Three prominent views on the morality of violence are (1) the pacifist position, which states that violence is always immoral, and should never be used; (2) the utilitarian position, that means that violence can be used if it achieves a greater "good" for society; (3) a hybrid of these two views which both looks at what good comes from the use of violence, while also examining the types of violence used.
[1] Christian theologians have traditionally argued against the morality of violence, arguing that Christians should love their enemies as well as their friends.
[2] Benito Mussolini often spoke about the morality of violence, arguing that violence was moral, and that it had spiritual importance as an expression of human will.
[3] Noted community activist, Saul Alinsky, also argued for a similar stance in his book Rules for Radicals where he states "That Perennial question, 'Does the end justify the means?'
is meaningless as it stands; the real and only question regarding the ethics of means and ends is, and always has been, 'Does this particular end justify this particular means?