I found this quote over at Overcoming Bias:
“The simple fact is that non-violent means do not work against Evil. Gandhi’s non-violent resistance against the British occupiers had some effect because Britain was wrong, but not Evil. The same is true of the success of non-violent civil rights resistance against de jure racism. Most people, including those in power, knew that what was being done was wrong. But Evil is an entirely different beast. Gandhi would have gone to the ovens had he attempted non-violent resistance against the Nazis. When one encounters Evil, the only solution is violence, actual or threatened. That’s all Evil understands.”
What immediately came to my mind is the current situation in the Middle East, Iraq, Syria, and especially Iran. By all outward appearances and indications, the leaders of Iran appear to be religious whackos that would destroy Israel if they thought they could get away with it. They claim they are developing nuclear capabilities only for civilian and peaceful uses, but this claim lacks any sort of credibility. Who is the judge of when diplomacy and non-violent sanctions can no longer work? I get the feeling that in the next ten years, the world will most likely be witness to a “test” detonation of a nuclear weapon, either in Iran or in Israel. By then it is too late. As Thompson pointed out, Evil cannot be persuaded with non-violence.
I have a difficult time of seeing the Iranian leadership in any other light.
