Should violence be used against racism?

The problem with violence is that it reinforces the self-belief of the racists themselves. Physically attacking a racist may make the victim of racism feel good for a while, but nothing changes. Avoiding violence or returning abuse may allow time for other solutions to work. Nelson Mandela, Mahatma Gandhi and many others have shown that non-violence can be more effective. Having said that, I think everyone has the right to self-defence, if the racist actually resorts to physical violence. The above answer is most certainly correct, although, as pointed out some kind of violence may be necessary as a last resort. If so, this should only be done by the relevant authorities, after due process and not as a measure for retaliation but only protection.

It also depends what one's ultimate aim is. If one fights fire with fire, then often this just produces an escalation of violence, and a vicious cycle of violence and one is ultimately no better off than before, and in many cases worse off, even if one was originally innocent.

Attacking racism with knowledge is one important non-violent measure. This is so, since it really is the inner attitude of the racist person that needs to be changed. Realizing that scientifically and Biblically we are all 'of one blood' helps to dispel racist myths about superiority.

Interestingly, in regard to medical donations such as blood and tissue donations, a person of a different colored skin can actually be a better match than a person of the same skin color. This is so because humans are essentially genetically the same regardless of skin color. This shows how superficial racism is. Knowing that white people can donate to black people and vice-versa, and can even be a better match than a fellow black or white person, should help to attack the fallacy of racism at the practical and factual level.

Promoting such knowledge is a non-violent attack on racist attitudes.