State violence
State violence is the use of force, intimidation, or oppression by a government or ruling body against the citizens within the jurisdiction of said state. This can be seen in a variety of forms, including military violence, settler colonialism, surveillance, immigration law, and other tactics used to express authority over a certain group.[1][2] State violence can happen through law enforcement or military force, as well as through other branches of government and bureaucracy. State violence is typically justified under the pretense of maintaining law and order, or protecting borders. State violence can include prolonged conditions imposed on individuals that are upheld, unaddressed, or furthered by the state. For example, structural violence that lead to Flint, Michigan having lead-contaminated water may be considered state violence.[3] U.S immigration laws are an additional example of structural violence.
Immigration policy
[edit]The effects of US immigration enforcement policies create difficulties for transnational families. The immigration policies also create a state of anxiety within immigrant communities.[4] Individuals with familial ties and long-term residency in the US are forced to leave the country. Additionally, immigration policing policies are intended to capture criminals, yet they do not always target serious offenders. Many immigrants are arrested without warrants by local police, often due to status violations or minor traffic violations.[4] Harm caused by immigration policies necessarily includes involvement of the state. The nature of the states involvement in structural violence is being critically evaluated.[5]
Violence through policy
[edit]The passing of the Patriot Act (2001) and the subsequent formation of the Department of Homeland Security expanded the definition (status) of individuals deemed worthy for detention.[4] Policymakers enact laws that reduce individuals to a status.[clarification needed] The fear of family separation due to legal status causes ongoing stress for undocumented people, regardless of how long they have lived with their families.[6]
Judicial violence and policing
[edit]The involvement of the state in law enforcement is frequently linked to the perpetration of violent behaviors, both on a systemic and personal level.[3] Instances of such behaviors can range from the application of police force by officers, to extended periods of pretrial detention, excessively long prison sentences, and insufficient care provided to those who are incarcerated. These concerns tend to have a greater impact on communities of color.[3] The policies implemented by law enforcement agencies, and the resulting imprisonment, can have a significant impact on various aspects of one's life[7]
Mass incarceration
[edit]The United States' high rate of imprisonment represents a form of structural violence that disproportionately affects black Americans. Approximately 33% of black men in the U.S. have felony convictions which leads to disenfranchisement from the voting process.[7] The more someone interacts with law enforcement, jail, and prison, the more they tend to believe that their place in society is predetermined. The consequences of continued imprisonment for them and other members of their community shape their views on the social structure.[7]
Excessive use of force
[edit]The issue of excessive police violence is being critically examined as a public health concern.[8] The location where excessive police violence occurs plays a significant role in policing. Police officers tend to use excessive force more frequently in low-income neighborhoods that are predominantly inhabited by people of color. Several factors influence the use of force, including gender, social status, and actual or perceived involvement in criminal activity.[8]
Settler colonialism
[edit]Unlike colonialism, settler colonialism seeks to claim land that is already occupied by an indigenous group. Typically, settlers will establish settlements, displace the indigenous groups, and initiate governmental control over the region.[9][10] During the 18th and 19th centuries, the United States advanced their settler colonial project with forced conversion, residential schools, and displacement of various indigenous communities.[11] Residential schools, also referred to as boarding schools, were state funded and typically managed by churches. These schools took a central role in perpetrating state violence against the native population. While indigenous children were in these schools, they were discouraged from participating in their culture and were given Anglo names.[11] The children were also subjected to abuse, exposed to illness, and isolated from their families. These practices were funded by the Indian Civilization Act Fund of March 3, 1819 and the Compulsory Indian Education Act approved by Congress in 1887.[12][11]
Violence against indigenous women in the United States
[edit]Historically, native women's bodies have been destroyed to further the colonial project in the United States. Because of women's ability to reproduce, native women have been killed in an attempt to extinguish indigenous populations. This reproductive state violence is then continued into the 1970's when the state performed forced sterilizations on unknowing indigenous women.[13]
State surveillance
[edit]Government surveillance is a tool used by government agencies to protect citizens from potential attacks from terrorists, extremists, or dissidents. Surveillance methods can include monitoring phone calls, video surveillance, or tracking internet usage. Although surveillance was designed to protect national security, it has the potential to perpetuate state violence.[14]
While surveilling as an action is not inherently violent, it can encroach upon citizens' civil liberties and right to privacy. After the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, President George W. Bush signed the Patriot Act; this Act allowed for an expansion of surveillance by the government and law enforcement. In 2008, U.S. Congress passed the FISA Amendment Act that gave government agencies, such as the NSA, unfettered access to private communications of foreigners.[15] Section 702 of the FISA Amendment Act allows for government agencies to collect information from private companies like AT&T, Google, and Facebook to target non- U.S. citizens. In some instances, this permission includes communications between a non-citizen and a U.S. citizen.[16] The FBI has been known to use these databases to search for information on U.S. citizens in a process called “backdoor searches”.[17] Although it is unclear who these searches have been used on, they could potentially be used to control populations, target activists, or profile minority groups. The misuse of surveillance to target civilians can amplify existing power imbalances and reinforce state violence.
State terrorism
[edit]Part of a series on |
Terrorism and political violence |
---|
State terrorism is terrorism that a state conducts against another state or against its own citizens.[18][19][20][21]
Governments accused of state terrorism may justify these actions as efforts to combat internal dissent, suppress insurgencies, or maintain national security, often framing their actions within the context of counterterrorism or counterinsurgency. Accused actions of state terrorism are normally also criticised as severe violations of human rights and international law, but contrast with state-sponsored terrorism in that the state is carrying out the actions rather than sponsoring violent non-state actors who do so.
Historically, governments have been accused of using state terrorism in various settings. The exact definition and scope of state terrorism remain controversial, as some scholars and governments argue that terrorism is a tool used exclusively by non-state actors, while others maintain that state-directed violence intended to terrorize civilian populations should also be classified as terrorism.[22][23]Political violence
[edit]Political violence is violence which is perpetrated in order to achieve political goals.[25] It can include violence which is used by a state against other states (war), violence which is used by a state against civilians and non-state actors (forced disappearance, psychological warfare, police brutality, targeted assassinations, torture, ethnic cleansing, or genocide), and violence which is used by violent non-state actors against states and civilians (kidnappings, targeted assassinations, terrorist attacks, torture, psychological and/or guerrilla warfare).[26][27] It can also describe politically motivated violence which is used by violent non-state actors against a state (rebellion, rioting, treason, or coup d'etat) or it can describe violence which is used against other non-state actors and/or civilians.[25][26][27] Non-action on the part of a government can also be characterized as a form of political violence, such as refusing to alleviate famine or otherwise denying resources to politically identifiable groups within their territory.
Due to the imbalances of power which exist between state and non-state actors, political violence often takes the form of asymmetric warfare where neither side is able to directly assault the other, instead relying on tactics such as guerrilla warfare and terrorism.[25][26][27] It can often include attacks on civilian or otherwise non-combatant targets.[28] People may be collectively targeted based on the perception that they are part of a social, ethnic, religious, or political group;[28] or selectively, targeting specific individuals for actions that are perceived as challenging someone or aiding an opponent.[28][29]
Many politically motivated militant, insurgent, extremist, and/or fundamentalist groups and individuals[30] are convinced that the states and political systems under which they live will never respond to their demands, and they thus believe that the only way to overthrow and/or reshape the government or state accordingly to their political and/or religious worldview is through violent means, which they regard as not only justified but also necessary in order to achieve their political and/or religious objectives.[28][31][32][33] Similarly, many governments around the world believe that they need to use violence in order to intimidate their populaces into acquiescence. At other times, governments use force in order to defend their countries from outside invasions or other threats of force and coerce other governments or conquer territory.[34][35]See also
[edit]References
[edit]- ^ Torres, M. Gabriela (2018), Treviño, A. Javier (ed.), "State Violence", The Cambridge Handbook of Social Problems, vol. 2, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 381–398, doi:10.1017/9781108550710.023, ISBN 978-1-108-42617-6, retrieved 2024-02-18
- ^ Renzetti, Claire; Edleson, Jeffrey (2008). "State Violence". Encyclopedia of Interpersonal Violence. SAGE Publications, Inc. pp. 689–690.
- ^ a b c Butler, Paul (2022). "The Problem of State Violence". Daedalus. 151 (1): 22–37. doi:10.1162/daed_a_01885. ISSN 0011-5266. JSTOR 48638127.
- ^ a b c Hagan, Jacqueline Maria; Rodriguez, Nestor; Castro, Brianna (2011). "Social effects of mass deportations by the United States government, 2000–10". Ethnic and Racial Studies. 34 (8): 1374–1391. doi:10.1080/01419870.2011.575233. ISSN 0141-9870. S2CID 146754128.
- ^ Schmid, Lukas (2021-04-03). "Deportation, harms, and human rights". Ethics & Global Politics. 14 (2): 98–109. doi:10.1080/16544951.2021.1926083. hdl:1814/72119. ISSN 1654-4951.
- ^ Berger Cardoso, Jodi; Scott, Jennifer L.; Faulkner, Monica; Barros Lane, Liza (2018). "Parenting in the Context of Deportation Risk". Journal of Marriage and Family. 80 (2): 301–316. doi:10.1111/jomf.12463. ISSN 0022-2445.
- ^ a b c White, Ariel R. (2022-05-12). "Political Participation Amid Mass Incarceration". Annual Review of Political Science. 25 (1): 111–130. doi:10.1146/annurev-polisci-051120-014809. hdl:1721.1/148682. ISSN 1094-2939.
- ^ a b Cooper, Hannah L. F.; Fullilove, Mindy (2016). "Editorial: Excessive Police Violence as a Public Health Issue". Journal of Urban Health. 93 (S1): 1–7. doi:10.1007/s11524-016-0040-2. ISSN 1099-3460. PMC 4824695. PMID 26984303.
- ^ Native Studies Keywords. University of Arizona Press. 2015. doi:10.2307/j.ctt183gxzb.24. ISBN 978-0-8165-3150-9. JSTOR j.ctt183gxzb.
- ^ Ostler, Jeffrey; Shoemaker, Nancy (2019). "Settler Colonialism in Early American History: Introduction". The William and Mary Quarterly. 76 (3): 361–368. doi:10.5309/willmaryquar.76.3.0361. ISSN 1933-7698.
- ^ a b c "US Indian Boarding School History". The National Native American Boarding School Healing Coalition. Retrieved 2024-03-02.
- ^ Bowker, Kathie (November 2007). "The Boarding School Legacy: Ten Contemporary Lakota Women Tell Their Stories" (PDF).
- ^ Smith, Andrea; Ross, Luana (2004). "Introduction: Native Women and State Violence". Social Justice. 31 (4 (98)): 1–7. ISSN 1043-1578. JSTOR 29768269.
- ^ Richards, Neil M. (2013). "The Dangers of Surveillance". Harvard Law Review. 126 (7): 1934–1965. ISSN 0017-811X. JSTOR 23415062.
- ^ "NSA Surveillance". American Civil Liberties Union. Retrieved 2024-03-16.
- ^ "H.R.6304 - 110th Congress FISA Amendment".
- ^ Taitz, Sarah (2023-04-11). "Five Things to Know About NSA Mass Surveillance and the Coming Fight in Congress | ACLU". American Civil Liberties Union. Retrieved 2024-03-16.
- ^ Aust, Anthony (2010). Handbook of International Law (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. p. 265. ISBN 978-0-521-13349-4. Archived from the original on 2024-03-29. Retrieved 2016-01-05.
- ^ "Terrorism". Encyclopædia Britannica. Archived from the original on 2020-01-11. Retrieved 2020-01-11.
- ^ Selden & So, 2003: p. 4. Archived 2024-03-29 at the Wayback Machine
- ^ Martin 2006, p. 111
- ^ Chenoweth, Erica; English, Richard; Gofas, Andrew; Kalyvas, Stathis (2019). The Oxford Handbook of Terrorism (First ed.). Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press. p. 153. ISBN 9780198732914. Archived from the original on 2023-01-11. Retrieved 2023-01-11.
- ^ Williamson, Myra (2009). Terrorism, war and international law: the legality of the use of force against Afghanistan in 2001. Ashgate. p. 40. ISBN 978-0-7546-7403-0. Archived from the original on 2024-03-29. Retrieved 2016-05-04.
- ^ McSherry, J. Patrice (2010). "Part 2: The Mechanisms of Violence – Chapter 5: "Industrial repression" and Operation Condor in Latin America". In Esparza, Marcia; Huttenbach, Henry R.; Feierstein, Daniel (eds.). State Violence and Genocide in Latin America: The Cold War Years. Routledge Critical Terrorism Studies (1st ed.). London and New York: Routledge. p. 107. ISBN 978-0-415-49637-7. OCLC 1120355660.
- ^ a b c Bardall, Gabrielle; Bjarnegård, Elin; Piscopo, Jennifer M. (November 2020). "How is Political Violence Gendered? Disentangling Motives, Forms, and Impacts". Political Studies. 68 (4). SAGE Publications on behalf of the Political Studies Association: 916–935. doi:10.1177/0032321719881812. ISSN 1467-9248. LCCN 2008233815. OCLC 1641383. S2CID 213536755.
- ^ a b c Miller, Martin A. (2022). "The Dynamics of Entangled Political Violence: From the Greensboro Massacre (1979) to the War on Terror (2001)". In Larres, Klaus; Hof, Tobias (eds.). Terrorism and Transatlantic Relations: Threats and Challenges. Security, Conflict, and Cooperation in the Contemporary World (SCCCW). Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 33–42. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-83347-3_3. ISBN 978-3-030-83347-3. S2CID 244740339.
- ^ a b c Stepanova, Ekaterina (2008). Terrorism in Asymmetrical Conflict: Ideological and Structural Aspects (PDF). SIPRI Research Report. Vol. 23. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1037/e549992011-001. ISBN 978-0-19-953356-5. OCLC 912414984. S2CID 142573156. Archived (PDF) from the original on 28 February 2022. Retrieved 8 March 2022.
- ^ a b c d Rossi, Federica (April 2021). Treiber, Kyle (ed.). "The failed amnesty of the 'years of lead' in Italy: Continuity and transformations between (de)politicization and punitiveness". European Journal of Criminology. 20 (2). Los Angeles and London: SAGE Publications on behalf of the European Society of Criminology: 381–400. doi:10.1177/14773708211008441. ISSN 1741-2609. S2CID 234835036.
The 1970s in Italy were characterized by the persistence and prolongation of political and social unrest that many Western countries experienced during the late 1960s. The decade saw the multiplication of far-left extra-parliamentary organizations, the presence of a militant far right movement, and an upsurge in the use of politically motivated violence and an upsurge in the use of repressive measures by a state. The increasing militarization and the increasing use of political violence, from sabotage and damage to property, to kidnappings and targeted assassinations, were justified by left-wing groups both as necessary means to achieve a revolutionary project and as defences against the threat of a neo-fascist coup.
- ^ Balcells, Laia; Stanton, Jessica A. (May 2021). Levi, Margaret; Rosenblum, Nancy L. (eds.). "Violence Against Civilians During Armed Conflict: Moving Beyond the Macro- and Micro-Level Divide". Annual Review of Political Science. 24 (1). Annual Reviews: 45–69. doi:10.1146/annurev-polisci-041719-102229. ISSN 1545-1577. LCCN 98643699. OCLC 42836185. S2CID 229425267.
- ^ Galland, Olivier (2020). "Religious Radicalism: from Absolutism to Violence". In Galland, Olivier; Muxel, Anne (eds.). Radical Thought among the Young: A Survey of French Lycée Students. Youth in a Globalizing World. Vol. 11. Translated by Hamilton, Peter. Leiden and Boston: Brill Publishers. pp. 24–62. doi:10.1163/9789004432369_003. ISBN 978-90-04-43236-9. ISSN 2212-9383. S2CID 234647465.
- ^ Fox, Jonathan (2021). "Chapter 1: FUNDAMENTALIST EXTREMISM AND POLITICS". In Mathew, Mathews; Tay, Melvin (eds.). Religion and Identity Politics: Global Trends and Local Realities. Singapore: World Scientific. pp. 3–26. doi:10.1142/9789811235504_0001. ISBN 978-981-123-551-1. S2CID 237868169.
- ^ van Prooijen, Jan-Willem; Kuijper, Sophia M.H.C. (June 2020). Colin, Cooper (ed.). "A comparison of extreme religious and political ideologies: Similar worldviews but different grievances". Personality and Individual Differences. 159 (109888). Elsevier: 109888. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2020.109888. ISSN 0191-8869. LCCN 85647765. OCLC 04965018. S2CID 213954640.
- ^ Schoenberger, Robert A. (September 1968). "Conservatism, Personality, and Political Extremism". American Political Science Review. 62 (3). Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the American Political Science Association: 868–877. doi:10.2307/1953436. ISSN 1537-5943. JSTOR 1953436. LCCN 08009025. OCLC 805068983. S2CID 144097887.
- ^ Valentino, Benjamin A. (May 2014). Levi, Margaret; Rosenblum, Nancy L. (eds.). "Why We Kill: The Political Science of Political Violence against Civilians". Annual Review of Political Science. 17 (1). Annual Reviews: 89–103. doi:10.1146/annurev-polisci-082112-141937. ISSN 1545-1577. LCCN 98643699. OCLC 42836185. S2CID 154287162.
- ^ Cohan, John A. (January 2006). "Necessity, Political Violence, and Terrorism" (PDF). Stetson Law Review. 35 (3). Gulfport, Florida: Stetson University College of Law: 903–982. Archived (PDF) from the original on 28 February 2022. Retrieved 8 March 2022.
Further reading
[edit]- Gomez-Barris, Macarena (2009). Where Memory Dwells: Culture and State Violence in Chile. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-25583-8.
- James, Joy (1996). Resisting State Violence: Radicalism, Gender, and Race in the U. S. Culture. University of Minnesota Press. ISBN 978-0-8166-8745-9.
- Sherman, Taylor C. (2010). State Violence and Punishment in India. Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-55970-6.