Structural violence is a form of violence where in some social structure or social institution may harm people by preventing them from meeting their basic needs or rights.

The term was coined by Norwegian sociologist Johan Galtung, who introduced it in his 1969 article "Violence, Peace, and Peace Research". Some examples of structural violence as proposed by Galtung include institutionalized racism, sexism, and classism, among others.

Definitions

Galtung

According to Johan Galtung, rather than conveying a physical image, structural violence is an "avoidable impairment of fundamental human needs."

Galtung contrasts structural violence with "classical violence:" violence that is "direct," characterized by rudimentary, impermanent "bodily destruction" committed by some actor. Galtung places this as the first category of violence. In this sense, the purest form of structural violence can be understood as violence that endures with no particular beginning, and that lacks an 'actor' to have committed it.

Following this, by excluding the requirement of an identifiable actor from the classical definition of violence, Galtung lists poverty (i.e., the "deprival of basic human needs") as the second category of violence and "structurally conditioned poverty" as the first category of structural violence. Structural violence and direct violence are said to be highly interdependent, including family violence, gender violence, hate crimes, racial violence, police violence, state violence, terrorism, and war.

Others

In his book Violence: Reflections on a National Epidemic, James Gilligan defines structural violence as "the increased rates of death and disability suffered by those who occupy the bottom rungs of society, as contrasted with the relatively lower death rates experienced by those who are above them." Gilligan largely describes these "excess deaths" as "non-natural" and attributes them to the stress, shame, discrimination, and denigration that results from lower status. He draws on Richard Sennett and Jonathan Cobb (i.e., The Hidden Injuries of Class, 1973), who examine the "contest for dignity" in a context of dramatic inequality.

In her interdisciplinary textbook on violence, Bandy X. Lee wrote "Structural violence refers to the avoidable limitations that society places on groups of people that constrain them from meeting their basic needs and achieving the quality of life that would otherwise be possible. These limitations, which can be political, economic, religious, cultural, or legal in nature, usually originate in institutions that exercise power over particular subjects." She goes on to say that "[it] is therefore an illustration of a power system wherein social structures or institutions cause harm to people in a way that results in maldevelopment and other deprivations." who explained that structural violence can also take place in online communities. The possibility of structural violence might be questioned on the basis that it leaves those affected “with no alternatives” (Galtung 1969, 178). After all, member can leave toxic online communities and social media more generally at any time. Yet, the authors demonstrate that, for many, the friendships, intimacy, and sense of family gained on social media are emotionally significant, making it incredibly difficult for users to leave. In particular they identify three prevalent forms of structural violence in online communities and on social media: hedonic darwinism, a relational contract that facilitates the exploitation of some members for the amusement of others, clan tyranny, where higher-status users abuse their superior influence to prevent other groups from gaining recognition, authority, and voice, and minarchy, a relational structure marked by ultraminimal intervention from governors.

Forms

Cultural violence

Cultural violence refers to aspects of a culture that can be used to justify or legitimize direct or structural violence, and may be exemplified by religion & ideology, language & art, and empirical science & formal science.

Cultural violence makes both direct and structural violence look or feel 'right', or at least not wrong, according to Galtung. Rossiter and Rinaldi (2018) argue that the structural elements manifest as organizational traits that enable the reconstruction of one's sense of inhumane behavior (e.g., moral justification), its deleterious effects (e.g., minimizing), the responsibility for its impact (e.g., denial), and the subject harmed (e.g., dehumanization), which leads to moral abdication and thus create an ethos of violence. One example of such traits highlighted by the authors is the social or physical distance between organizations and the broader society, which serves as a key mechanism in sustaining such violence. Michael Mann makes the argument that within state formation, "increased organizational power is a trade-off, whereby the individual obtains more security and food in exchange for his or her freedom."

Siniša Malešević elaborates on Mann's argument: "Mann's point needs extending to cover all social organizations, not just the state. The early chiefdoms were not states, obviously; still, they were established on a similar basis—an inversely proportional relationship between security and resources, on the one hand, and liberty, on the other." found that black Americans had a significantly lesser chance of receiving treatment than white Americans.

If biosocial understandings are forsaken when considering communicable diseases such as HIV, for example, prevention methods and treatment practices become inadequate and unsustainable for populations. Farmer therefore also states that structural forces account for most if not all epidemic diseases. Holmes used examples like governmental influences of structural violence—such as how American subsidization of corn industries force Mexican farmers out of business, thereby forcing them to make the very dangerous trip across the border, where the U.S. Border Patrol hinder these migrants' chances of finding work in America, and the impact this all has on the migrants’ bodies.

See also

  • Accumulation by dispossession
  • Communal violence
  • Conflict theories
  • Cycle of violence
  • Economic violence
  • Extermination through labour
  • Institutional abuse
  • Peacebuilding
  • Political violence
  • Slow violence
  • Social murder
  • Suicide among LGBTQIA+ people
  • Symbolic violence

Footnotes

Further reading

  • Galtung, Johan. 1969. "Violence, Peace, and Peace Research." Journal of Peace Research 6(3):167–91.
  • Gilman, Robert. 1983. "Structural violence: Can we find genuine peace in a world with inequitable distribution of wealth among nations?" In Context 4(Autumn 1983):8–8.
  • Henderson, Sophie. 2019. "State-Sanctioned Structural Violence: Women Migrant Domestic Workers in the Philippines and Sri Lanka." Violence Against Women 26(12-13):1598–615. .
  • Ho, Kathleen. 2007. "Structural Violence as a Human Rights Violation." Essex Human Rights Review 4(2). .