Revolutions and Political Violence

Reforms, Revolutions and Political Violence

Basically, at the mention of violence, revolution and reformation people think of disorganization, physical harms and property destruction. However, these are three very different concepts though grouped in a single category. Essentially, reformation and revolution are concepts directly tied to innovation and social change[1]. Violence is a rowdy practice that mostly comes along with revolution. The difference between the three concepts chiefly lies in the method and channel that is used to achieve the desired goals. While reformation follows a systematic government stirred procedure, revolution is mainly spurred by the masses. ORDER YOUR PAPER NOW

Reformations, particularly, imply that the changes are made on an already existing structure. Reformations are meant to streamline the government structures by incorporating the necessary changes. As thus, a reform is undertaken by the government in power to inculcate changes in flawed systems[2]. Reformation ideas could also be suggested by the president or state advisory committees. Reformations are inherently systematic, well-planned and abide by the law. A perfect and ideal example of a reformation could be traced back to the 18th century. A series of reforms, specifically in Europe, were made to improve the working conditions to better the quality of their lives.

Revolutions, on the other hand, are driven by the common masses. People of the middle class are the driving forces for most revolutions. A revolution entails a total disruption and a radical transformation, especially in the status quo. Hence, revolutionary groups see the entire government structure as a fully flawed entity and step out to fully change it. Most revolutions tend to be generally disorganized and random[3]. Revolutions thus need not be abided by the law. Revolutions are majorly characterized by violence and a massive bloodshed. The French revolution that dates back to 1787 is a typical example of a revolution. The revolution led to a radical and significant change in the political structure of the country. From the explanations of a reform and a revolution, it can be inferred that violence is a key aspect that distinguishes the two concepts/drivers of social change. While revolutions carry a negative connotation, reforms are highly praised. ORDER YOUR PAPER NOW

The biblical guidelines offer the correct path that should be adopted with concern to violence, reformations and revolutions. While the guidelines tend to prefer reformations to revolutions which emerge to be violent, there are some incidents when violence becomes inevitable. This I the greatest weakness that can be drawn from the guidelines. I think a ‘divine violence’ should be allowed in some cases. Even the Bible presents some instances of divine violence. Succinctly, reformations can never work all the times. A reform I hardly viable especially with the 21st century stubborn regimes[4]. It might have worked in the past but can hardly work with the fully changed trends in the modern world. I believe that no single aspect of social change can fully work in the modern world[5]. A blend of both reforms and revolutions work the bet. However, the revolutions ought to be made more organized and orderly to avoid violence. ORDER YOUR PAPER NOW


Bernal-Verdugo, Lorenzo E., and Davide Furceri. The Dynamic Effect of Social and Political Instability on Output: The Role of Reforms. International Monetary Fund, 2013.

Luxemburg, Rosa. Reform or Revolution and Mass Strike. Edited by Helen Scott. Chicago, Illinois: Haymarket Books, 2008.

Tanter, Raymond. “A theory of revolution.” International Journal of Political Science 11 (2010): 1-12.

Tilly, Charles. “Does Modernization Breed Revolution?” Comparative Politics 5, no. 3 (2015): 425-447.


Leave a Reply