by: Jon Warren (aka Livermush and Grits)

Introduction: The Paradox of Liberty and Force

Throughout history, political violence has been a paradoxical force—condemned in the moment, yet celebrated in hindsight. Nations revere their revolutions while vilifying uprisings. This article, insert ignoramus disclaimer, "does not seek to glorify bloodshed", but rather to confront a difficult question: when does political violence become not only understandable, but just? The American Revolution, the Confederate secession, Scotland's Wars of Independence, the radical phase of the French Revolution, the Bolshevik and Chinese Communist Revolutions, and even the fictional universe of Star Wars offer powerful examples for analysis.

The American Revolution: Treason or Birth of a Nation?
In 1776, thirteen colonies took up arms against what they saw as tyrannical overreach by the British Crown. The Declaration of Independence listed grievances ranging from taxation without representation to the denial of judicial rights. Importantly, these colonists had exhausted peaceful means—petitions, appeals, and negotiations. When those failed, they declared the right to alter or abolish the government.

Thomas Jefferson's assertion that "the tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants" remains a controversial endorsement of resistance. American political violence was not anarchic; it was strategic, widely supported, and aimed at establishing self-governance.

Scotland's Fight for Freedom: Blood, Soil, and Sovereignty
Scotland's medieval struggle against English domination echoes the American cause, albeit centuries earlier. William Wallace and Robert the Bruce led campaigns of armed resistance during the Wars of Scottish Independence (1296–1357).

The 1320 Declaration of Arbroath, addressed to the Pope, proclaimed:

"It is not for glory, nor riches, nor honours that we fight, but for freedom alone, which no good man gives up but with his life."
That sentiment reverberates through history as a justification for violence in pursuit of national self-determination.

Rebellion or Revolution?

The Confederate States of America:

The Confederate secession of 1860–61 remains one of the most contested acts of political violence in U.S. history. Motivated by the defense of states' rights, economic interests, and the preservation of slavery, the Confederacy mirrored many structural elements of the American Revolution.

Yet moral weight matters. Unlike Scotland or the American colonies, the Confederate cause was inseparably linked to slavery. Political violence, even if procedurally similar, is judged by the justice of its goals.

The French Revolution and Robespierre: Terror as Virtue
Maximilien Robespierre emerged as the figurehead of the Reign of Terror (1793–1794) during the French Revolution.

"Terror is nothing other than swift, severe, indomitable justice; it flows, then, from virtue."

Thousands were executed under his leadership, including King Louis XVI. Robespierre believed revolutionary violence was a moral necessity to defend the Republic from its enemies.

Lenin’s Bolshevik Revolution: Force as Class Warfare
In 1917, Vladimir Lenin and the Bolsheviks overthrew Russia’s Provisional Government in the October Revolution.

"The goal of socialism is communism. The dictatorship of the proletariat is a period of transition to that goal."

Class enemies and counter-revolutionaries were targeted by Lenin's Cheka in what became the Red Terror.

Mao’s Chinese Revolution: Revolution as Permanent Struggle
Mao Zedong led the Chinese Communist Revolution after years of civil war and Japanese occupation.

"Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun."

Mao used violence not just to seize power but to maintain ideological purity through purges, land seizures, and the Cultural Revolution.

Other Successful Political Revolutions: Beyond the West

History is filled with examples where political violence led to lasting, if controversial, transformations. Here are key examples, with their motives, methods, and words:

• The Haitian Revolution (1791–1804)
  • Motives: Liberation from slavery and colonial rule
  • Methods: Slave revolts, guerrilla warfare
  • Quote: Jean-Jacques Dessalines: "We have dared to be free. Let us be thus by ourselves and for ourselves."

• The Algerian War of Independence (1954–1962)
  • Motives: National liberation from French colonial rule
  • Methods: Guerrilla tactics, bombings, assassinations
  • Quote: FLN Declaration, 1954: "Our fight is aimed at ending colonialism and establishing national independence within a democratic framework."

• The Iranian Revolution (1978–1979)
  • Motives: Overthrow of the Shah and establishment of Islamic rule
  • Methods: Protests, sabotage, street clashes
  • Quote: Ayatollah Khomeini: "People will never accept injustice. When oppression becomes law, resistance becomes a duty."

• The Vietnamese Revolution (1945–1975)
  • Motives: National independence and socialist reunification
  • Methods: Guerrilla warfare, insurgency, total war
  • Quote: Ho Chi Minh: "All men are created equal... the right to life, the right to liberty, and the right to the pursuit of happiness."

• The Cuban Revolution (1953–1959)
  • Motives: End U.S. intervention, dictatorship, and inequality
  • Methods: Guerrilla warfare, sabotage
  • Quote: Fidel Castro: "History will absolve me."

Star Wars: Rebellion in Myth and Metaphor

George Lucas' Star Wars frames political violence as mythic resistance against tyranny.

Princess Leia: "The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers."

Padmé Amidala: "So this is how liberty dies: with thunderous applause."

The Star Wars saga distills the moral dilemmas of revolution into a cinematic form—tyranny, rebellion, sacrifice, and justification.

Defining Political Violence: Context, Consent, and Cause
Legitimacy often rests on:

• Consent of the governed
• Exhaustion of peaceful means
• Justice of the cause - Violence in service of domination differs starkly from violence in service of liberation.

Dangers of Romanticizing Rebellion
Not all resistance is righteous. Revolutions may become oppressive. Terrorism may wear the mask of justice. Modern societies must examine political violence with sober discernment.

This is why words matter. Rebel, Liberty, Freedom are words used as weapons. There is no single definition that Thomas Jefferson or Mao would agree on.

"When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic." - Dresden James 

Conclusion: The Line We Must Walk

From the Highlands of Scotland to the fields of Yorktown, from the Committee of Public Safety to Red Square and Tiananmen, from Port-au-Prince to Havana, and even to the stars of Alderaan, political violence has shaped history and imagination alike.

[insert ignoramus disclaimer] This article does not endorse violence—but acknowledges its complex, powerful role in the pursuit of freedom. We must ask, as Jefferson, Wallace, Robespierre, Lenin, Mao, and Princess Leia did:

When is resistance a duty? And when does silence become complicity?  Those who can convince the most people to take action will win the day.

"The art of leadership... consists in consolidating the attention of the people against a single adversary and taking care that nothing will split up that attention."  - Adolf Hitler

P.S.

NYC just elected an open communist which, incognito, is a Democratic Socialist. These ideas and beliefs are antithetical to Liberty and American values. Americans and rational humans hold to high esteem "Agree to Disagree". But what if the other side absolutely does not believe in that. Are we really listening to their words of "Liberation" and "Fascism"? Perhaps we should accept that they have deeply accepted the "propaganda" as their truth.

Yet the "other side" cheers a President that freely bombs a sovereign nation without any declaration of war by congress. Congress has abdicated their role in equal branches of the government.  Whether you are right or have the moral high ground, all that matters is the power to have immunity for your decisions behind a wall of "We are the Government".