In the technical sense, V is a terrorist. Is terrorism a legitimate way to overthrow an oppressive government? Is it the only way? Were the fatalities likely caused by Vs. explosions worth the ultimate result? Miramar Gadding, Hosts Embark, Augusto Pinochle, Francisco Franco, and Bonito Mussolini, where all dictators that over controlled and completely abused over the people of the countries in which they ruled, by oppressing slaughtering and torturing the ones that where against their beliefs.
All of them actually ended the same, killed by the people from their country that where bored off being constantly mistreated, oppressed and who their human right where violated. I think the same happens in the book v for vendetta if v wouldn’t have done what he did the only thing that would change would be the time of the revolution people while always rebel to evil oppression. The term terrorism refers to the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.
In that case V is the most accurate terrorist the oral has ever seen, because his method consisted on making fear grow in the government and hope in the peoples heart. The terrorist is the one that opposes to the government because it doesn’t believe that what this government is doing is right V wanted to change things to better and he knew very well this government he knew the would not accept any type of opposition whether it was social political cultural o what ever kind was presented. He was witness to all of the horrible things that where done to those who didn’t make the cut of the ideal society that the government was trying to create.
All the gays, the blacks, the ones with a different way of living, where killed Just for being different from the others. This people control what people see, what people hear, and how people feel. V knew that the only way to tear apart a government which was so cruel, so hostile was by the way of violence or as he call it vengeance. He knew that the government that kills people for being against them would not support a passive rebellion in which the rights of society where demanded. He had to end with this dictatorship from the roots.
That’s why he had to recur to terrorism or violence, it was the only ay he could really damage and make changes in this government. Words would have not hurt them plus the government wouldn’t have let this words spread, they where in total control. It was the only way he could really impact and let people know there was another way to live and not Just by being oppressed and followed. Terrorism is a legit way to overthrow an oppressive government. The oppressive government will never tolerate opposition the will try to get rid of this opposition whether it is by killing, torturing or hopefully exiling it.
Terrorism fights back with the name force that the government strikes. Just as the third law of Newton states, “Each action will have a same reaction” this meaning if the government kills and oppresses the people, the people will eventually rebel and kill the government oppressors. I believe there are simpler ways to rebel against a government. For example Indian’s pacific independence from Great Britain. The difference is that there where not being oppressed and it was what helped this independence to be successful. Mean while oppressed country can only recur to terrorism too make their opinion be taken in mount.
The fatalities caused by v where totally worth the outcome of his actions, the people could now build a new England free of oppression, violence, slaughter, and hostility. The can create a democracy where diversity is accepted and cherished. Sure it was not beautiful what V had to do to give this drastic change and great opportunity to the people of England, but it was obviously worth it. As some would say, “Kill one to save a million “and that was exactly what V did he devoted what was left of his life to free England from the oppression.