Violence is never a real solution to a political crisis.
When there is a political crisis the least thing government can do is to use violence to solve it. Using violence to solve political crisis further destabilizes the situation that can intensify the tension on the issue. Furthermore, the security of citizens cannot be guaranteed thus resulting in foreclosure of major business, shops and banks that can results in economical crisis that further intensify violence. In addition, bloodshed that can be taken place and resulting in hundreds life’s of innocent people. Seeing violence as a real solution to solve political crisis can be analogy to having lung cancer and still keep smoking cigarette in hope it will get better. Nevertheless, there are different approaches to solve political crisis such clear communication and compromise among parties. Give a chance to people who causes political crisis to speak up, to express their concerns and demands and listen to what they have to say.
However, sometimes violence can be the last choice left to solve political crisis. Some specific situation where violence considered a real solution to a political crisis is fighting for independence. For example, during colonial era British Colonies used violence to declare their independence from Britain. Furthermore, violence could be considered a real solution to a political crisis when removing a dictatorial government and replacing it with democratic government which was the case in many post Soviet countries. Moreover, if majority people fighting for basic rights such as human rights, freedom of religion, and expression then violence can be consider a solution to political crisis. For example that situation in Libya portrays above statement. In many cases it difficult to determines when it is just to use violence to solve political crisis.
There are many factors that can determine when violence is justified in solving political crisis. If citizens lack human rights, the majority people are poor, no healthcare provided to citizens and government does nothing to improve the situation in this cases the usage of violence can be justified. Moreover, if majority people demand the change but government does not respond then people could consider violence as a solution to fight for their rights