That social injustice does not justify violent action?
I'm not exactly understanding what the question is asking. Any places where I could get info for points to back up this statement would be appreciated.
I am not quite understanding the question, either.
Whether or not you consider the statement to be true is a matter of opinion and the degree of the injustice. It took 100 years to get the Civil Rights Law of 1968 passed, while the main form of protest was nonviolent passive resistance. Mahatma Gandhi manage to get independence for India in a few years by nonviolent means. Although the Boston Tea Party cannot be classified as violence, the Revolutionary War that followed was considered a violent rebellion by the British.
Martin Luther King's march into Selma was definitely NOT violent and was a protest against social injustice. However, there were violent protests in Los Angeles and other places.
The violent protests in L.A., Detroit, Chicago, etc. tended to set back the Civil Rights cause. In the long run, it was the non-violent Civil Rights methods that won over the country to get rid of this form of social injustice.
The question is about whether social injustice justifies violent action. It is asking whether actions such as protests, riots, or acts of violence can be justified as a response to social injustice.
To gain a deeper understanding of this topic and gather points to support the statement that social injustice does not justify violent action, you can consider the following steps:
1. Define social injustice: Start by understanding what social injustice means. Look for reliable sources like dictionaries, academic articles, or sociological textbooks to grasp the concept. This will give you a foundation for discussing why social injustice is a problem.
2. Seek scholarly articles and books: Access academic databases like JSTOR, Google Scholar, or your university library's database to find scholarly articles and books that explore the relationship between social injustice and violent action. Search for terms like "social injustice," "violence," "protests," "ethical considerations," and "justification." This will provide you with well-researched perspectives on the topic.
3. Analyze different viewpoints: Read articles and books that present different perspectives on whether social injustice justifies violent action. Look for arguments both in favor and against this idea. Consider the reasoning and evidence presented by different authors as they make their case.
4. Consult reliable news sources: Look for news articles that highlight real-life examples of social justice movements, protests, or cases of violence related to social injustice. Reputable news outlets often provide analysis and opinions that can help you understand different viewpoints and gather examples to support your argument.
5. Engage with philosophical and ethical frameworks: Consider exploring philosophical and ethical frameworks that address the notion of violence as a response to social injustice. Think about principles such as non-violence, just war theory, or principles of civil disobedience. Analyze these frameworks to form a well-rounded argument.
6. Examine historical and contemporary examples: Study historical movements that aimed to address social injustice and determine whether violence played a role in achieving their goals. Examine movements like the Civil Rights Movement, anti-apartheid struggles in South Africa, or various feminist movements. Additionally, look at contemporary social justice movements around the world to identify whether violent actions are prevalent or justified.
Remember, it is important to critically analyze the sources you find to evaluate their credibility, bias, and reliability. By following these steps and considering different perspectives, you will gain a comprehensive understanding of the topic and gather points to support the statement that social injustice does not justify violent action.