Final answer:
Bloodshed is often associated with revolutions, but not all revolutions involve a significant amount of violence. Various factors, including societal ideals and the tactics of revolutionaries, can influence the degree of bloodshed in a revolutionary change, as exemplified by the Glorious Revolution which John Locke saw as a legitimate and relatively peaceful transformation.
Step-by-step explanation:
Bloodshed is often associated with revolution, but this does not mean that violence is a normal or necessary condition of revolutionary change. The concept of revolution involves a fundamental change in political power or organizational structures that take place in a relatively short period of time. History indicates that while many revolutions have involved significant bloodshed, such as the French Revolution and the Russian Civil War, this is not a steadfast rule for all revolutions.
Throughout history, conflicts and revolutionary movements have illuminated the struggle between established governments and those seeking change. Sociologist and philosopher Karl Marx postulated that these conflicts are sometimes necessary steps toward a more egalitarian society. Yet, the multifaceted nature of modern conflicts, such as those in Libya and Syria, shows how difficult it can be to achieve peaceful resolutions.
It is also important to remember revolutionary ideals. For example, according to John Locke, the Glorious Revolution was a legitimate transformation because it had popular support and resulted in constitutional governance without a significant amount of violence. This highlights that revolutions can occur with varying degrees of bloodshed and can be influenced by a society's collective ideals and the strategies of the revolutionaries.