VIOLENCE IS THE LAST REFUGE OF THE
INCOMPETENT
BEYOND COMPETENCE:
THE FINAL REFUGE DILEMMA
FROM COMPETENCE TO CONFLICT:
EXPLORING VIOLENCE AS THE FINAL
OPTION
I. Introduction:
"When individuals exhaust their
arguments, they reach for their swords."
Thesis:
Violence becomes the ultimate recourse for the inept, as they find themselves
with limited avenues to address challenges or crises, ultimately resorting to
violence when pacifist options are depleted.
II. Factors of
Competence and Incompetence:
- Competence is
defined as possessing the necessary skills to tackle problems effectively.
III. Competent
Individuals and Violence:
- Competent
individuals may resort to violence, but it is not their final option.
- Violence is
either constrained or utilized for self-defense.
IV.
Incompetence and Last-Resort Violence:
a) At an
individual level, incompetence leads to resorting to violence:
- Inadequate husbands resort to domestic
violence.
- Ineffective teachers punish students due to
their shortcomings.
b) On a
societal level, incompetence manifests in:
- Ideological groups turn to violence when
peaceful methods fail.
- Incompetent governments suppressing dissent
to conceal their failings.
- Sports teams resorting to violence out of
fear of losing.
c) On an
international scale, incompetence is demonstrated through:
- Israel's forceful occupation of the West
Bank following legal setbacks.
- The USA's resort to violence when
diplomatic efforts fail.
V. Nonviolent
Achievements of the Competent:
- Examples:
- Quaid-e-Azam's achievements without
resorting to violence.
- Barack Obama's diplomatic successes, such
as the Iran deal, in contrast to Trump's reliance on intimidation regarding
North Korea's nuclear program.
VI.
Recommendations:
- Enhancing the
capabilities of the incompetent through education and workshops.
- Strengthening
regulations to curb violence.
VII. Conclusion
These noble words were uttered by Oliver Cromwell when the British monarch Charles I ordered his royal army to arrest members of the British parliament by force. Oliver Cromwell was a prominent English leader who, along with other parliamentarians, demanded popular sovereignty in Britain. The debate on this topic continued for years between the populist and royalist leaders. Finally, when Charles I failed in the civil debate he resorted to violence. This Rickstarted the English Civil War which ended with the decapitation of Charles I. This instance is instructive in the sense that violence has always been the policy of the incompetent However, this policy does not bear favorable results because violence always begets violence as John F. Kennedy had put it during the Cold War. But the main question remains why do the incompetent always resort to violence as a last resort? Violence is their refuge because he Is a coward. He has limited options available to him. Whenever he faces a problem or crisis, his pacifist options are exhausted soon and he is left with violence as a last option.
A person is competent if has the necessary
skills to cope with an issue at hand. If he does not have those required
skills, he will act irrationally. The nature of those skills varies with the
circumstances. A person who is lost in a jungle will require survival skills to
survive. If he has those necessary skills such as the skill to make fire, the ability
to find direction, and hunting skills, he will be a competent person to survive
under this scenario. Similarly, a politician who has good communication skills
and rhetorical abilities will be a competent politician. An incompetent person
does not have the necessary skills to excel in his field. He might have some
limited skills but those limited number of skills are not sufficient to carry
his efforts to fruition.
A competent person usually avoids
violence but he may resort to violence under certain circumstances. First, the use
of force is neither his priority nor his last refuge. He might use force to
supplement and complement his other efforts. For instance, Abraham Lincoln used
violence in the American Civil War to supplement and support his efforts for
the abolition of slavery. As soon as he overcame his adversaries, he stopped the
use of force and introduced an amnesty scheme for his enemies. He used force
only to ensure that his efforts to abolish slavery in the USA did not falter.
Secondly, a competent person does
not indulge in a protracted war. The same is the case with the competent
states. They become violent only for short durations when their security is
threatened. Usually, such states fight war only when the war is imposed upon
them. In 1965, Pakistan had to defend itself because India had stealthily
attacked Pakistan. But as soon as Russia (Soviet Union) intervened, Pakistan
disassociated itself from fighting and came to terms with India in the Tashkent
accord, 1966. It exhibits that competent persons or states use violence only as
a part of a defensive strategy.
On the contrary, an incompetent
person invariably resorts to violence as a last-ditch effort when his limited
skills fail to bring out a favorable result. On the individual plane, a husband
or a patriarch of a family who cannot manage his household affairs properly
often resort to violence. According to a report published by the Aurat
Foundation in 2014, husbands who are illiterate and drug-addicted are 64% more
prone to violent behavior towards their wives and their children It means that
incompetent husbands always try to find fault with their wives to hide their
incompetence. When they realize that they cannot convince their partner through
false promises, blackmail, and other wrongful means, they finally indulge in
violent actions to subdue their wives.
Similarly, an inefficient and
ineffective teacher thrashes his students to blame them. He tries to hide his
incompetence making students his whipping boys. It is a common scene in many
government schools in rural areas in Pakistan where teachers believe that
thrashing a child is the best way to make him excel in his studies. They do not
make an effort in their lectures to elucidate the concepts rather they force
the students to cram the lesson. When the students fail to do that, the
incompetent teacher beats them black and blue. On the contrary, a competent
teacher will encourage a student to learn his lesson by appreciating him.
The aphorism under consideration applies
to states and irrational societies. When some ideological group or political
party fails to convince people through their agenda or pacific means, they may
become violent. In Pakistan, many -of the sectarian groups failed to strike a
chord in the hearts of Pakistanis through their extremist ideas. When they
failed to gain prominence through pacifist means, they started a sect-based war
within Pakistan during the 90s to gain sympathy from common people belonging to
their sects. Similarly, in many African countries when a political party loses
elections, it resorts to violence. Recently, when a former Kenyan President
lost his re-election due to his in competencies, he ordered his supporters to
set the polling stations on fire. These instances validate that violence is the
last refuge of the incompetent.
Similarly, an incompetent
government may muzzle dissent through violent means to mask its incompetence.
It is an incontrovertible reality that tyrannical regimes are often violent.
Such regimes are incompetent too because they are often run by a small elite.
On the contrary, a consent-based government is not only competent but it also
uses amicable means to manage the affairs of government. For instance, the
despotic regime under Hosni Mubarak initiated a crackdown against the
protestors when they demanded his resignation. Hundreds of lives were lost
during those protests. Conversely, when South Koreans demanded resignation from
President Ms Park, she did not retaliate violently. She peacefully left office
and averted any potential confrontation with the peaceful protestors. These
examples exhibit that incompetent government, unlike representative government,
does not avoid the use of force as a state policy.
“For
me, there is sufficient evidence of a government’s incompetence, if it does not
hesitate in using violent means against its people."
Thomas
Jefferson
Like politicians, the incompetent
may also resort to violence in sports. It is a matter of common observation
that when a bowler cannot get the facing batsman out, he resorts to cursing and
intimidation. Australian bowlers are notorious for this attitude. Bowlers like
Brett Lee and Me Grath are well-known in this regard. Similarly, the Indian
Kabbadi team resorted to violence during the Asia Cup Final in 2015 when they
were unable to compete against Pakistan in the game. The Indian players slapped
and punched Pakistani Captain Babar Gujjar when he earned a point for Pakistan.
Their violent demeanor showed that the incompetent use violence when their
other efforts end in smoke.
In the international sphere,
incompetent states use force and coercion to control other states. Israel is an
incompetent state in this regard. It Is incompetent because it has failed to
establish its legitimacy over Palestinian territories through legal means.
Rather Israel is using its military presence as a state tool to perpetrate
violence. It has forcibly displaced thousands of Palestinians from their homes
and constructed illegal settlements for Jews in those areas. All principles of
international law prohibit such settlements and Israel has so far, been unable
to justify its claims over occupied territories. In the absence of legal
competence, Israel has adopted violence as its last refuge.
In a similar vein, the USA which
claims to be the torch bearer of non violence and democratic principles, often
resorts to violence as its last refuge. Throughout history, the USA tried to
influence other countries through various means. But those means are limited.
First, the USA uses diplomatic pressure, then economic sanctions, and finally
resorts to violence. There is a set pattern of the USA’s foreign policy, where
violence is always the last refuge. The USA toppled many political governments in Iran,
Idi Amin's government in Uganda and Saddam's rule in Iraq.
“It was our norm to
hatch the assassination plan of the ruler who did not oblige to our demands.”
John Perkins Ex-CIA
operative
On the flip side of the coin, the
competent often get their work done without violence. They might use limited
force for defensive or tactical purposes but they do not use violence
habitually. Quaid-e-Azam is a pertinent case in this regard He was not only a
competent lawyer but a competent leader also. Being a competent leader, he
always used his arguments and reasoning to convince the British. He never
called for violence. The case for an independent Muslim State was not built on
the corpses of innocent people but on the logical grounds of the two-nation
theory. For this reason, even sane voices within the Hindu Community like that
of B.R Ambedkar supported the case of Pakistan.
“If Jinnah or, for
that matter, the Muslim League were violent, they would have never won such
support for their cause."
B.R. Ambedkar
“The Care for
Pakistan"
In addition, Barrack Obama also
proved his competence when he settled many outstanding issues through
diplomacy. ‘The Cuban Crisis’ is as old as the Cuban Revolution in 1959. The
USA always considered Cuba its backyard colony, so when Fidel Castro took over,
it started an all-out effort to overthrow his regime. John F. Kennedy even used
violent means like the Bay of Big Invasion in 1961 to establish American
control over Cuba. However, all efforts failed and relations became bitter.
Obama changed the policy and initiated an overture towards Cuba to bang both
countries closer. His non-violent efforts bore fruits and both countries have
re-established their diplomatic relationship.
Similarly, Barrack Obama handled the
'Iranian Nuclear Crisis' with patience amid Israel's call for an attack on
Iran. Obama categorically stated, “I firmly believe that we can achieve much
with cooperation what is impossible through a kinetic action." His words
proved right as the P5+1 deal successfully halted Iran’s nuclear program
without even firing a bullet. On the other side, Donald Trump is facing a
similar situation in the case of North Korea’s nuclear missile program. Trump
rather than following Obama's footsteps, is retracing a flawed policy of
intimidation. This policy has further aggravated the crisis. The comparative
appraisal of both cares brings home an important lesson that a policy of
non-violence is useful which is also a testament to the competence of an
individual or a state.
Once established that an
incompetent person resorts to violence as a last refuge, remedial measures, in
this regard can be suggested. First, incompetence among people should be rooted
out through education. As John Dewey said, “The more the education, the less
the incompetence”, people should be taught proper skills to succeed in their
lives. If husbands are better educated, they will avoid violence. If teachers
are well-trained, they will avoid violence in their classrooms too. Moreover, the
incompetence of government and state can be reduced if individuals of that
nation are properly educated about their civic duties. David Thoreau once
remarked, “The best check on a government is an educated populace." So,
proper education and effective awareness programs not only reduce incompetence
among the individuals but also among the states.
Secondly, to reduce violence in
society, laws and regulations should be strengthened. According to the US Institute
of Peace Report on Global Violence 2016, the strongest laws are inversely
related to violence within a society. If an incompetent person or group tries
to use force illegitimately, the government should stop such a person or group
forcibly. Max Weber said, “Only the state has a monopoly over the legitimate
use of force so that illegitimate violence can be forestalled." Thus,
proper laws and regulations should be put in place to incapacitate an
incompetent person or group to use violence as a last refuge.
The quintessence of all discourse is that a violent attitude is a characteristic of an incompetent person. A hungry man is an angry man. Similarly, an incompetent person does not have the necessary skills to excel in his field so he becomes violent. An incompetent person who resorts to violence to prevail over his enemy is like a man who catches a straw when he cannot find anything helpful. Such people make this world a hell-like place to live in. As violence begets violence, violence perpetrated by the incompetent in this world creates unrest and causes chaos. If this world is to be made a peaceful place, the incompetent must be reformed through education and bridled through proper laws.
