion to choose between major political powers.

Background

Political violence emerged as a recognized global concern in the early 20th century, notably with the rise of revolutionary movements and state repression. Its significance intensified after World War II, as decolonization, ideological conflicts, and civil wars highlighted its pervasive impact. Scholarly and policy attention grew with the documentation of coups, assassinations, and mass unrest, leading to systematic studies and international monitoring, such as by the Uppsala Conflict Data Program (https://ucdp.uu.se/) and the Global Terrorism Database (https://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/).

Incidence

Political violence remains a persistent and widespread issue, affecting countries across all continents and resulting in significant human, social, and economic costs. Incidents range from targeted assassinations and violent protests to large-scale armed conflicts, often leading to mass displacement, loss of life, and destabilization of societies. According to the Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project (ACLED), over 100,000 incidents of political violence were recorded globally in 2022, highlighting its alarming prevalence and impact on global stability.
In 2023, Sudan experienced a dramatic escalation of political violence when clashes erupted between rival military factions in Khartoum and other cities. The conflict led to thousands of deaths, widespread destruction, and the displacement of millions, severely exacerbating the country’s humanitarian crisis.

Claim

Political violence is a grave and urgent problem that threatens the very foundation of democracy and civil society. It destroys lives, silences voices, and breeds fear, making peaceful discourse impossible. Ignoring political violence allows hatred and extremism to flourish, undermining justice and stability. We must confront and condemn all forms of political violence without hesitation, recognizing that our collective future depends on upholding peace, respect, and the rule of law.

Counter-claim

To suggest that political, religious or other forms of extremism is not justified by history, contemporary reality, logic or law, as did a USA commission on violence in 1969, is plain silly. Many people and governments may believe in liberty, equality and justice but their behaviour is something else. And many people and governments simply do not hold these beliefs. Have not all peaceful demonstrations, sit-ins, freedom rides and marches, defiance campaigns, petitions, letters to editors and legislative representatives been singularly unsuccessful for some people. Have not decades spent, knocking, patiently, moderately and modestly at a closed and barred door been spent by some minorities in vain. The resort to violence to achieve political ends is a tactic that embodies a cry for help; that seeks reforms; that wants attention to grievances and demands; and that demands a response to a deep and abiding sense of iniquity and inequity. There is a point where violence is a necessary and creative response to institutionalized violence; it is saying no, no longer, no more, not again loud enough and clearly enough to be heard. If people are barred from using the sophisticated instruments of the established order for their ends, they will find another way. To the people involved in the riot, the civil war, these are far less lawless and far more representative than the system of arbitrary rules and prescribed channels which they confront every day. These are far less violent than the ongoing brutality of living in a slum, shanty town or backward village maintained by a social and political system geared to maintain the status quo.