Which is the better violence or non violence?
It depends on the situation and there is no definitive answer. In short, your actions should match the threat. If the threat is imminently violent, a concurrent violent response may be necessary. However, acting preemptively with violence is rarely necessary. IE - you don't need to bring guns to a knife fight.
What did Gandhi mean by Better to be violent when there's violence in our hearts than to put on the cloak of non violence to cover impotence?
Non violence is good christians and Muslims spread empire and now they have many countries but hindus keep non violence and now you have only one counter now say non violence is good or bad?
* In Florence, Zanotelli spoke clearly to the extremist wings of the movement and expressed the concept of " civilization of tenderness": " Active non - violence is not merely pacifism, it is something different. I started reading Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Don Milani, Mazzolari and they helped me to realize it had been Jesus of Nazareth who first practised non violence, the same non violence that was crushed by the Roman imperialism, in Galilee…