Abstract:

The aim of the paper is to test the attitude of the Romanian high-school students towards using the violence in solving social problems in Romania.
The questions created an environment related to the use of violence by involving slightly different meanings among the questions addressed when talking about the solution to a social problem: violence or negotiation/violent action or peaceful protests.

Methodology:
The sociological investigation consisted of the application of an online questionnaire at the level of a population of 538 high-school students from Bucharest (15 to 18 years of age). The research is a pilot project and it does not intend to assume a representative sample for the population of high-school students in Romania. Its function is that of identifying the existence of a problem and the relevance of that problem concerning the attitude towards social violence as a mean in solving social problems among the high-school pupils.

We selected Q1-5, Q8 as representative for this research purpose.
Q1. Even when the natural rights of a person, group of people, or peoples are denied, violence should not be used – the nonviolent protest action is the only way to protect the rights violated.
Approximately 19% of the questioned students are willing to accept a violent manner of solving problems.
Q2. Violence has worked in many cases, the same as we know that there are plenty of situations where the rational arguments had no success. So, violent methods are justified when our rights and freedoms are violated by the powerful.
A percentage of 35.6% of the questioned students deem the use of violence as justified means to solve problems.
Q3. Violence is not a solution for defending the rights and freedoms of a group, of an ethnicity, nation or an individual: it creates social tensions, puts under alert entire communities, divides the public opinion and makes it nearly impossible to reach agreement.
A 90% percentage of the students responded that they reject this idea of justified violence.
Q4. If they enjoy positive effects, so that groups, ethnicity, or peoples gain the recognition of their rights by violent means, then they are justified.
A percentage of 24% believe that violent means are justified provided they serve a collective cause concerning the acquirement or preservation of certain rights.
Q5. The goal – no matter how good – does not justify the means: it is not correct to use violence in order to protect, defend, conquer rights of a people, group, ethnicity, or of an individual.
A percentage of 78% of the questioned students believe that it is not fair to use violence for the preservation, acquirement or defence of collective rights, whereas 22% of them reject this idea.
Q.8 If peaceful means fail in defending the rights of a person, group f persons, or peoples, then it is necessary to resort to a violent form of action.
We see that 23.3% of the questioned high school students consider that violence is justified after the peaceful means have failed in the solution to a social problem.

Our conclusion is that an average of 20-25% of the students tend to accept the violence as an ultimate reason when solving social problems. The majority of the subjects reject the violent means (social violence) in responding to different group problems, favouring rather the negotiations and the peaceful protests.

Keywords:

Social violence, negotiation.