Justifying Violence: Macbeth and the Copenhagen Shooting

Most people’s kneejerk impression of violence is ivory-towered condemnation. Nevertheless, history has proven time and time again that violence is an inevitable byproduct of human interaction – but inevitability does not always imply legitimacy. Violence devoid of context is inarguably “wrong” – it is the motivations of its perpetrators (as well as the means of execution) that cause the line between moral extremes to blur.

Macbeth and the recent Copenhagen shooting deftly illustrate the relationship between acts of violence and personal motive. Throughout Shakespeare’s Macbeth, the namesake protagonist mutates from faithful noble to a shadow of his former self as he succumbs to self-destructive megalomania. In recent days, headlines have followed the religiously-motivated shootings in Copenhagen. While upholding the notion that he is following his destiny, Macbeth resorts to unscrupulous methods in order to attain and maintain domination. The shooter, by entwining their offenses with religion, claims he is delivering retributive justice by “correcting the crimes against Islam.”  

So, are the actions of the Copenhagen shooter and Macbeth justifiable? The answer is that it depends. One must acknowledge one’s perception of violence is as integral to the context of rationalizing violence, if not more so, than understanding the motivations for committing the act itself. Macbeth is portrayed as a villain and the poster child for the corruptive nature of power. Muslim extremists are aggrandized as terrorists with excessive religious zeal that is evinced through acts of brutality. Individuals with different worldviews would  hold a diverse range of opinions over the immoral actions of a power-hungry noble versus the deeds of al Qaeda supporters. While some would incontrovertibly assert that whichever party’s actions are inexcusable, others would passionately disagree. Justification ultimately boils down to personal perception, and subsequently the coexistence and aggregate of opinions determines whether acts of violence are considered justifiable.