The righteous and virtuous questions that surrounds the pacifism subject

Introduction

Peace is the ultimate goal of pacifism… Some point out that there have been many successful nonviolent revolutions throughout modern history (Fitzgerald). Nonviolence is a practice in pacifism, in which the certain individual does not believe in conflict, regardless of who is involved (Fitzgerald) Nations everywhere have created a worldwide controversy in relation to whether or not nonviolence is truly as effective as people accredit it to be. Certain individuals question the potential of nonviolence, while others place confidence in what nonviolence can do. Throughout history, many nonviolent activists have demonstrated the effectiveness of nonviolence by overcoming immense obstacles that has baffled the public. Overall, the extent of nonviolent actions in the past has proven to be an influential part in creating peace. Nonviolence leads to composure; composure leads to peace; peace leads to happiness.

Point

Moreover, as the debate rages on, people are suffering from acts of terrorism, which obligates us to take a stand. Most people want to avoid war, but those willing to engage in violent action believe it is necessary to rid the world of evil (Wilson and Wagner). When pushed to the brink, a nation must be forced to execute orders as if they were a second nature. In the most tragic act of terrorism the United States has ever faced, approximately 3, 000 people were killed mercilessly, but what should the expected response be (Wilson and Wagner)? Is it logical to fly to Iraq, holding picket signs, and expecting them to give in to our demands? Put into mind, the immeasurable amount of pain civilians faced from the terror of dictators such as Saddam Hussein. In a world like this, dictators have no intention in negotiating terms with other nations; their motive stays adamant (Wilson and Wagner). What happens as these acts of violence manifest into a series of events for the entire public to view? A substantial amount of people believe media violence is a cause towards aggression in children, but there is no clear piece of evidence supporting this opinion. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) have undergone research studies reporting 18 out of 3, 500 children show a positive correlation between exposure to media violence and aggression (Freedman). This evidence does not prove that media violence affects aggression in children; instead it proves that there is an insignificant correlation between the two factors. Ponder upon which is more effective against a dictator; a group of nonviolent activists or an army ready to serve their country?

Nonviolence: To Be or Not To Be? Is That Really a Question?

Furthermore, nonviolence has proven itself worthy in the past to a great magnitude by allowing many influential changes to occur. Martin Luther King, Jr. has stated, Peace is not merely a distant goal that we seek, but a means by which we arrive at that goal (Parish and Stingl). What is the greatest weapon anyone can possess? This weapon is not a blade, nor a gun, but the sheer strength of the mind. In the past, by simply emitting ones voice it can create a stampede of followers ready to create a change. [T]he last century has shown us that peaceful people disciplined, organized, and patient can bring about a peaceful change. It has estimated that two-thirds of the worlds population has experienced successful non-violent social change (Parish and Stingl). Generally speaking, this practice of nonviolence amounts to training that brings discipline to the individual. For instance, if nonviolent activists who support peace react to people who taunt them, then their cause has failed (Parish and Stingl). People are usually petrified at the sight of arms from terror, on the other hand, when people witness an unarmed person it establishes a disarming feeling throughout the air. As this is amplified in numbers, there is an immense increase in power. Unarmed movements also increase the likelihood of defections and non-cooperation by police and military personnel, who will generally fight in self-defense against armed guerillas but are hesitant to shoot into unarmed crowds (Berlatsky) Subsequently, throughout generations the practice of nonviolence has portrayed its own capabilities in this battle; a battle without bullets flying through the air, swords clashing with each other, nor a single fist making contact with another human being. Who would you rather want on your side: a military general or someone like Martin Luther King, Jr.?

Opinion

Nonviolence is much more effective than other approaches. To begin with, nonviolence is less costly than other ways. Consider the expense for weapons when anyone wages a war, and compare that to the cost of your words and actions. Additionally, nonviolence decreases the chances of people being in harm. A police officer would feel comfortable shooting at an armed group of people, but he will be hesitant when confronting people that are unarmed (Berlatsky).

Conclusion

All in all, nonviolence has demonstrated its potential in establishing a state of tranquility and peace. As others question the efficiency of this alternative approach in resolving war and creating peace, numerous people have already taken a stand for what they believe in. Nonviolence has waged a war throughout the entire world. One in which, not a single bullet is fired, yet drastic reconstruction of society can occur. Some believe nonviolence is insignificant, causing only a nuisance with their picket signs and marches. However, if you examine this briefly in a different perspective, the evidence is quite clear that nonviolence has in fact created a ripple effect in society. Imagine how life would be if people such as Martin Luther King Jr. and Mahatma Gandhi had not done what they had.