Addressing Structural Violence: Reforming Our Perspectives
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
IAPT – 01/2019 typoscript [AK] – 05.03.2019 – Seite 53 – 2. SL Addressing structural violence: Reforming our perspectives Raymond J. Webb Structural violence is a condition in which groups of persons are harmed by general and persist- ing situations not of their own choosing; from which most have no real way of escaping. Great harm, including death, and limits on the actualization of potential are the result. Three frequently contributing major causes of structural violence to be reviewed in this chapter are poverty (with resource inequality), sexism, and racism. El Salvador is used as an example. The practical theolog- ical strategy suggested here is: 1) in any context under study, raise the question of whether struc- tural violence might be involved and give consideration of the effects of structural violence a priority even in the midst of other negative causes; 2) seek remedies against structural violence; and 3) augment the agency of the persons negatively affected. Reforming our perspectives is required to move us from focusing on small but deadly brushfires while missing the firestorm of structural violence, which deadens our social landscapes. Introduction and definition Raymond J. Webb is Professor and Chair of Pastoral The- ology, University of Saint Mary of the Lake, Mundelein, In this chapter, I will introduce and elaborate on the Illinois, U. S. A. concept of structural violence and examine some contributions to the concept’s development. Then I will look at the relationship of structural violence to have no real way of escaping. It is like having one’s poverty, sexism, and racism. Afterwards, I will de- foot stuck in a tar pit; one can be fed but one cannot scribe and discuss the situation of the Central escape. People are simply trapped in the shadowy American country of El Salvador. Finally, I will sug- life-shortening convergences of negativity, living gest that we practical theologians reform our per- fewer years, with worse health, and not achieving spective on problematic situations by heightening reasonable fulfillment of their human potential. awareness of structural violence, by working to Most simply put, structural violence is 1) harmful, eradicate it in general, and by giving individuals often lethal, 2) not immediately obvious, 3) involun- means to escape its effects. This paper does not con- tary, 4) generally unavoidable in its effects, 5) severe- tend that the whole world is structurally violent. ly diminishing of the potential of certain groups of What is argued here is that in certain circumstances persons, and 6) often longstanding (cf. Ho 2007). using structural violence as a template may reform I argue here for a reform in the way we view our understanding of those situations and hopefully many dire human situations. Structural violence offer a path to some remediation. must be recognized as causal in certain of them. Ex- Structural violence, a most serious type of social acerbating certain serious situations are the interac- injustice, is a condition in which groups of persons tion and intersection of factors such as historical and even nations are harmed by ongoing general sit- conditions (e. g. colonialism, slavery, rich-poor di- uations not of their own choosing, from which most chotomy), biological situations (e. g. endemic malar- Auli Vähäkangas, Sivert Angel and Kirstine Helboe Johansen, eds. 2019. Reforming Practical Theology: 53 The Politics of Body and Space. IAPT.CS 1: 53–60 DOI: 10.25785/iapt.cs.v1i0.53 ORCID-ID: 0000-0002-2464-8659 IAPT – 01/2019 typoscript [AK] – 05.03.2019 – Seite 54 – 2. SL Raymond J. Webb ia, drug resistant tuberculosis, un-remediated toxic tion focuses on “bad apples” and “responsible par- conditions, lack of clean water, malnutrition), and ties” (2012, 192). But he contends that violence can- discriminatory attitudes (e. g. racism, sexism, the not be accounted for only by a “liability-based rich-poor dichotomy). These can exist hidden from model of agency and force” (2012, 191). In situations view because they are either unrecognized or pre- of structural violence, power is unequally distribut- sumed to be “normal.” Examples of the presump- ed, and so also the ability to trade in goods, educa- tion of “normality” include: “There will always be tional opportunity, etc. Characteristic of structural poor people,” “The woman’s work is in the home,” violence is exploitation (where some profit more and the popular association of certain ethnic groups than others), leading to premature death for some, with gangs, crime, and drugs. Some examples of sit- leaving others in a permanent involuntary state of uations of structural violence are the general situa- poverty (illness, etc.) and segmentation, in which tion in the country of El Salvador (discussed below), the “underdogs” are only allowed a limited view of Haiti, many iterations of the social situation of the reality in which they exist (Galtung in Müller women, the Russian penal situation, many other pe- n. d.). Dilts points out that “[m]embers of the Occu- nal systems, the crime ridden poorly resourced Chi- py movement have pointed directly to the forms of cago neighborhood of Englewood, the isolated liv- systematic violence and domination inherent in ing situations of certain groups of indigenous wealth and income inequality and demanded an peoples, and even homes for dependent children in end to economic and political domination” (192). which order and “having a good attitude” are the They have been met by naked violence and brutality dominant principles rather than the complete hu- by opponents, including governmental ones. In- man development of each resident child. deed, stability and tranquility often mask deeper and more pervasive violence. According to Matthew Mullen, structural violence is “built-in” systematic Developing the concept of structural vulnerability and dehumanization (Mullen 2015, violence 462). He argues that in dealing with transitional jus- tice the central focus should be structural violence Johan Galtung, the Norwegian social scientist cred- rather than courts and commissions. Otherwise, in ited with first using the term “structural violence,” some way, the violent structures will continue, e. g. described it as “the avoidable impairment of funda- daily life in South Africa. mental human needs or, to put it in more general For Farmer (2005, 41) structural violence is terms, the impairment of human life, which lowers ‘structured’ by historically given (and often economical- the actual degree to which someone is able to meet ly driven) processes and forces that conspire—whether their needs below that which would be otherwise through routine, ritual, or, as is more commonly the possible” (Galtung 1993, 1). Physician and anthro- case, the hard surfaces of life—to constrain agency. For pologist Paul Farmer elaborates extensively on many, including most of my patients, and informants, structural violence, drawing from his analysis of sit- choices both large and small are limited by racism, sex- uations in (among others) Haiti, Russia, Rwanda, ism, political choice, and grinding poverty. and Peru. He has been responsible for making more visible the notion of “structural violence” in Pathol- Farmer’s two most well-known examples are from ogies of Power (2003) and other writings. In explor- Russia and Haiti. In Russia, lengthy detention be- ing structural violence and drawing on Galtung, fore trial results in prisoners being exposed to Farmer, and other theorists, I will consider it first as drug-resistant tuberculosis, which they later trans- structural, then as violent, followed by the charac- mit to their families after release. In Haiti, without teristics of being hidden and “normal.” consultation, the government expropriated land from farmers for a dam to provide hydro-electric power. People who lost their farming livelihood had Structural no alternative but to head to Port-au-Prince for work, eventually resulting in the spread of abject Structural violence is hidden in structures rather poverty and HIV-AIDS in the region of the dam. than being inflicted by a specific individual or group of individuals. Andrew Dilts notes that public atten- 54 IAPT – 01/2019 typoscript [AK] – 05.03.2019 – Seite 55 – 2. SL Addressing structural violence: Reforming our perspectives Violence Hidden and normal Galtung points out that, as a result of structural vio- The social factors must be simultaneously consid- lence, life is shortened from what it would have been ered but are “differentially weighted in different set- had one had the world’s average amount of resourc- tings and times” (Farmer 2005, 42–43). As Linda es. One lives fewer years and in a diminished state of Green notes, Farmer is able to use “structural vio- development of potential. Avoidable pre-mature lence” to make visible the social machinery of op- death is a type of violence. As Farmer et al. (2006) pression, keeping the historical sources of oppres- put it, structural violence describes “social arrange- sion in view (Green 2004, 319). Without keeping the ments that put individuals and populations in causes in view, the structures of violence become harm’s way.” Harmful social structures, supported simply “given,” a “normalization” of oppression by stable institutions and regular experience can be (Farmer 2004, 317). Farmer is comfortable with invisible. Unequal access to resources, political Pierre Bourdieu’s notion of “habitus” and sees struc- power, education, health care, and legal standing are tural violence as both “structures and structuring” examples of these potentially lethal structures, says (Farmer 2004, 315). It constricts the agency of its Farmer, following Galtung. victims and determines the allocation of resources. Forensic psychiatrist James Gilligan says that It socializes for scarcity, exemplified in the Haitian structural violence is the cause of more deaths than proverb, “A full belly means trouble.” Yves Winter war, accidental death, homicide, and suicide togeth- (2012, 192–3) highlights that structural violence can er (1996, 110).