Martin Luther King once said that “non-violence is a just and powerful weapon; a sword that heals; it cuts without wounding and ennobles the man who wields it.” Nov violence is more effective than violent confrontations in the fight for justice, fairness and equality.
The use of violence to fight for justice in most cases escalate to the point where the fighters remaining agenda is vengeance, victory and self-defense. When violence is the tool for getting justice, any moral arguments of the people fighting for justice are rendered irrelevant. Having used violent means, the opponent is justified to retaliate violently. The irony in all these is that each side of the divide is usually able to argue as to who started the violence (Miller 2005). The use of violence usually leads to the loss of innocent lives, the destruction of property, and in most instances, do not achieve the objective that it set out to achieve.
Non-violence methods, such as those castigated by Martin Luther King and Mahatma Gandhi try to avoid this trap by evading any violent confrontations. Far from being termed as cowardice, non-violence requires tremendous self-control, courage and a ready heart to endure pain, suffering and death. Non-violent strategies dwell on the strength that they reduce the moral legitimacy of those who persist in their use of violence against non-violence. This loss of legitimacy is a double sword in that it leads to efforts in coalition building that eventually leads to the condemnation of the violent parties, and it often culminates in the imposition of sanctions on the party by the international community. Nonviolence is a strategy used to counter the use of violence. It can also be used against any illegitimate use of legal and political force (Miller 2005).
For nonviolence to be successful, the involved parties must base their actions on moral principles. They