A lingering question that I have had on my mind after this week has been the question “Why does turning to violence become something we do even if we know it doesn’t work?” I’ve also been thinking about this in conjunction with our discussions over how a central figure/leader of a movement can affect and impact the actions that one takes during a movement and how desperation can lead to violence.
I wonder if the lack of a leader can permit more violence because without a central figure, those without leadership or direction might resort to actions and choices that are destructive to the cause itself. When there is no leadership, it is easy to split off and have different sub-groups that each have their own priorities and intentions in a movement. When this is the case, it is easy to see how some might turn to violence for their own gain. Although it is important to clarify that not all violence is a product of placing self-interest before the interests of a group, it is interesting to think how the representation of a group as a whole is changed by the actions of a few. I offer the thought that a central leader or figure might help to sort through these separate interests and re-align the group with their original intentions and goals.
Similarly, just as desperation is possible in any movement, when there is no central figure to help unite and continue to push the interests and concerns of the group, it is possible that desperation could cause the parts of the group to go their own way and resort to violence to help make their concerns known. I think it is interesting how the human mind works and how when we want or need something, we often do whatever it takes to get that thing. I think personally we often need someone to help guide and lead us in our decision making and process of making a plan and similarly, I think movements need this person as someone to help redirect and aid in the choices that a movement makes. Without this, violence becomes an option rather than something to try to avoid.
I like your discussion of the group versus the individual. Individuals will forever create bad press for groups that they claim to be in. It gives the opposition of these causes easy material to challenge the group as a whole. There are no requirements to join political parties, religions or social causes. Time and again individuals within these groups will make a bad name for their peers through their actions. It is an unfortunate reality that we must work to combat; we must not generalize or allow others to make generalizations about entire communities. I agree that a central leader may help with this issue as they could come out and say that they do not support/condone the actions of the few that act violently.