Moral Force ProtestingMoral force protest has a greater chance to succeed that physical force protest. Discuss in relation to our contemporary world. In the modern world today, there is an immense diversity of global issueswhich are constantly being dealt with. Moral force protest as well as physicalforce protest are used, in hope of achieving a purpose and proving a point.
Forboth of these acts of protest, there must be a substantial amount of facts andevidences backing it up. Both protests, no matter how it’s done, are in some wayseeking for the support of the leaders’, most of the time, the leaders’ beingthe government. Moral force protest involves logical convincing speeches which are fightingfor a cause within the boundaries of law. It’s possible to legally get enoughsupport for a cause and eventually win by never once using any sort of violence. In some cases, hunger strikes by the victims’ are also done.
Aside from wellconstructed speeches and hunger strikes, the refusal to obey certain laws andthe passive resistance, that is, resisting to incoming violence usually from thegovernment, are other ways to morally protest without any physical violence. Sometimes due to the refusal to abide to certain laws the supporters may findabusive, the moral force protest supporters might find themselves confrontingthe law, and perhaps even acting illegally. In recent years, certain countrieswhich hadn’t previously given women the right to vote changed their decision byreceiving strong moral force protest; this right was gained, and nowadays inthose countries women possess the right to vote. Physical force wasn’t in anyway used in this case. The opposing way to support some strong cause can be through physical forceprotests.
This involves violent protests which may harm people purposely. Destructive attitude from the people supporting a cause by using physical forceis indeed very common. In most cases violence is used in hope of gettingattention and media publicity. Physical force protest, has a very distinctivedifference from moral force protest; one of the most important ones being that,by violence, these supporters are terrorising the general public, and trying toget the government to recognise their terrorism, and give in. Moral forceprotest is not even remotely linked with terrorism.
Not in any way, do the supporters practising moral force protest adapt toterrorism like do these physical force supporters. By terrorising the generalpublic and the government itself, these supporters think they’ll create such anintolerable situation that the government will give in to their extreme andsometimes unnecessary violence. Now, if any government is prepared to give intheir monopoly of violence over to a group supporting an intelligent andimportant cause through physical force protest, the situation is most likely todeteriorate rapidly. The government’s monopoly of violence should constantlyremain intact, under no circumstance should it be put at risk, no matter howthreatening a situation they are facing. Violence should remain their monopoly.
A few examples of physical force protest can be seen in recent IRA bombings;the purpose of the IRA being to gain independence for Northern Ireland fromBritain. So far, these bombings have proved to be counter productive,nevertheless, the IRA seem to be relentless. Therefore they continue toterrorise society and sometimes wound or even kill innocent people. Although not impossible to answer, the issue of whether which protest is moresuccessful, moral or physical, it is a very complex and contradiction filledsubject to discuss and come to a logical and correct conclusion to.
Theacceptance of either form of protest can be in many ways extremely contradictory. Due to the sea of information that surrounds this issue, many valid argumentscan be cleverly twisted in order to support or go against either side. Whilesome people may see their own argument as being absolutely valid and completelytrue in favour of moral protest force, someone else can easily turn around thatsame argument and use it against moral force protest, and in favour of physicalforce protest, still seeing the argument and reasons as a definite truth. Afterall, truth is the real state of things, according to each individual. A reasonable speech clearly justifying any reasons backing up a specificcause may be a lot more effective than acting upon blatant violence to gain theneeded attention to support a global cause.
If the fight for a cause consists ofthoughtful and intelligent reasons, it is likely that the case stated will beheard attentively; more so than if any kind of physical force was used. Validfacts and accurate statistics and information that act within the law have ahigh chance of achieving their goal due to the fact that there are noillegalities being used, no crime is committed, no panic should be feared. Martin Luther King Jr. fought with all his might and power in favour of theblacks of the United States; never once using force, his speeches and protestswere tremendously well received, and always heard. He is in fact, mostremembered for his I have a dream speech, which caused many Americans to stopand think about the cause being fought. By purely using moral force protest,Luther King ended racism in the US of A, although there are still some cases ofextreme racism there, Luther King’s fight clearly decreased it greatly.
Nevertheless, his fight was hard and long, and in more ways than none,incredibly successful, therefore very much worth it. Hunger strikes such as the ones used by the people under the leadership ofGandhi in India, could prove to be extremely effective if done right. Gandhi wasfighting for the independence of India, he wanted freedom from the English, andwas prepared to do everything he could within the limits of moral force protest. By refusing to stand for violence, some people under his leadership wereprepared to lay down on the ground and block the way for tanks to pass. In someways, this could be considered illegal, and the government has the right to evenarrest them, but then again, they are technically not doing anything wrong byobstructing the path for these tanks to come; or more innocently put, by simplylying on the street.
The refusal to obey the law can be considered illegal, but to a certainextent, some laws for being blatantly abusive to the general public, can andprobably will be ignored by some people, understandably so. Physics force protest has been recently used in Israel and in the UK. TheArabs with their suicide bombers’ are killing needlessly and coldly to showtheir discontent with the peace process started by the Israelis. Violence toshow one’s discontent in the way a country is going about trying to bring peace,is undoubtfully ironic and almost unexplainable.
By destroying the human raceand trying to terrorise the Israelis, the Arabs aren’t gaining anything at all,they’re simply gaining publicity which shouldn’t be given to them in the fistplace, for their acts are simply monstrous. The IRA is also a very good example of supporters fighting for a strong andjust cause by means of violence. The cause the IRA are constantly fighting foris actually one that could indeed be expressed in moral force protest andperhaps maybe even justified. By turning to violence, the IRA as well as theArabs are immediately ruling out any possibilities of winning their causes.
Theyare, in the long run, doomed to failure. Today’s world has enough violence and terrorism surrounding its environmentto even consider using any sort of inadequate violence to fight for a cause, nomatter how important. When so many progress can be acquired by simply usingone’s intelligence and logic and supporting a cause following moral forceprotest, why should anyone even stop to consider opting for useless and wastefulviolence is completely beyond me. No government will ever give in to violenceused in order to gain popularity and create havoc for any global issue. Thequest to terrorise their way through, by any supporters using physical forceprotest, is in fact, counter productive, for it’s never actually proven to haveworked. Moral force protest can usually be very effective and successful.
Itshould be strongly considered, specially since we are now living in a time whenviolence seems intent on destroying us. Keep the peace.History
