Drawing on the readings and lectures for this topic, examine the argument that violence is an inevitable
feature of human relationships. Answer with reference to violence at the level of the individual or the
community or the state.
9.* Johnson, P. (1997) A History of the American People, Weidenfeld & Nicolson: London, pp. 667- 671.
- Waters, N. (2008) �Japan�, in G.H. Herb and G.H. Kaplan (eds.), Nations and Nationalism: A
Global Historical Overview, Vol. 2, pp. 817-823.
Violence is an inevitable feature of human relationships
Violence is an inevitable feature of human relationships. Sometimes, violence may be
applied in fighting a good cause (Held 59). There are circumstances under which war among
states may be allowed. For a war to be considered as just, it must fulfill the requirement of just
cause (McMahan 663). This implies that there must be a sufficient reason for war. From the
perspective of classical writings, a state may resort to war in circumstances where another state
has committed or imminently threatened to commit a wrong against the former. This wrong
needs to be sufficiently serious to be considered as a violation of a state’s rights. Accordingly,
the rules which govern just and unjust wars tend to be in favor of the drafters (Yoder 53). With
the changes in technology, rules are being written in favor of the party states with the greatest
strength in terms of older technology. International rules also approve war as just where
Surname 2
necessity calls for war. Some states are compelled to war to revenge against the wrongs done to
them by another state.
Racial prejudices have also led to acts of violence among states. The U.S is also
notorious of perceiving the Japanese as subhuman or nonhuman creatures such as insects,
reptiles, monkeys, and rats. For instance, the U.S.’s perception of the Japanese as people who
“breed like rats, live like rats, and act like rats” made them feel that all the Japanese should be
send back to Japan. This verbal discourse was accompanied by humiliating treatment that indeed
reinforced the fact that Japanese are less human. During the war in Asia, there was prevalence in
exterminationist policies, technological change, dehumanization, and racism, which were
demonstrated in unprecedented ways (Dower 97). The Japanese felt humiliated by the manner in
which Asian states were being treated by the U.S. In this spirit, Japan resolved to fight in order to
survive. Japan believed that she was the most advanced country in Asia and that she had to
assume leadership in the bid to liberate the whole continent from oppression (Waters 820). The
Hiroshima Bombing was seen by the U.S. as a just cause that was made in retaliation to Japan’s
wrong doing (Johnson 669). Japan wished she could retaliate but U.S. was too powerful that she
had to surrender. When states are in war against each other, the subjects do not get confronted by
the consequences of their decision to carry out violent acts (Milgram 21).
States that have an inherent feeling of insecurity due to the general perception that
violence is inevitable. This is the reason for the numerous disarmament campaigns and
regulations among states. It is presumed that states which have many arms pose more danger to
other states. For instance, during the World War I, Germany committed many atrocities against
other states due to her superiority in weaponry. This made other states to conclude that there was
Surname 3
need for Germany to disarm in order to avoid further violence. Up to now, some states are
against complete disarmament because of insecurity (Pinker 322).
Thus, war is an inevitable part in human relationships. States have set out laws to regulate
the relationships among each other in order to avoid acts of violence that may be committed by
one state against another (McMahan 673). International law allows states to engage in war if it is
to achieve a just cause rather than other motivations. However, sometimes this is not the case.
Prejudices have always caused members one state to cause injustices to members of other state.
Works Cited
Dower, J. W. (1986) War without Mercy: Race and Power in the Pacific War, Faber & Faber:
London, pp. 77-93.
Held, V. (2004) ‘Terrorism and war’, Journal of Ethics, 8, pp. 59-75.
Johnson, P. (1997) A History of the American People, Weidenfeld & Nicolson: London, pp. 667-
671.
McMahan, J. (2007) ‘Just war’, in R. Goodin, P. Pettit & P. W. Pogge (eds), Companion to
Contemporary Political Philosophy, 2nd edn, Wiley-Blackwell: Chichester, Volume II, pp. 669-
677.
Milgram, S. (1975) ‘The perils of obedience’, Dialogue, 8, pp. 16-27.
Pinker, S. (2011) The Better Angels of our Nature: A History of Violence and Humanity,
Penguin: London, pp.322-334.
Surname 4
Waters, N. (2008) ‘Japan’, in G.H. Herb and G.H. Kaplan (eds.), Nations and Nationalism: A
Global Historical Overview, Vol. 2, pp. 817-823.
Yoder, J. H. (1996) When War Is Unjust: Being Honest in Just-War Thinking, 2nd edn, Orbis
Books: Maryknoll New York, pp. 50-70.
