Final answer:
To change an unjust government, strategies range from nonviolent civil disobedience to violence, depending on the context and historical outcomes. The complexity of situations like the conflicts in Libya and Syria show that peace can be elusive, and the morality of violence depends on specific circumstances.
Step-by-step explanation:
Changing an unjust government can be approached through various strategies, such as nonviolent civil disobedience, legal challenges, voting, or as a last resort, violence. Evaluating the justifications for violent revolutions requires examining historical contexts and outcomes. For instance, in the 1960s, evidence from the civil rights movement demonstrates that nonviolent civil disobedience can lead to societal change without the need for violence. Additionally, in instances like the Latin American Revolutions or the American Revolution, violence became a historical turning point but the moral justifications and necessity of violence were context-dependent and not universally applicable. In contrast, in situations like the conflicts in Libya and Syria, the multifaceted conflicts illuminate the complexities of changing a government where peaceful resolutions become increasingly difficult. British actions that might have prevented violence at Lexington and Concord, or the influence of the American Revolution on abolitionists like Benjamin Franklin, show that ideals such as liberty and equality can inspire transformative, nonviolent societal changes. The Haitian Revolution, including the actions of leaders like T'ouverture and Dessalines, exemplifies a struggle against an unjust government that led to revolutionary outcomes but also invites debates on the necessity and justifications of the violence that occurred.