RE: [Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime> structural violence

["Steve McAlexander" <mcalexander@veriomail.com>]

How about "instutionalized violence"  how does that differ from
structural moniker?

Steve McAlexander
"Strength and Honor"

John Adams wrote in 1772: "There is danger from all men. The only maxim
of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with power to
endanger the public liberty." Thomas Jefferson wrote in 1799, "Free
government is founded in jealousy, not confidence.... Let no more be
heard of confidence in men, but bind him down from mischief by the
chains of the Constitutions."

-----Original Message-----
From: nettime-bold-admin@nettime.org
[mailto:nettime-bold-admin@nettime.org] On Behalf Of Eric Miller
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 15:44
To: nettime-l@bbs.thing.net
Subject: [Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime> structural violence

I agree that this definition of "structural violence" is confusing and
inflexible.  On a more fundamental level, by defining "violence" so
broadly, doesn't it devalue the power of the word?

I think that most individuals have a very concrete concept of what
"violence" is...it's the act of physically inflicting pain, and connotes

malicious intent.  Neither one of these conditions are met when we
discuss
the unfortunate consequences of inaction.

But to me, this definition is deliberately cast wider in order to assign

responsibility to institutions, rather than acknowledging the sad truth
that bad things happen in the world.  Doesn't this definition serve to
anthropomorphize the source of a "violent" act, and gain legitimacy by
attributing personal intent to what would otherwise be a coincidence or
an
unrelated event?

By no means would I absolve governments/corporations/societies of their
responsibilities or the consequences of their actions.  But at the same
time, I don't see the value in assigning responsibility based on
institutional status rather than culpability.

>What does the concept of "structural violence" have to do with
terrorism?
>First, the nutshell definition, complete with critical proviso (or way
>out):
>
>"Popularized by the Norwegian sociologist Johan Galtung, the idea of
>structural violence involves a wide construal of violence aimed at
showing
>that its menace is present in institutional ways even where no literal
or
>'narrow' violence occurs. Structural violence does not involve agents
>inflicting damage by force, but is equivalent to social injustice.
Apart
>from its potentiality for confusion, a key problem with the concept is
its
>dubious suggestion that a variety of apparently quite different social
>problems are all essentially the same and will therefore yield to the
one
>approach."
>
>Oxford companion to philosophy, from:
http://www.xrefer.com/entry/553621


_______________________________________________
Nettime-bold mailing list
Nettime-bold@nettime.org
http://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold


_______________________________________________
Nettime-bold mailing list
Nettime-bold@nettime.org
http://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold