Abstract

The present considerations discuss the systematic opposition between a practice of nonviolence to experienced social injustice and violent relationships. At the point, we see existential decisions about war and violence, there are signs of misconduct of responsibility waiver form – the Security Council unable to act, the protective effect for the affected people lapsed, the effectiveness of international law too weak. What emerges in this starting position, especially for the present considerations as a problem, is nothing less than the question of a meaningful rule between legitimate power and illegitimate violence, hence a question that has a historical and a fundamental anthropological side. In the present case should be explicitly asked for the meaning of criteria of modern violence ability. The modern power capability opens up a complex and challenging task field. The historical origin and existential explosiveness are often overlooked