Violence, last resorts and necessities

Is violence necessary? Is it ever necessary? Is  "violence is the last refuge of the incompetent" as Isaac Asimov wrote?

Dad thought so. I guess he was incompetent as he resorted to violence sometimes.

I 'spose the best important needed thing is to define violence. Try this on.

Violence is force that cause pain, hurt, harm, injury and even death to another entity. That violence can be physical, mental, emotional, economic or any combination.

If I am wrong, tell me.

Accepted.

EXAMPLE

Let's look at an example of violence.

In 2024, I had a total knee replacement. That was violence committed on my person. The doc and crew nearly cut my leg off.

I wanted it. I was tired of the constant pain and being unable to walk any distance. I could have live with the deteriorating knee. I chose another path, a path of violence.

If a joint replacement is not violence, then I need want demand request to hear your definition of violence.

Enlighten me.

ANOTHER QUESTION

Here is another question. Is it violence only when it is a human being doing it to another human being? Leave the idea of rights out of this. Just want to know about violence.

Can a human commit violence against or on a wombat? Is it violence when a shark bites a human? When a male lion takes over a pride and kills the kits, is that violence?

Share your insights, please.

RUNNING ON ASSUMPTIONS

Running on my assumptions that violence is pain, hurt, harm, injury and even death to another entity, then I ask, is violence necessary?

At this point someone is gonna bring up MLK, Ghandi and other so-called pacifists. I say so-called because maybe they never threw a punch, fired a gun or tore someone apart verbally. They absolutely engaged in violence.

The famous bus boycott was economic violence. https://blackpast.org/african-american-history/1955-martin-luther-king-jr-montgomery-bus-boycott/ It brought a public transit system to its knees. How did this affect the bus drivers? Businesses along the routes.

A lawsuit was filed.https://www.britannica.com/event/Montgomery-bus-boycott A court order was issued. Dunno about you, but where I am from, defying a court order leads to violence. You get arrested, you get fined, your salary gets garnished and so on. Physical and economic violence automatically. The stress of being arrested, having your money taken away also leads to mental and emotional stress, externally inflicted violence.

Beyond that, MLK issued a call for force when speaking on the bus situation. "Standing beside love is always justice, and we are only using the tools of justice. Not only are we using the tools of persuasion, but we’ve come to see that we’ve got to use the tools of coercion."

The online Dictionary defines the word coercion as "the practice of persuading someone to do something by using force or threats: 'our problem cannot be solved by any form of coercion but only by agreement'"

Mmhm.Ghandi? https://wagingnonviolence.org/2013/02/what-gandhi-really-thought-about-guns/ "In truth, Gandhi did not oppose the use of violence in certain circumstances, preferring it to cowardice and submission. Even though Gandhi’s spiritual philosophy of ahimsa rejects violence, it permits the use of violent force if a person is not courageous and disciplined enough to use nonviolence. Gandhi regarded weakness as the lowest human flaw, and would rather see a person use violent force in self-defense than be passive."

Jesus? He said to them, "But now let the one who has a moneybag take it, and likewise a knapsack. And let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one." Luke 22:36. 

GOVERNMENT 

Government is violence. Period. Anything government does, it then assumes the authority to back up with punitive measures against those who resist. No? Gimme an instance of a government action that either does not have direct violence or is backed up by violence.

I'm not gonna wait.

HISTORIC HYPOTHETICALS

If you could, you would go back in time and kill Pol Pot? Stalin? Genghis Khan? How about today? If you could whack the midget running North Korea today, would you?

Would you kill one to save millions?

Margaret Traylor is now deceased. When she was alive she told me she could not kill someone no matter the provocation. She would try to stop them, but lethal force was not an option for her. She had 2 daughters.

What about you? Someone comes to kill you, will you defend yourself? Would you defend others if lethal force was the only way?

Violence. It is unfortunately necessary only because someone will always want to control you against your will. Some of these people cannot be reasoned with. Some of these people will only understand superior force.