A character who firmly believes in Thou Shalt Not Kill ends up being presented with a situation extreme enough that despite much compunctions and reservations, they are compelled to resort to violence — and it works. It makes everything all right. It was the right thing to do all along.
The character is usually, but not always, a Technical Pacifist or something to that extent. If they were an Actual Pacifist, they would never resort to violence under any circumstances at all; if they were a Nineties Anti-Hero, they would have no problem with it to begin with. In some versions, they will be (self-)tortured after making this choice, but in others, it is surprisingly easy, and it really seems like the message is that pacifism is laughable, or at best impractical. For some pacifist characters, it could be interpreted by some audiences that they will refuse to resort to violence until it is proven to them that their enemy has no qualms about using it and is shameless about doing so, which acts as a sort of Godzilla Threshold to persuade the character that resorting to violence is a necessary evil.
A classic Family-Unfriendly Aesop. Compare with Murder Is the Best Solution, Violence Is the Only Option, and The Extremist Was Right. Guilt-Free Extermination War is the ultimate extreme case. Related to Might Makes Right and sometimes related to Right Makes Might.
open/close all folders
Anime & Manga
Vash of Trigun is quite similar to Jimmy Stewart's character in Destry Rides Again (see Film), but his ultimate need to use (lethal) violence is shown as very traumatic. Since the series ends right after the choice, it's hard to tell what his future will be.
Kitano from Angel Densetsu is an Actual Pacifist that always gets dragged unwillingly into fights. Normally he just stands there dodging every blow until his opponent is too tired to continue — just do not push his Berserk Button.
Full Metal Panic! has the former child-soldier and career mercenary protagonist acting as the head coach for his high school rugby team, who had lost forty-nine of their past forty-nine games. By the end of his training, every one of the wimpy, pacifist team members have been turned into berserkers with burning-red eyes. One of them is outright disappointed that a tackle that carried him through a member of the rival team left said person trembling on the ground instead of dead. With that in mind, the substitute coach was literally reading an instruction manual that was inspired by the teachings of Drill Sergeant Hartman.
The "Old Man Logan" arc of Wolverine turns out this way. 50 years after becoming an Actual Pacifist, a cross-country errand to earn enough money to save his family leads Logan into a confrontation where violence is unavoidable, as he's locked in a room with someone trying to kill him. Unfortunately, after he defeats his foe and returns home, it turns out he should have resorted to violence much earlier.
This has cropped up more often in recent years. His solution in Avengers vs. X-Men? Murder Hope Summers, a teenage mutant girl, for being a beacon for the Phoenix (though he can't go through with it). And in Age Of Ultron? Murder Hank Pym so he can't make Ultron, who has successfully taken over the world. A Subverted Trope that second time, as it makes everything go From Bad to Worse in The Multiverse.
A Golden Age Comic Book story featuring the Guardian and the Newsboy Legion had them interact with two pacifist brothers who'd isolated themselves in their house for years because of the world's warlike ways. Enemy spies break into the house for some reason (possibly to use it as a hideout, or to steal the brothers' stashed money to fund their spy ring) and it's only by the Guardian's use of applied force that the spies are defeated. The brothers grasp the intended Aesop, that if you don't confront evil, it will eventually come in after you.
The original run of Hawk and Dove had this as a message. Of course, if you're going to be a crime-fighter, it's implied that you have to fight people, Dove.
Both played straight and inverted in Transmetropolitan. By the end of the series, Spider has personally killed more than a dozen people (mostly in self defense) and has committed assault on hundreds, if not thousands. But he also carries around a mostly nonviolent, if uncomfortable, weapon (the Bowel Disruptor, which is Exactly What It Says on the Tin) and almost all real change is effected through the written word rather than the alternative.
Superman, in his early Post-Crisis years, infamously killed several (depowered) villains who'd killed their worlds and threatened to get their powers back and do the same to Earth-DC; Supes was left tormented as a result. It strengthened his resolve to always find another way from then on, to the point that when later confronted with Xenomorphs in Superman / Aliens, he is still reluctant to kill them.
A crossover between The Punisher and Deathlok (a pacifist man in the body of a killing machine) feature this. The climax of the story has Frank killing a man threatning the life of Deathlok's son. Deathlok initially objects, and Frank says that he didn't have a choice. Deathlok gets ready to argue, but then decides that this time, he was right, and thanks him for saving his son's life.
In one Atomic Robo story, the titular robot battles giant ants encroaching on Reno, Nevada. When interviewed afterwards about how he defeated them, he explains "I used my violence."
Subverted in The Badger. In one story the Badger debates this issue with a crippled street musician. After the Badger saves him from a mugger the busker, while remaining personally committed to pacifism concedes that the Badger has a point.
In The Wizard in the Shadows, Harry's default response to most problems is to blast his way through them. Or, for instance, use an unhelpful guard as a battering ram.
In High Noon, the main character's wife is a Quaker, and against violence. She leaves her husband when he wants to fight with his enemies instead of escaping, but finally returns to him, and shoots one of the bad guys.
In the Lord of the Rings Trilogy, seemingly everyone starts out feeling reluctant to take up arms and go to war. Everyone who actively resists the call to arms is presented as being either weak or being secretly manipulated by the enemy. Still, with a wrathful demigod on the loose who has an army of objectively evil minions at his beck and call, the only choices they really have are to fight or to be brutally slaughtered.
Batman is a type who has no problem with brutal fights but a code against killing. Often, villains (especially the Joker) will test this commitment.
The movie Batman Begins presents an example where he has no choice, as his mentor turned enemy explicitly states that he feels no gratitude that Bruce previously saved his life and vows to kill Bruce if he doesn't join his cause. Ultimately, the movie flirts with The Dog Shot First, since Batman doesn't kill the villain but rather declines to save him, which is still at odds with Batman's code of ethics, at least the one established in the comics (especially as it was Batman's plan to stop the train that put the villain in a position which threatened his life). OF course, he was just starting out. It should also be noted that the villain was likely capable of saving himself, if he so wanted to. He seems to have solidified his moral code by the time of The Dark Knight—when the spring-loaded razors on his gauntlets cut the Joker and causes him to fall off the building, he still catches him. It could also be argued that since he survived the fall, he might not have expected Dent to die when he prevented him from killing Gordon's son. Batman can be excused for Dent's death, considering he was exhausted and shot, he only tackled Dent off the ledge to save a small child, and there really wasn't any way for him to know that there would be a fall that would kill Dent. Dent's death was an accident that Bruce can't really be held accountable for.
Burton's Batman, on the other hand, never had this problem, and just killed without much thought.
The missionaries in Rambo find out the hard and painful way that violence only understands violence and when your opponents' goal is mass genocide, pacifism just makes their job easier. Rambo himself has no such illusions, and has no choice but to unleash a world of hurt on the Burmese military junta to save what's left of the naive missionary team. It appears that cold, harsh reality backs this one up; the monks who attempted peaceful protests against the Burmese S.P.D.C. have been all but wiped out.
One of H. Beam Piper's stories subverted Asimov's maxim, stating that violence is the last resort of the incompetent because "Only the incompetent wait until the last extremity to use force, and by then, it is usually too late to use anything, even prayer."
This trope was inverted in In the Presence of Mine Enemies by Harry Turtledove, when the quiet programmer is mocked by his supervisor for not having the conviction to go join the riots against a coup... and then once he's left alone changes a geneological database and anonymously alerts the "good guys" to the "discovery" in a move which does far more to undermine the coup than any individual bottlethrower could imagine (and the POV characters who are protesting physically do little violence but simply shame the coup mooks into not killing them for hours until the mooks are EAGER to surrender to the "good guys" military forces).
Turtledove also has an Anvilicious short story in which the Nazis take over India, and Mahatma Gandhi tries his nonviolent civil disobedience methods against them. It ends with his movement horribly crushed, and on his way to be executed Gandhi laments his mistake in assuming basic human decency on the part of the Nazis, the moral being that such methods can only hope to defeat a hypocritical oppressor with a conscience. This is not without basis in fact, as the real-life Gandhi had urged the use of non-violent resistance against the Nazis in Europe, in particular by the Jews.
He went one step further in his Worldwar series, suggesting that violence is not only the answer, but our salvation. Humanity's constant strife and warfare has made it so "perfidious" and battle-ready that we continually take the technologically advanced but strategically stagnant alien invaders by surprise with our double-dealing and resourcefulness. For example, pissing on a sensor and freaking out an analyst, who swore up and down that "4 billion Big Uglies" were coming right at them.
This was a big theme of Terry Goodkind's Sword of Truth series, particularly Naked Empire, in which the pacifist Bandakar Empire had to be persuaded to fight the invading Order soldiers. The protagonist massacres pacifists "armed only with their hatred of moral clarity".
Essentially the point of Starship Troopers. The book was about the question of what a citizen owed in exchange for his political privileges, as Heinlein points out that Americans do not earn their citizen status. Violence wasn't the answer provided society was well-governed, but violence was the ultimate, final way in which disputes were settled. Hence, all authorities ultimately must be backed by force or they are toothless. Heinlein's novel featured a Mary Suetopia Earth where nearly everyone was law-abiding, rights were extended to all regardless of race and gender (revolutionary in his time), and civil society was idealized. He contrasts this with a much-more-violent post-war collapse of civil order. Violence against the Bugs was inevitable because neither humanity nor the Bugs would cede their unlimited expansion throughout the universe. Violence is also used to convince the Skinnies to switch sides in the war. The point that violence is a means to an end, and not an end, is frequently brought up, only a bit less than the whole citizenship issue. Heinlein was preachingClausewitz, not carnage.
In fact, citizenship could be earned by any form of civil service. Military service was simply the quickest and most prestigious route, with the much more chance of rising to political office later. Also, the government decides which form of service you get assigned (you can quit anytime outside of active combat, forfeiting the chance to earn full citizenship) — thus, the chance of being assigned to the armed forces depends on just how much this trope applies to the current interstellar political situation.
Redwall. No matter how much the Abbot insists that Violence Is Wrong, Cluny's horde ends up being defeated by... violence. In fact, pretty much every book in the series has the message "violence is OK if you're killing evil creatures", and even among the normally peaceful Redwallers, only a few characters are ever bothered by having killed an enemy. And the ones that are bothered are usually instantly rounded on by the other characters, chastised for their softness/naivete.
Many L.E. Modesitt novels end up with the protagonist reluctantly using their magic or technology to become a Person of Mass Destruction and completely destroying an enemy city, nation, or entire planet, because they need to make sure there is no way that the enemy will be able to start another war, ever again, no matter what.
Being a Technical Pacifist (albeit one who fights dirty), Sam Vimes in the Discworld books frequently finds himself in situations where he is pressured to have to kill his enemies but tries to avoid it. The Fifth Elephant presents a good example, where Lady Margolotta, the mentor and/or pupil of Magnificent Bastard Lord Vetinari, shows her cunning credentials by aiding the villain so he will go after Vimes' wife, putting Vimes in a situation where it is apparent that he has no choice but to kill, knowing that the villain (a werewolf with Nigh-Invulnerability) will always come back against the ones he loves. Vimes does end up killing, fully aware of being set up by Lady Margolotta, and notes how he won't deliver a Bond One-Liner because he believes that it's the only thing separating self-defense and murder.
Subverted for once in The Killer Inside Me by Jim Thompson. The narrator spends most of the story rationalizing his killings, but through therapy realizes he was really just followinghis own psychoses.
The moral of nearly any Vince Flynn book.
As expected, an integral part of The Art of War. However, Sun Tzu famously states that war with an enemy is the least favorable, last resort to achieving victory.
Used in The Two Towers, both book and movie. In the movie, the Ents initially decide to not fight, but they change their minds after finding that Sauruman had clear-cut a large section of the forest. It received lots of complaints about being pro-war. It was more subtle in the book, with Treebeard's line, "It is likely that we march to our doom, but if we stayed home and did nothing, doom would find us anyway".
Note that Tolkien was writing this during World War II, a war pretty much universally declared to be completely justified, in stark contrast to World War I in which Tolkien himself had fought. It's likely his intended message was that fighting is okay, if it's in a cause as justified as stopping the Nazis.
Not only that, Tolkien's Britain had seen a very active pacifist movement during the 1930s (in 1933, the Oxford Union debating society successfully carried the motion "this House will under no circumstances fight for King and country") along with numerous unsuccessful attempts to deal with the Nazis short of war. Doom, or at least war, *did* find them anyway.
George Orwell remarked in one of his essays that, "Those who 'abjure' violence can only do so because others are committing violence on their behalf."
In the novels In Death Ground and This Shiva Option by David Weber and Steve White, the invading aliens are an implacable hive mind. No negotiation was possible and the aliens had no desire to coexist. The aliens, in fact, didn't understand coexistence as a concept and were not interested in learning. The violent solution turned out to be the correct one.
In the Anita Blake series this is a recurring and controversial theme, especially as it's had a steady presence throughout the series as each new line Anita's willing to cross cuts her off from more of the "normal" world, and slowly pushes old friends and associates further away from her. The author's made comments to the general effect that while she likes and admires idealism enough to write it into characters, she can't manage enough personal belief in it to avoid this trope in her writing.
The Sarah Jane Adventures has a variant on this in Enemy of the Bane. Sarah Jane tells Clyde "There are better ways to solve a problem than guns", only for two of the Bane to get killed by Kaagh's blaster and the Brigadiers gun-cane. Seems like having a gun around might have its uses...
Bully Beatdown. Someone messing with you? Let's put him in a cage with a Mixed Martial Arts fighter.
"The Peacekeeper Wars": Our heroes try to run away from the conflict and when they realize they can't do that, they spend the bulk of the miniseries attempting to facilitate a diplomatic solution. In the end, though, the only thing that can stop the bloodshed is more bloodshed — a wormhole weapon destructive enough to force the two sides into accepting the diplomatic solution.
Also many of the Zhaan spotlight plots have her succeeding through physical or psychic violence despite her pacifist ideals, especially the Maldis episodes and "Look at the Princess". She was almost always tormented by the decision, and at least the first time it happened she spends the next few episodes pretty bitter about it and struggling to regain her inner peace.
In the episode "Midnight", the Doctor spends the first part of the episode trying to prevent the creature that has broken into the bus being thrown out of the airlock. He ends up almost being thrown out of the airlock himself and is only saved when the person originally possessed by the creature is thrown out by the hostess.
The Doctor very frequently ends up killing lots of people/creatures to solve problems, (to the point that some fans have started using "genocide" as a verb because it happens so often,) but, with a very few exceptions, he gives them a chance to withdraw peacefully first, and is much happier if a problem can be solved without anyone getting hurt. If his warnings are ignored, however, he shows no mercy, and afterwards seems OK with the ethical implications of wiping out a species in order to protect others.
A notable example of this is the Doctor killing both of all the crazy Timelords and Daleks at the end of the last great Time War. The moral is proved in the case of the Daleks throughout the show, and in the case of the Timelords in "The End of Time, Part Two". This moral is then entirely inverted in the "Day of the Doctor" special. Talk about changing your mind.
Notorious old-school examples are "The Daleks", in which Ian has to teach the Thals anger, and "The Dominators", which was deliberately written as a hippie-punching allegory of how pacifists are stupid cowards who will get exterminated by the first non-pacifists they meet.
Tom Baker has expressed his misery about this in interviews fairly often, complaining that it was wrong for Doctor Who to idealise intelligence, love and pacificism, and yet so often end stories with the Doctor blowing the aliens up. He once even said, likely jokingly, he'd prefer it to be more violent to the point where it became obviously fantastical (the example he gave was a Gory Discretion Shot of him slaughtering 25 people with a sword) if the plots were going to use violence as a solution anyway.
In Chinese Paladin, Elder Shi is seen as a Knight Templar because of his insistence that nothing will be gained by diplomacy with Bai Yue; various characters, including the Nanzhao General, take the time to privately advise Ling'er differently. Elder Shi is later proved right, and there is a beautiful scene at his funeral where each of the dissenting characters apologizes and pledges to give the battle their all.
In Family Matters, Steve Urkel would usually try to find non-violent solutions to problems. Once in a while, though, that wasn't possible, and he would have to turn himself into Bruce Lee.
The Kenny Rogers song "Coward of the County".
Exalted has something of a theme that most problems in Creation can be solved, at least temporarily, by punching the right being in the face. The main risk is that today's necessary puncher becomes tomorrow's punchee. Exalted also tends to assert that violence can "solve" problems, but will often create bigger problems in the process. For Example:
Going to war against the Primordials and murdering them won Creation for humankind. But it also permanently broke the cycle of reincarnation.
The Usurpation saved the world from the Solar Exalted. But while the Shogunate's warring states weren't as dangerous to the world as the reality-warping Lawgivers, they still weren't GOOD rulers, and the Terrestrial Exalted couldn't keep up the fantastic technology of the First Age
And then the two combine: the wrathful dead primordials imbue the ghosts of murdered Solars with power to create the Deathlords, who to date have come the closest to killing everything in the world..
Surprisingly enough, Warhammer 40,000 could be argued to have an example of this in some of the stories around the Tyranids (and Tau). Usually, violence is utterly futile against the Tyranid (Space Bugs/Mammals/Reptiles/Something numerous enough to take down the armies and navies of entire systems just by clogging vehicles with their corpses), which forces anyone hoping to stand against them to produce alternate methods. Of course, these "alternate methods" usually consist of either poisoning them or diverting their attention. Still, Science Really is the Answer!
It happens more often in battles with small splinter fleets. Major Hive Fleets so far were destroyed by concentrating all available space faring firepower from several (dozens, sometimes hundreds) of sectors, craftworlds, tombworlds, septs and/or Xeno Empires. Hive Fleet Leviathan was indeed lured away from it's path to Terra with the help of Science, but the exact effect of this operation is debatable. Sooner or later (most likely, sooner), Orks or Tyranids will emerge victorious (most likely, Tyranids) and stronger than ever. And whoever wins this fight, it is the Imperium that loses the most.
Mega Man X had always tried to be a pacifist, but he quickly concluded (or at least, decided before the first game) that fighting was necessary to bring about peace, to the point that he states that he is not afraid to fight his best friend Zero to stop him from getting corrupted in X5, and his enemy Sigma if he keeps showing up to stop the reconstruction of the world in X6. Then he suddenly made a decision to become an Actual Pacifist in X7, which everyone else (including the players, who were given Axl as a result) hated him for. Once you save enough Reploids or beat all 8 Mavericks however, X decides (again), that yes, violence is necessary. Then he becomes playable.
His reasoning is somewhat sound: he doesn't want to fight anymore because he's tired of killing (he's spent four of the last six games fighting without any direct correlation to helping people that he can see). Given his power, he's very good at killing, and he decides that his abilities and hesitance are better used in more of a leadership role (where he plays the devil's advocate more often than not, arguing that violence is not the answer). After you rescue enough Reploids, he realizes there are a lot of people in the line of fire in what's essentially a custody dispute gone nuclear, and decides to fight to save them, not to stop the fighting (that's incidental).
This stance is better seen in X8, where X is clearly displeased by the start of yet another conflict started by Sigma, but immediately jumps into the fray without the slightest word of complaint, as he knows that a lack of involvement will only end with more innocents in the crossfire and he doesn't want the situation to snowball. In fact, when Lumine (a New Generation Reploid able to go Maverick at will and the real mastermind of X8) tries his hand at psychological warfare and seems to succeed at getting X and Zero to hesitate, it is a bulletfrom Axl that rouses the two out of their brief Heroic BSOD and the epilogue has Zero reassuring X that fighting is necessary, not only to combat Mavericks but to Screw Destiny when it comes to the evolution Lumine spoke of.
One wins U.S. Men's Hockey Team Olympic Challenge!, an Interactive Fiction game, by vandalizing the Olympic Village. The motto of the game is literally "Violence really is the answer to this one," a parody of a traditional error message stating the opposite.
Pretty much any video game with any sort of combat will go into this. To paraphrase the list of console RPG cliches: "All the world's problems can be solved by finding the right guy and beating the crap out of him." It's rather rare to find a game where the major conflict isn't resolved by some variation on "Beat the hell out of this guy."
Suikoden II is probably one of the best examples of an exception. In most endings, the major conflict is resolved just by successfully seizing an important location. In the best ending, the more personal conflict for Riou is resolved by confronting Jowy at the stone where they promised to meet back up at the beginning of the game and allowing Jowy to beat him to death. He gets better.
There's also Phantom Brave, where the Big Bad Demon Sulphur is pushed out of the dimension by the Power of Friendship, sacrifice, tears and blood. Then he just comes back at full power as a Bonus Boss and it turns out Level Grinding and hitting him really, really, really hard works better.
In Dragon Age II, this is averted. Killing Orsino and Meredith does secure the survival of Hawke and his/her True Companions, but it doesn't prevent the Mage-Templar war.
A big theme of Schlock Mercenary — when it comes down to it, the galaxy is best protected by heavily armed (and vaguely sociopathic) mercenaries who laugh at collateral damage. Some of the Seventy Maxims of Maximally Effective Mercenaries discuss the subject.
Maxim 6: If violence wasn't your last resort, you failed to resort to enough of it. Maxim 13: Do unto others. Maxim 27: Don't be afraid to be the first to resort to violence.
The "That Which Redeems" arc in Sluggy Freelance has a morally complex take on this. When the demons of the Dimension of Pain invade the ridiculously pacifistic Dimension of Lame, nobody is willing to violently oppose them except for Torg, who is from the main story dimension. It is pointed out that left to its own devices, the DoL would be a paradise, but the invasion makes violence necessary.
Phase of the Whateley Universe comes from a super-wealthy family where violence is never the answer, because they have security forces and lawyers and layer after layer of protection from the real world. But then Phase manifests as a mutant and gets kicked out of the family, at which point he has to live in a superhero universe where the appropriate response is often an energy blast to the face. He still has trouble with this, although in stories like "Ayla and the Networks" he demonstrates that sometimes the answer is months of scheming and sneakiness beforehand.
Avatar: The Last Airbender zig-zagged this in the last few episodes: Aang speaks with his past lives and each one tells him, indirectly, that killing Ozai is justified—even a fellow monk pacifist tells him that as Avatar, the well-being of the people supersedes his own spiritual needs. Then Aang goes into the Avatar State, beats the ever living snot out of Ozai, and refuses to complete the finishing move. THEN Aang uses energy bending to save the day without killing.
Adventure Time takes this trope and runs with it. A lot of times, Finn and Jake just solve something by beating or threatening to beat the crap out of it. It's even the aesop for the episode, "His Hero", when Finn is unable to learn the opposite of this. The hilarious part is that "Sometimes violence can solve all your problems" is the secondary Aesop for the episode. The big lesson that Jake and Finn learn is "Never listen to old people," taught to them by a little old lady whom Finn rescues with his fists of righteous anger.
The plot of Crystals Have Power revolves around Jake accidentally hurting Finn, which reminds him of a time where his father told him to hurt everyone. He decides that he doesn't want to use violence to solve problems anymore. Unfortunately, Finn is captured by crystal soldiers who will turn him into a crystal, and Jake is the only one who can defeat them. In the end, Jake gets a vision of his late father, who reveals that Jake wasn't paying attention to what he was really trying to say: Jake must hurt everyone who is evil. Jake then "snaps out of it" and easily beats the crystal men.
Animaniacs did this in the episode Bully for Skippy. Slappy Squirrel's nephew is being horribly bullied at school, and his counselor keeps suggesting all the "solutions" Real Life counselors give: ignore the bully, try to befriend them, inform the bully that they've hurt your feelings, etc. Skippy just gets beat up worse and worse until he teams up with Aunt Slappy and breaks out the Cartoon Violence and dynamite... which oddly reforms the bully into a good citizen.
It seems people agree that this may be Truth in Television, since most of the YouTubecomments say that the counselor's offered approaches rarely work and often only make the bully worse, as seen in the cartoon. For those who haven't seen the particular episode, the solutions, such as "Ignore the bully," "Be a friend to the bully," and "Try to invoke the bully's empathy," are based mostly in quite discredited Freudian Excuses used to explain bullying, such as low self-esteem. Bullies actually tend to have high self-esteem.
One episode of Star Wars: The Clone Wars was spent mostly trying to convince a tribe of Actual Pacifists that the Separatists were about to test a new superweapon on their planet whether the villagers were there or not (although the village was something of a bonus), the Jedi did not lead the Separatists there, and politely asking the Separatists to leave was not going to have any effect. One of the elders of the village refuses to listen and makes the argument that while violence might/would save their lives they would be sacrificing the very heart of who they are as a people by giving up pacifism. Then again, without their lives, who they were as a people is a lot less valuable.
The Hero Factory: Invasion from Below special seems to at first play the "violence is bad" moral straight when Breez calms down the beast queen by offering peace. But, due to a misunderstanding, the beasts attack again, and this time the Heroes have no option but to beat them up, indirectly killing them.
In Time Squad It's official from the start of the series that this is Buck Tuddrussel's go-to philosophy, punch first, ask questions later! Otto at first tries to intervene at every chance, trying to explain that most problems that the Squad comes across could easily be solved with their words and can be manipulated into an agreeable compromise. But eventually its shown that there's just some problems in life that can't just be "talked" into fixing, sometimes a little butt kicking goes a long way.
Steven Universe invoked this trope, with a tragicomic subversion, in So Many Birthdays. Steven has lost control of his shapeshifting abilities and is dying because of the Rapid Aging that ensues. After everything else fails, Afro AsskickerBadass In Charge Garnet grits her teeth and violently shakes frail old Steven. When the other Gems pry her away, she is very lost and seems to be in a shocked daze. She explains her actions by invoking this trope: "I thought violence would be the answer." (To be fair, Violence Really Is the Answer to 99% of the problems in Garnet's life.)
Malcolm X said, "I don't even call it violence when it's in self defense; I call it intelligence."
Keep in mind, at the time, i.e. during segregation, for about a century or so whites openly slaughtered blacks with complete impunity and the tacit if not explicit support of the police, government and military. X lived in an era when the murder of black children was entirely, sickeningly common and open terrorism against blacks was effectively ignored if not outright praised by a large percentage of the population. Example: a case where civil rights advocates were nearly murdered investigating a black man's severed head displayed in a local tool shop window Down South. If that were in a sci-fi novel, it'd be justification for a Guilt-Free Extermination War against whatever alien species did it. So yeah, less "intelligence", more like "reflexive survival instinct evolved over hundreds of thousands of years".
Notably, though, the greatest successes of the Civil Rights Movement were achieved with nonviolence, so the exact applicability of this trope is debatable.
One should also remember that Malcolm X wasn't much a proponent of the Civil Rights Movement as he was of Human Rights in general. He didn't care all that much about the progression of "civil rights" (due to being beyond wary about dealing with the then current authority figures needed to make that change) as he cared about black people upholding their own civil liberties and ending the abuse of black people in general. This trope is definitely still applicable to HIS ideals, especially in his earlier career.
Nelson Mandela, while he insisted that black people of South Africa use nonviolent protest tactics, acknowledged all along that violence was ALWAYS an option, albeit a last-resort. Once white Afrikaners demonstrated their shameless willingness to use violence against blacks, he refused to renounce the use of violence in self-defense. To this day, many white politicians, including several in America, insist on calling Mandela a terrorist, despite the fact that his wife's promotion of extreme retaliatory violence so disgusted him that he divorced her because of it.
A physical attack on one's person is generally best responded to with violence.
Disputed by many real-life martial arts instructors, who say the first response should be to get out of the situation. Violence is used only when you cannot safely get away or otherwise defuse/avoid the situation. Although many suspect that those martial arts instructors who say that are just trying to shield themselves from any potential liability if one of their students is sued for excessive force, so how seriously such protestations ought to be taken is debatable. Outside of civil liability, if someone is pushed to use force to defend themselves, even in places with the Castle Doctrine and "Stand Your Ground" laws, demonstrating that they did everything in their power to avoid a violent confrontation is far more likely to earn them favor with the judge and jury.
With those where a refusal to use violence is seen as a weakness, this is what you start with—and then be open to being convinced to not beat anybody else up once you've established that it's not because you can't.