AMERICAN

OPEN ACCESS JOUROF SOCIAL ISSUES AND HUMANITIESNAL

A Colloquy on Violence and Non-Violence: Towards A Complementary Conflict Resolution

1Emmanuel Bassey Eyo, 2Diana-Abasi Ibanga Francis

Department of Philosophy, University of Calabar Cross River State, Nigeria [email protected]

Department of Philosophy, University of Calabar Cross River State, Nigeria [email protected]

Abstract In conflict resolution discourse the two challenging and contrasting concepts, violence and non- violence, are often presented as opposites and contradictory. On the basis of this, one is affirmed against the other. In this article, we aimed to present violence and non-violence as complementary phenomena toward a complementary process of conflict resolution. The objective was to provide an analysis to show that the two concepts can contribute meaningfully to conflict management and resolution. To achieve this aim and objective, we highlighted their significance as methods of resolving and managing conflict, and discussed their problems as well. We used the method of complementary analysis to render a practical account of this discourse; the paper reviewed a number of scenarios where the strategies of violence and non- violence were employed towards conflict resolution and transformation. This enables us to see how the violent and non-violent methods can contribute to resolve the issue of conflict. From the analysis, we concluded that methods of violence and non-violence should overlap each in conflict and peace research. Keywords: Violence, Nonviolence, Complementarity, Conflict Resolution, Peace.

AJSIH | ISSN: 2276 – 6928 Vol. 7 | Issue 2 | June 2017 | 137

AMERICAN

OPEN ACCESS JOUROF SOCIAL ISSUES AND HUMANITIESNAL

INTRODUCTION conflict resolution. This article is dovetailed on the basis of complementary Conflict resolution engenders peace in principle. The method of complementarity human society. Philosophers, scholars, holds the promise of providing peace advocates, sociologist, and leaders metaphysical basis for the understanding have written momentous volumes of of the roles of violence and nonviolence in literature and developed differential conflict resolution. However, diverse methodologies for conflict resolution. On principles of complementarity would be the one hand, philosophers such as Martin examined in this article with the aim of Heidegger, Mahatma Gandhi, Confucius, confluencing violence and nonviolence Martin Buber, Immanuel Kant, Martin towards conflict resolution. Luther King Jr., Leo Tolstoy, David Thoreau, and Chevez have developed VIOLENCE AND NON-VIOLENCE: philosophical framework and CONCEPTUAL ANALYSES AND methodologies for non-violent resolution DISCOURSE ON RELATED of conflict. On the other hand, CONCEPTS philosophers like Fantz Fanon, Malcolm Definition of the concepts of violence and X, Walter Rodney, Friedrich Nietzsche, non-violence in its broadest sense will help Karl Marx, and Georg Hegel have us understand the thin line between the developed philosophical frameworks and two concepts and how superficial methodologies for violent resolution of interpretations of the concepts have led conflict. These frameworks and many analysts and scholars to presume methodologies are plausible in their own fundamental difference for the two right and are deployed in practical notions. Trudy Govier (2008) argues that situations in pursuit of peace. In Africa, the concepts of violence and nonviolence philosophical frameworks on peace have are not simple clear cut distinctions of been proposed and developed by Ephraim which their differences can be easily Essien (Debellibifism), Jim Unah pointed out. Generally, in this section, I set (Phenomenology of Tolerance), Campbell out to show how the concepts of violence Momoh (Conflictology), and Chigbo and non-violence overlap conceptually. Ekwealo (Ndu Mmili Ndu Azu). This will enable me to prove how the two Despite the large volume of literature concepts complement each other in written in this area and the practical conflict resolution. deployments of the various methodologies, Violence: The concept of violence is one peace has been elusive. Therefore, it of the many terms with disputed or remains relevant to continue to pursue disagreeable definitions. Sanko (2003) studies in this direction with the hope of argues that there is considerable finding a formidable framework, disagreement among scholars regarding methodology and strategy in resolving the meaning of violence. One of the conflicts. This is the preoccupation of this commonest ways of defining violence is article, namely: to adumbrate a that it is an impermissible application of complementary ontological framework physical force to another person (Reidel & towards the study and understanding of the Welsh 2002; Waddington, Badger & Bull roles of violence and non-violence in 2004; Govier 2008). This sort of narrow

AJSIH | ISSN: 2276 – 6928 Vol. 7 | Issue 2 | June 2017 | 138

AMERICAN

OPEN ACCESS JOUROF SOCIAL ISSUES AND HUMANITIESNAL

way of defining violence has even found definition of violence focuses on replacing its way into jurisprudence whereby the terms ‘force’ with ‘power’. In this violence is defined merely as direction, “violence is defined as the use of impermissible infliction of physical hurt or power to harm another, whatever form it injury on another person without his/her takes” (Henry 2000, 3). The harm may consent (Weiner 1989). The World Health take the forms of physical, psychological, Organization (WHO) defines violence as, emotional, moral, economic, political, “The use of physical force or power, philosophical and/or metaphysical threatened or actual, against oneself, characteristics. another person, or against a group or community, that either results in or has a Another definition of violence is that high likelihood of resulting in injury, advanced by Vittorio Bufacchi. According death, psychological harm, to him, there are two basic conceptions of maldevelopment or deprivation” (WHO violence in the literature – namely: 1996, 4). This definition is a bit broad violence as force and violence as violation because it encompasses armed conflict, (Bufacchi 2005). Violence as force threats, suicide, and acts undermining the characterizes violence as intentional act of well-being of individuals. Further, in the excessive or destructive force. John Dewey speech he delivered on 3rd April 1964 in is in this category of scholars who defined Cleveland, Ohio, entitled “The Ballot or violence as mere force. According to him, the Bullet”, Malcolm X (2017) defined “energy becomes violence when it defeats violence to include racial oppression, or frustrates purpose instead of executing exploitation and degradation. or realizing it” (Dewey 1916, 361). That is to say, violence is force gone wrong in Willem de Haan posits that “violence is terms of being destructive and harmful. multifaceted because there are many Dewey does not argue that force and different forms of violence which are violence are synonyms but that force exhibited in wide range of contexts; ...[and becomes violence when it becomes that] violence can be individual or destructive and harmful. The other collective, interpersonal or institutional, conception of violence, according to national or international, symbolic or Bufacchi, is violence as violation. This he structural” (2008, 28). He further avers defines in terms of infringement, that violence is context-specific; hence transgression, or exceeding of some limit what is classified as violence is socially or norm (Bufacchi 2005, 196). This may determined. Haan (2008) scheme two ways include violation of rights. This approach of defining violence, namely: restrictive to conceptualizing violence also reflects definition of violence and inclusive the African philosophical approach. definition of violence. Restrictive Generally, in African ontology or theory of definition of violence limits concept of force, violence is represented as violation violence to physical attacks and in terms of disrupting the hierarchical threatening gestures. In this direction, arrangement of forces by violating either violence is defined as “behaviors by communal norm or being of the other individuals that intentionally threaten, (Unah 2002). In this direction, peace attempt, or inflict physical harm on others” (which is viewed as opposite of violence) (Reiss & Roth 1994, 2). Inclusive means coexistence, that is, live and let live.

AJSIH | ISSN: 2276 – 6928 Vol. 7 | Issue 2 | June 2017 | 139

AMERICAN

OPEN ACCESS JOUROF SOCIAL ISSUES AND HUMANITIESNAL

One other conception of violence which is to one’s expectation to rewarding pertinent is that of Johan Galtung. It is a somebody for conforming to one’s categorical departure from the traditional conception of right which prevent the definition. According to him, “violence is human being from realizing his/her actual present when human beings are being potentials – For example, paying a influenced so that their actual somatic and professional footballer who is hopelessly mental realizations are below their confined to the bench. The third distinction potential realizations” (Galtung 1969, is “whether or not there is an object that is 168). The usage of the potential-actual hurt”, which includes arrested violence duality in the definition presupposes that such as testing of missiles which may violence is the cause of the difference cause degradation in the individual. The between what could have been and what is. fourth distinction is “whether or not there For example, if a person dies from is a subject (person) who acts”, this range tuberculosis in the 18th century it is not from personal violence such as physical violence because it was unavoidable due to attack to structural violence such as absence of cure; but if a person dies from nepotism. The fifth distinction is “intended tuberculosis in the 21st century when there or unintended”, which can be decided by is cure for the disease then it is violence. In on the basis of either utilitarianism or this manner, violence will include absence deontology. The six distinction is “the of government’s public health measures to manifest and the latent”, which range from curb the disease. He expanded the meaning observable forms to potential forms. of violence by making a distinction between personal and structural violence The canon of philosophy of violence as (Galtung 1969). Personal violence may enunciated by Malcolm X is that violence include direct and indirect use of force in should be reciprocal: “if there is to be any forms. Structural violence includes bleeding, it should be reciprocal – bleeding inequality in the distribution of power, on both sides” (Malcolm X 2005, 144). He opportunities, amenities, education, and argues that a people or person visited with other social survival measure as well as violence, and without hope of getting racial and ethnic stratifications. All these justice from the political system, should characteristics go a long way to prevent respond in kind. He argues that the the individual from realizing his/her actual individual should not start the violence for somatic and mental capacities. that would constitute in an immoral act; but if he is faced with violence, he should Galtung (1969) notes that the definition reciprocate in kind. points to six dimensions of violence. The first distinction is “physical and I don’t mean go out and get psychological”, which range from violent; but at the same constraint in physical movement such as time you should never be absence of access roads to all sorts of nonviolent unless you run indoctrinations, brainwashing, lies, mental into some nonviolence. I’m poisoning, and threatening gestures. The nonviolent with those who second distinction is “negative and are nonviolent with me... positive”, which range from punishing Any time you know you’re somebody for refusing to act in conformity within the law, within your legal rights, within your

AJSIH | ISSN: 2276 – 6928 Vol. 7 | Issue 2 | June 2017 | 140

AMERICAN

OPEN ACCESS JOUROF SOCIAL ISSUES AND HUMANITIESNAL

moral rights, in accord with phrase in the definition is “without justice, then die for what employing physical violence”. However, you believe in. But don’t nonviolence is not cowardice or helpless die alone. Let your dying be submission to the oppressor but active reciprocal. This is what is resistance and not passive resistance meant by equality. What is (Gandhi 2014; King 2005). Gandhi (2014) good for the goose is good says that “one cannot be passively non- for the gander. (Malcolm X violent” (63); he describes passive 2017, 176) resistance as misnomer (67). Non-violence is not a do-nothing philosophy; rather it Malcolm X avers that it is morally right involves active direct action such as non- for people living in areas that are cooperation, protest march, and vulnerable to violence to protect petitioning. It is active direct action themselves from violence. That the first because it involves taking the initiative and law of nature is self-preservation; but self- meeting up with your fears (opponent) in a preservation by any means necessary. He direct manner without ambiguity. argues that it should be constitutional right Nonviolence is not merely a substitute for for people to own a gun; but then it would violence whereby one resorts to exceed their right if they constitute nonviolence because he lacks the weapons themselves into a battalion out of it and go to engage in physical violence. Gandhi about looking for opponents (Malcolm X avers that “the strength of non-violence is 2017). He denounced nonviolence in exact proportion to the ability, not the methods which mean to appeal to the will, of the nonviolent person to inflict moral conscience of the aggressor. He violence” (2014, 61). He also says, “non- argues that by resorting to set out against violence therefore presupposes ability to another with violence, the aggressor has strike” (Gandhi 2014, 39). The individual lost his conscience. That it is a waste of is considered to be nonviolent if he time appealing to his moral conscience; for possesses the capacity (weapons) and the the aggressor only eliminate the evil in his capability (ability to strike) to cause being if it threatens his existence, and not physical violence but rather refrain from it because it is illegal or immoral (Malcolm despite possessing an advantage by means X 2017). of weaponry. Gandhi (2014) avers that violence degrades and undermines our NONVIOLENCE: Mahatma Gandhi and personhood; and reduces humans to the Martin Luther King Jr. seem to have level of animal. Nonviolence, for him, is provided an unambiguous and systematic the way of nature and it is the most active definition of nonviolence. But let us begin force in the world. He maintains that with the definition provided by other although “we may never be strong enough scholars. Govier defines nonviolence as to be entirely non-violent in thought, word “those methods of protest, non- and deed;” but we must fix our focus upon cooperation, and intervention in which the it and make steady progress towards it actors, without employing physical (Gandhi 2014, 37). For it is only by violence, refuse to do certain things they nonviolence that truth can be found and are expected or required to do; or do possessed. certain things they are not expected, or are forbidden, to do” (2008, 63). The key

AJSIH | ISSN: 2276 – 6928 Vol. 7 | Issue 2 | June 2017 | 141

AMERICAN

OPEN ACCESS JOUROF SOCIAL ISSUES AND HUMANITIESNAL

Govier’s (2008) definition of nonviolence higher law – natural law. Holmes (1971) is trite, he opines that it involves processes calls this psychological violence; and that of protest, non-cooperation and it exists because people are not only intervention, without employing physical vulnerable in physical ways. Interestingly, violence, to cause an opponent to change a some psychological violence is more course of action. The key phrase in the forceful and harmful than physical definition is “without employing physical violence. People often say ‘don’t break me violence”. This definition suggests that the with words’ or ‘those words deeply hurt’. use strategy of psychological violence in a In other words, his/her ego has been non-physical violent resistance is affected. The ego is the seat of the human appropriate. The tactics employed or personhood and the source of his pride as recommended for nonviolent struggle is person; it cannot be affected by physical designed to cause disruptions of processes means except by means that are of normalcy or status quo in order to force psychological. The methods of change or encourage an opponent to come nonviolence often impress psychological to their negotiation table. Robert Holmes violence on the ego. Moreover, some (1971) defines psychological violence as a methods of nonviolence (such as strike or process of rendering another person disruption of public utility like hospital) vulnerable in non-physical ways such as can be negative or seriously affect other denying him/her respect by non-physical persons not targeted in the struggle and means as in when they are insulted or may cause them physical harm such as humiliated by actions involving no leading to their demise or putting them in a application of physical force. Humiliation more vulnerable state of physical health. can be by means of using words or singing songs that hurt his/her dignity as person. King (2005) has developed six tenets for Holmes (1971) argues that psychological philosophy of nonviolence. The first tenet violence or non-physical violence by stipulates that the nonviolent resister must psychological means is violence be courageous to resist oppression without nonetheless, and it is a violation of one’s resorting to methods of physical violence. personhood. He argues that doing violence And that he must recognize nonviolence as means violating a person or treating a the only way to victory. The second tenet person in a way that diminish him/her. is that the person involved in nonviolence should not aim to humiliate the opponent Immanuel Kant (1949) had argued that but to win his friendship and persons are deserving of respect and understanding. That, while nonviolence is worthy of dignity in themselves; and that often expressed in the forms of non- depriving or denying persons respect or cooperation and protest, those are merely dignity violates their personhood. means; the aim is to awaken moral shame However, Gandhi has rejected Kant’s in the opponent and ultimately seeks version of the personhood argument by reconciliation and fosters a beloved arguing that “the dignity of man requires community. The third tenet is that obedience to a higher law” (2014, 6). The nonviolence resistance is directed against opponents in a nonviolent struggle are not forces of evil rather than the person deserving of dignity, or lack it thereof, if exhibiting the evil. The aim is to redeem their actions are not in alignment with the the opponent from the evil forces and

AJSIH | ISSN: 2276 – 6928 Vol. 7 | Issue 2 | June 2017 | 142

AMERICAN

OPEN ACCESS JOUROF SOCIAL ISSUES AND HUMANITIESNAL

reconcile him to oneself and good. Nelson Concept of violence has been largely Mandela avers that “the oppressor must be discussed in anthropocentric perspectives. liberated just as surely as the oppressed Both the traditional and broad definitions [because] a man who takes away another of violence seem to exclude non-human man’s freedom is a prisoner of hatred, he nature from its scope. It is apparent that is locked behind the bars of prejudice and not much attention is accorded by scholars narrow-mindedness... [Therefore] the to the impact of violence on non-humans oppressed and the oppressor alike are and its moral scope within such robbed of their humanity” (1994, 544). consideration. Apart from the fact that Balwant Bhaneja notes that, for Gandhi, physical violence which is directed at “man and his deed are two distinct things”; human entities do impact significantly on hence, his insistence that we must “hate non-human entities, there are also the sin and not the sinner” (2007, 217). deliberate efforts by individuals and The fourth tenet is that persons involved in communities to get rid of certain animal nonviolence should be willing to accept and plant species by violent means suffering from the opponent or oppressor (Francis 2016; Ekwealo 2010). Despite the without physical and mental retaliation. He lukewarm attitude of violence studies must see the suffering as redemptive and towards animal and plant violence, there as a route to freedom. The fifth tenet is that are two conceptual paradigms that suggest nonviolence movement must be anchored the importance of animal violence to the on love. Nonviolence resistance must not overall corpus of violence studies. These only avoid inflicting external physical philosophical paradigms are: utilitarianism violence but also internal violence of and Kantism. spirit. “The nonviolent resister not only refuses to shoot his opponent but he also The utilitarian paradigm was developed by refuses to hate him” (King 2005, 136). For Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill. this reason, nonviolence must not lead to Although the doctrine of utilitarianism can the resister to become bitter or indulge in be easily traced to the ancient Greek hate campaigns. The fifth tenet connects philosopher Epicurus; but it was Bentham directly with the third tenet which aims at and Mill who definitely systematized it reconciliation and fostering of a beloved into a functional framework of study to community. The sixth tenet is that understand and resolve problems. The nonviolence philosophy recognizes that the aspect of utilitarianism, called universe is on the side of justice and environmental utilitarianism, where this “works to bring the disconnected aspects section derives much authority, was of reality into a harmonious whole”. definitely developed by Peter Singer. Consequently, the nonviolent practioner Utilitarianism, particularly the version must have abiding faith in the future; that developed by Mill, states that the goodness while he accepts suffering without or utility of an action is determined by the retaliation his effort are in alignment with amount of harm it inflicts: the less pain or the cosmic order of the universe. harm an act foster the more good, moral or just it is (Mill 1994). This means that violence is not intrinsically bad rather its moral value is determined by the amount NON-HUMAN VIOLENCE of pain experienced by the subject. This is

AJSIH | ISSN: 2276 – 6928 Vol. 7 | Issue 2 | June 2017 | 143

AMERICAN

OPEN ACCESS JOUROF SOCIAL ISSUES AND HUMANITIESNAL

multiplied by the number of persons. What theoretical basis for substantial re- enable detection of pain is sentience; conceptualization of the concepts of which is a bodily quality present both in violence (and nonviolence) to include human beings and animals that cause physical attacks on animals, particularly suffering and pain? It is on the basis of this those that have to do with animal abuse. If that Mill condemns harm, particularly concept of violence is substantially those that have least utility value for the revised, then even acts of ecological abuse greatest number of people. It is also on the which have led to climate change will be basis of this that Singer condemns calculated to be violence against animals. violence against animals. Singer (1994) But then it will also be violence against argues that violence is bad because it human beings; because decimated non- causes pain and suffering to the animal. human entities have serious bearing on the Singer’s argument recommends total socio-economic welling of human beings prohibition of animal killing, including directly connected to that environment those done for consumption purposes. (Baird 2008). If an attempt is to be made to Singer’s view is considered to be extreme; ecologically reconceptualise violence, it this can be compared to Kant’s position on will look like something like this: Violence animal rights. refers to the use of physical force or power, threatened or actual, against Kant animal ethics centres on the necessity oneself, another person, animal, or against as the only basis for killing of animal. He a group or community, or an ecosystem, argues that killing animal for food is that either results in or has a high acceptable but that killing it for game or likelihood of resulting in injury, death, for the joy of it, is morally depressing. He psychological harm, mal-development or argues that humans are like caretakers over deprivation, so that their actual somatic the animals; hence must not abuse their and mental realizations are below their roles towards them. He recommended that potential realizations; but which in the animals that have serve his/her master as case of an animal or ecosystem the domestic animal for long should be violence arose as unnecessary. allowed to live until its death rather than be killed for food or be violently disposed THE DISCOURSE ON THE of (Kant 1963). He argues that there was a PRINCIPLE OF linkage between animal violence and COMPLEMENTARITY violence towards humans; that those who commit violence against animals are more Complementarity as a notion is discussed likely to do same to human subjects (Kant both from the perspectives of social and 1963). existential paradigms. According to the historical records, complementarity has This view that Kant advanced over 350 been in existence from the cradle of years ago has now been supported with civilization, especially in the Egyptian empirical findings. Many empirical studies mystery school. First, from semantics today have linked animal violence to point of view, the term derived from the attitude of violence against human being word complementation, which means to (Raupp, Barlow, and Oliver 1997; complete. Flower says “it is that which Fitzgerald 2009; Upadhya 2014; Phillips completes” (1964, 247). Hitherto, we had 2014). This therefore provides strong mentioned that complementarity principle

AJSIH | ISSN: 2276 – 6928 Vol. 7 | Issue 2 | June 2017 | 144

AMERICAN

OPEN ACCESS JOUROF SOCIAL ISSUES AND HUMANITIESNAL

is traceable to the cradle of civilization in complementarity abstracted from his Egypt. Innocent Onyenwuyi captures this dictum “there is portion of everything in point thus, “Maat is the Egyptian concept everything”. The recency of of the principle which underlies and complementarity is evident in the African governs the interrelationship of antithetical postulation of Ibuanyidanda philosophy. pairs or opposites and brings about harmony, balance and justice among The Ibuanyidanda theory of being as aspects of existence which otherwise enunciated by Innocent Asouzu holds that should be antagonistic and makes them approach to being transcends uni- complementary” (1993, 252). As an dimensionality rather it is complementary extension of the concept above, he added: and multidimensional. Asouzu introduced the concept of “missing links” to define The principles of creation, that reality as fragmentary and mutually is, male and female, hot and complementary rather than oppository and cold, external recurrence and antagonistic. He maintains that “all external sameness in their mode experience, modes of existence and of functioning illustrates a expression of being in history are missing complementary relation. Taken links, which upholds their being and separately, each is an individual existence the moment they can be aspect of life, distinct aspect that conceived as aspects of being in cannot single handly create life complementary relationship, as to help unless when working together in make evident the character of this unity (Onyenwuyi 1993, 252- relationship that is service in 253). complementarity” (Asouzu 2007, 267). He also argues that to be is to be in mutual Inyang Effiwatt explication of the concept complementary relationship and that its here is pertinent. According to him, “in negation is to be alone (Asouzu 2011). If African social relations, the idea of reality is complementary then to access it complementarity is used to show how demands complementary approach. distinct individual efforts can blend to Asouzu (2007) argues that complementary achieve overall harmony and success in the approach to the study reality ultimately community” (Effiwatt 2000, 290). contributes to harmonious understanding Complementarity is discernable at the of being or reality. global frame as it pertains to cross-cultural exchange between the various blocks and VIOLENCE AND NONVIOLENCE: continents of the world which TOWARDS COMPLEMENTARY contemporaneously is found in the notion CONFLICT RESOLUTION of globalization. Obviously, an adequate understanding of the actual complementary Violence and nonviolence have often been aspects and complementary potentials of discussed as mutually exclusive concepts; diverse cultures would facilitate the of which one stands in total opposition and creation of a new world order devoid of contradiction to the other. The two are political tension, economic hostilities and conceived as being at opposite extremes. other forms of violence and rancour Studies have tended to emphasize one (Effiwatt 2000). In Anaxagoras’ against the other, otherwise it has de- philosophy, the principle of rationalize one and rationalize the other.

AJSIH | ISSN: 2276 – 6928 Vol. 7 | Issue 2 | June 2017 | 145

AMERICAN

OPEN ACCESS JOUROF SOCIAL ISSUES AND HUMANITIESNAL

But the obvious questions are: Does moral understands is the language of violence. arc bends towards nonviolence rather than Many times this saying is proven true. violence? Doesn’t violence have a place in Georg Hegel and Karl Marx argue that a peace process? Are there where contexts history of humankind progresses by means violence and nonviolence are of violence. Many times transformation in complementary in a search for peace? the society is brought about by violent These are the questions that guide this means. The Arab Spring movement of section of the discourse. 2009 in North Africa was mainly a violent movement that led to toppling of despots Generally, in ontological circle, conflict is and enthronement of democratic regimes often traced to Parmenides’ theory of in the affected country. being. Parmenides had argued that being (what is) is one, fixed, eternal, infinite, However, several times violence alone unbecoming and indivisible (see Stumpf cannot bring about conflict resolution. The 1994, 16-17). This means that truth (or recent experience in The Gambia clearly what is) is uni-dimensional, fixed, static indicates how strategic deployments of and monolithic. Parmenides rejected the violent and nonviolent means can view that reality is, and can be, contribute towards resolving a conflict multidimensional. He argued that situation. The American civil rights multiplicity is illusion because being is struggle is another case in point. Although, one, fixed, static and monolithic. From many scholars are fun of one-sided Parmenides’s thesis it follows that there is analysis of the American civil rights only one way to truth. And in the context conflicts; it is noteworthy that realisation of this work, there is only one way to of civil rights took many factors, other conflict resolution and management. If than nonviolent methods. The American nonviolence is identified as a viable path civil rights conflict was a long struggle to peace, then it must be the only path. that combined violent and nonviolent tactics to whittle down the power of In the context the ibuanyidanda oppression of the minorities in that framework, violence and nonviolence are country. As Denton Watson rightly notes, merely aspects to the whole reality. Both “King’s nonviolent tactics [alone] could violence and nonviolence have their place not have destroyed the south’s racial in the scheme of things. Some aspects to system” (2005, 169). Tiffany Gallati reality require violent approach; some (2017) has also said the same thing, that require nonviolent approach; and others Martin Luther King’s non-violent require a combination of both approaches movement would not have had serious to achieve a holistic perspective. For effect if it was not complemented by example, nonviolence requires relying on Malcolm X’s militant rhetoric as a protest rallies, petitions, and non- backdrop. Sometimes, nonviolence serves cooperation with the oppressors. But what to prolong conflicts rather than resolves or can protest rallies, petitioning or non- transform it. Yet, as Afanasyev rightly cooperation do to resolve the Boko Haram argues, avoidance of violence and conflict in the Nigeria’s northeast or the “struggle for peace is essential to social Islamic State conflict in the global mid- progress” (1968, 107). It is important to east. In fact, oftentimes it is said the only pursue the course of peace and language Nigerian government

AJSIH | ISSN: 2276 – 6928 Vol. 7 | Issue 2 | June 2017 | 146

AMERICAN

OPEN ACCESS JOUROF SOCIAL ISSUES AND HUMANITIESNAL

nonviolence, no matter how long it may CONCLUSION take, so that our efforts to transform our environment may not be wasted in the From the analysis above, we can conclude field of violence. Moreover, it is cheaper thus: The use of violence and/or non- to pursue course of nonviolence, at least violence methods as a means of resolving when measured in terms of human death, conflict is context-dependent. Conflict is ecosystem disruption and material historical event; it depends on what destruction. However, one must be happened. To this end it is important for courageous enough to accept that both context to be factored in whenever any violence and nonviolence have their place discourse is made on the subject. An in conflict resolution process. arbitrary and absentminded discourse on conflict is likely to boomerang or at least become ineffective. When historical contexts are factored in, it becomes clear what direction a conflict should take and what methods should be adopted towards

resolving it. Context will ultimately determine whether violent or nonviolent strategy should be adopted and when or where. Sometimes, a combination of violent and nonviolent methods is the most effective way of resolving a conflict within a given historical context. Insisting that all conflicts should be resolved by nonviolent means amount to blind idealism. Within this frame of reasoning, violence and nonviolence are paradigms for a complementary conflict resolution. The

principle of complementarity makes unassailable the argument that violence and nonviolence apparently underlie the profundity of complementary conflict resolution.

AJSIH | ISSN: 2276 – 6928 Vol. 7 | Issue 2 | June 2017 | 147

AMERICAN

OPEN ACCESS JOUROF SOCIAL ISSUES AND HUMANITIESNAL

REFERENCES Philosophical Evaluation. Lagos Notes and Records: A Journal of Afanasyev, V. 1968. Marxist Philosophy: the Faculty of Arts University of rd A Popular Outline, 3 ed. Tr. Leo Lagos, 16: 18-39. Lempert. Moscow: Progress Publishers. Fitzgerald, Amy. 2009. Slaughterhouses and Increased Crime rates: An Asouzu, Innocent I. 2011. Ibuanyidanda Empirical Analysis of the and Philosophy of Essence. Spillover from "The Jungle" Into Calabar: Univeristy of Calabar the Surrounding Community. Press. Organization & Environment, Asouzu, Innocent I. 2007. Ibuanyidanda: 20(10): 1-27. A New Complementary Ontology Flower, E. Ed. 1964. Concise Oxford Beyond World-Immanentism, Dictionary of Current English. Ethnocentric Reduction and Oxford: Oxford University Press. Impositions. Zürich: LIT VERLAG GmbH KG Wien. Francis, Diana-Abasi I. 2016. Logical and Theoretical Foundations of Baird, Rachel. 2008. The Impact of African Environmental Ethics. Climate Change on Minorities Africology: The Journal of Pan and Indigenous Peoples. London: African Studies, 9(9): 3-24. Minority Rights Group International. Gallati, Tiffany. 2017. Malcolm X & Martin Luther King Jr.: Non- Bhaneja, Balwant. 2007. Understanding Violent v. Violent Resistance in Gandhi’s Ahimsa (Non- the Civil Rights Movement in the Violence). Asteriskos, 3(4): 215- American South. Retrieved at: 224. https://tru.academia.edu/triffanyg allati Bufacchi, Vittorio. 2005. Two Concepts of Violence. Political Studies Galtung, Johan. 1969. Violence, Peace, Review, 3: 193-204. and Peace Research. Journal of Dewey, John. 1916. Force and Coercion. Peace Research, 6(3): 167-191. International Journal of Ethics, Gandhi, Mahatma. 2014. My Non- 25(3): 359-367. Violence. Sailesh Kumar Bandopadhyaya (Compli). Effiwatt, Inyang. 2000. Complementarity Ahmadabad: Jitendra T. Desai and African Social Relations: A Navajivan Publishing House. Case for Cultural Universalism. In Logic, Philosophy and Govier, Trudy. 2008. Violence, Introduction to Computer Nonviolence, and Definitions: A Science, ed. Princewill Alozie, Dilemma for Peace Studies. The 289-97. Calabar: Elcrof Pub. Co. Canadian Journal of Peace and Conflict Studies, 40(2): 61-83. Ekwealo, Chigbo. 2010. Do Witches Really Exist: A Mystical-

AJSIH | ISSN: 2276 – 6928 Vol. 7 | Issue 2 | June 2017 | 148

AMERICAN

OPEN ACCESS JOUROF SOCIAL ISSUES AND HUMANITIESNAL

Haan, Willem de. 2008. Violence as an (1960-1965). Essentially Contested Concept. In Malcolmxfiles.blogspot.com Violence in Europe: Historical and Contemporary Perspectives, Mandela, Nelson. 1994. Long Walk to ed. S. Body-Gendrot & P. Freedom: The Autobiography of Spierenburg, 27-40. New York: Nelson Mandela. Boston: Little, Springer. Brown & Company. Henry, S. 2000. What is Violence? An Mill, John. 1994. Utilitarianism. In Donald Integrated Definition. Annals of C. Abel (Ed.), Fifty Readings in the American Academy of Philosophy (371-379). McGraw- Political and Social Science, 567: Hill Inc. 16-30. Onyenwuyi, Innocent. 1993. African Holmes, Robert. 1971. Violence and Origin of Greek Philosophy: An Nonviolence. In Violence: Award- Exercise in Afrocentrism. Nsukka: Winning Essays in the Council for University of Nigeria Press. Philosophical Studies Phillips, Allie. 2014. Understanding the Competition, ed. Jerome A. Link between Violence to Animals Shaffer, New York: David and People: A Guidebook for McKay Company. Criminal Justice Professionals. Kant, Immanuel. 1949. Fundamental Alexandria, VA: National Center Principles of the Metaphysic of for Prosecution of Animal Abuse. Morals. Thomas K. Abbott Raupp, Carol, Mary Barlow and Judith (Trans). Indianapolis: Bobbs- Oliver. 1997. Perceptions of Merrill Educational Publishing. Family Violence: Are Companion Kant, Immanuel. 1963. Lectures on Ethics. Animals in the Picture? Society Louis Infield (Trans). New York: and Animals, 5(3): 219-237. Harper & Row Publishers Inc. Reiss, A. & J. Roth. 1994. Understanding King, Martin. 2005. Blacks Must Employ and Preventing Violence. Nonviolent Resistance. In The Washington D.C.: National Civil Rights Movement, ed. Jill Academy Press. Karson, 133-9. Detroit: Thomson Riedel, M. and W. Welsh. 2002. Criminal Gale. Violence: Patterns, Causes, and Malcolm X. 2005. Nonviolent Resistance Prevention. Los Angeles: is not Enough. In The Civil Rights Roxbury. Movement, ed. Jill Karson, 140-6. Sanko, E. 2003. Introduction: Detroit: Thomson Gale. Conceptualizing the Meaning of Malcolm X. The Ballot or the Bullet. In Violence. In The Meanings of Antihostile (Ed.), El-Haji Malik Violence, ed. E. A. Sanko, 1-13. El-Shabazz Malcolm X: Collected London: Routledge. Speeches, Debates and Interviews

AJSIH | ISSN: 2276 – 6928 Vol. 7 | Issue 2 | June 2017 | 149

AMERICAN

OPEN ACCESS JOUROF SOCIAL ISSUES AND HUMANITIESNAL

Singer, Peter. 1994. All Animals Are ‘Violence’. British Journal of Equal. In Environmental Ethics: Criminology, 45: 141-164. Readings in Theory and Application, ed. Louis P. Pojman, Watson, Denton. 2005. King’s Protest 33-40. London: Jones and Barlett campaigns had a Limited Impact Publishers. on Civil Rights. In The Civil Rights Movement, ed. Jill Karson, Stumpf, Samuel E. 1994. Philosophy: 169-73. Detroit: Thomson Gale. History and Problems. New York: McGraw-Hill Inc. Weiner, N. 1989. Violent Criminal Careers and ‘Violent Career Criminals’: Unah, Jim I. 2002. African Philosophy: An Overview of the Research Trends and Projections in Six Literature. In Violent Crime, Essays, 2nd ed. Lagos: Foresight Violent Criminals, ed. N. A. Press. Weiner & M. E. Wolfgang, 135- 8. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Upadhya, Vivek. 2014. The Abuse of Animals as a Method of Domestic World Health Organisation (WHO). 1996. Violence: The Need for Violence: a Public Health Criminalization. Emory Law Priority. Global Consultation on Journal, 63: 1163-1209. Violence and Health. WHO/EHA/SPI.POA.2. Gene Waddington, P. A. J., D. Badger and R. Bull. 2004. Appraising the Inclusive Definition of Workplace va: World Health Organisation.

AJSIH | ISSN: 2276 – 6928 Vol. 7 | Issue 2 | June 2017 | 150