Greetings steemians! Today I want to talk to you about violence and defense. This seems to come from the misconception that force is equivalent to violence. Force can be defined as the capacity to do work or cause physical change. Violence is the immoral use of force to coerce someone to do something that is contrary to their free will. Anything that impedes the ability of someone to act according to their will so long as they harm none is an act of violence. When an act of violence is committed against an individual it is not only that person's right but their moral duty to act with sufficient force to get that person to stop.
If one person is verbally abusive to another then the one who is being verbally abused has the moral obligation to try to get that person to stop. They may try to calmly explain why they should not be treated in this manner but if that person refuses to let them speak then they might have to raise their voice. This is not abuse. Indeed, that person has the moral obligation to persist in their efforts until their voice is heard to prevent further abuse.
If someone is physically abusive to another then that person has the right to strike back with sufficient force to make the other person stop. Really, if someone has resorted to physical violence to escape hearing the other's defense against their verbal abuse then that is a particular vile form of violence. If that person did not respond to those acts of physical violence with equal physical force then that person has exercised a remarkable amount of restraint and should be commended for their patience.
Dishonesty is also a form of violence. While this certainly includes blatant lies, it is not limited to this. Selectively telling the facts in order to get someone to act a certain way while omitting those that would lead to a different perspective is an act of violence and is abusive to everyone that it effects. This is particularly relevant when someone tries to present another's use of defensive force as an act of violence by omitting the abusive actions that the person was defending against. When this happens the dishonest person has committed an act of violence against the person they presented this misleading information to and the person they painted a false picture of as well as anyone else that would be affected by this.
Removing monetary rewards from someone with no explanation is an act of violence particularly if they were going to use those monetary rewards to benefit others. Then the person who committed the act has committed an act of violence against everyone who would have benefited from those rewards.
When these acts of violence occur they don't just happen to one person, they happen to everyone that is affected by them. This means that all of those people have the moral obligation to respond with sufficient force to correct the situation and prevent further acts of violence. These are not acts of violence. They are the right and the duty of those that have had these acts of violence occur against them.
I've ranted enough for one day but I will leave you with this thought provoking video by a man who has done more than almost anyone to expose how people have been manipulated to have false impressions, the great Mark Passio.
