State Violence
What is State Violence?
Literally, it is the use of violence by the state
“Violence” can mean both its use and the threat of it
- Violence can be psychological too
- The literature uses the term “violence” to indicate other forms of non-physical
damage: symbolic violence, structural violence…
- Only physical and psychological violence
“The state” is an entity composed of several sectors and organisations
- Police forces
- Armed forces
- Judiciary branch
- Prison system
Use of Violence by the State
State and violence are inseparably linked
The most popular and commonly accepted definition of the state was written by Max
Weber in 1919:
- The state is the “only human community within a certain territory that claims the
monopoly on the use of legitimate physical force.” (Weber 2015, 136)
The monopoly on (legitimate) violence is a state’s fundamental element!
The state decides on the laws within a particular territory and then enforces them,
through police forces and the criminal justice system
The state can also defend its monopoly against external and internal competitors,
through the armed forces and the police
- Internal & external sovereignty
The use of violence underlies a state’s fiscal capacity
The use of force effectively allows the extraction of taxes from individuals living in
the state’s territory
Without use of force, some (or most?) people would probably not pay taxes and the
state would not gather as many resources as it does now
Historical Relations between State + Violence
The link between state and violence is apparent when looking at modern history
States have been built through violence, and more precisely through war-making
(Tilly 1985)
Violence had the double effect of helping to impose state rule on a territory and
forcing the state to establish armies, bureaucracies, and taxation
Modern states emerge in Western Europe in the 1500s, and since then they have
used violence and other means to achieve a territorial monopoly on the use of
violence
At the same time, states have spread from Europe to the rest of the world through
imperialism and emulation
The whole surface of the world now belongs to states
This makes state violence a pervasive feature of life
, State Violence + State Crime
In most cases, the state gets to define what constitutes crime and what does not
How likely it is that the state will prosecute itself?
Remember though that the state is not a unitary actor – it is made up of several
organisations…
- … some of which may have an interest in accusing and prosecuting the others
Who can accuse a state of committing a (violent) crime?
- International society (other states, the international community in general)
- Civil society
- NGOs (Amnesty International, Transparency International, Human Rights
Watch…)
Legitimate State Violence?
The issue of “legitimacy” is also fundamental in deciding whether a state committed
a crime
Weber: the state possesses a monopoly on the legitimate use of force
If an act of violence is deemed legitimate, it will be considered as permissible and
just – and thus it will not be considered as a crime
Where does legitimacy come from?
- Self-defence: the state was defending itself from foreign aggression
- Democracy: state officials answer to the people
- Human rights: the state uses violence compatibly with the respect of
fundamental human rights
- Culture: the state represents a community bound by common language, history,
and culture (nation-state)
Who decides on legitimacy?
Two main options:
- External audience: the international community
- Internal audience: the public opinion + the state itself (for example, its judiciary
branch)
As a general rule, three main activities involving violence are considered legitimate
uses of force (Green and Ward 2009, 164)
- Policing (self-explanatory, although police overreach and/or militarisation are
real concerns)
- Punishment (and so the operation of the judiciary branch and the prison system)
- Warfare (and so the operation of the armed forces)
This doctrine is universal by nature and is enshrined in several fundamental
international legal documents (such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights)
Notice however that this doctrine can be instrumentalised and is not closely applied
by the international community
- “Exporting democracy” …
- China in the UN Human Rights Council…
State Violence Now
Every part of the world belongs to a state
Some states are much less functional than others (“failed states”, “ungoverned
areas”)
What is State Violence?
Literally, it is the use of violence by the state
“Violence” can mean both its use and the threat of it
- Violence can be psychological too
- The literature uses the term “violence” to indicate other forms of non-physical
damage: symbolic violence, structural violence…
- Only physical and psychological violence
“The state” is an entity composed of several sectors and organisations
- Police forces
- Armed forces
- Judiciary branch
- Prison system
Use of Violence by the State
State and violence are inseparably linked
The most popular and commonly accepted definition of the state was written by Max
Weber in 1919:
- The state is the “only human community within a certain territory that claims the
monopoly on the use of legitimate physical force.” (Weber 2015, 136)
The monopoly on (legitimate) violence is a state’s fundamental element!
The state decides on the laws within a particular territory and then enforces them,
through police forces and the criminal justice system
The state can also defend its monopoly against external and internal competitors,
through the armed forces and the police
- Internal & external sovereignty
The use of violence underlies a state’s fiscal capacity
The use of force effectively allows the extraction of taxes from individuals living in
the state’s territory
Without use of force, some (or most?) people would probably not pay taxes and the
state would not gather as many resources as it does now
Historical Relations between State + Violence
The link between state and violence is apparent when looking at modern history
States have been built through violence, and more precisely through war-making
(Tilly 1985)
Violence had the double effect of helping to impose state rule on a territory and
forcing the state to establish armies, bureaucracies, and taxation
Modern states emerge in Western Europe in the 1500s, and since then they have
used violence and other means to achieve a territorial monopoly on the use of
violence
At the same time, states have spread from Europe to the rest of the world through
imperialism and emulation
The whole surface of the world now belongs to states
This makes state violence a pervasive feature of life
, State Violence + State Crime
In most cases, the state gets to define what constitutes crime and what does not
How likely it is that the state will prosecute itself?
Remember though that the state is not a unitary actor – it is made up of several
organisations…
- … some of which may have an interest in accusing and prosecuting the others
Who can accuse a state of committing a (violent) crime?
- International society (other states, the international community in general)
- Civil society
- NGOs (Amnesty International, Transparency International, Human Rights
Watch…)
Legitimate State Violence?
The issue of “legitimacy” is also fundamental in deciding whether a state committed
a crime
Weber: the state possesses a monopoly on the legitimate use of force
If an act of violence is deemed legitimate, it will be considered as permissible and
just – and thus it will not be considered as a crime
Where does legitimacy come from?
- Self-defence: the state was defending itself from foreign aggression
- Democracy: state officials answer to the people
- Human rights: the state uses violence compatibly with the respect of
fundamental human rights
- Culture: the state represents a community bound by common language, history,
and culture (nation-state)
Who decides on legitimacy?
Two main options:
- External audience: the international community
- Internal audience: the public opinion + the state itself (for example, its judiciary
branch)
As a general rule, three main activities involving violence are considered legitimate
uses of force (Green and Ward 2009, 164)
- Policing (self-explanatory, although police overreach and/or militarisation are
real concerns)
- Punishment (and so the operation of the judiciary branch and the prison system)
- Warfare (and so the operation of the armed forces)
This doctrine is universal by nature and is enshrined in several fundamental
international legal documents (such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights)
Notice however that this doctrine can be instrumentalised and is not closely applied
by the international community
- “Exporting democracy” …
- China in the UN Human Rights Council…
State Violence Now
Every part of the world belongs to a state
Some states are much less functional than others (“failed states”, “ungoverned
areas”)
