The Legitimation of Extrajudicial Violence in an Urban Community

1174 Social Forces The Legitimation of Extrajudicial Violence The Legitimation of Extrajudicial Violence in an 2020 09 May on user Library Medicine of School NYU by https://academic.oup.com/sf/article-abstract/98/3/1174/5382469 from Downloaded Urban Community Jon Gordon, New York University .................................................................................................................. ost scholarship on violence in urban communities accepts the Weberian association between legitimate violence and the state. Under this assump- Mtion, extrajudicial violence is interpreted as a symptom of legal cynicism, which is fomented by a negligent or illegitimate state apparatus. How, then, do we explain communities in which extrajudicial violence and legal authority are seen as legitimate simultaneously? Drawing on ethnographic observations of interactions among an armed group, residents, and police officials in a poor zone of Medellín, Colombia, I found that residents routinely appealed to the armed group and police to supply security and redress grievances. This indicates that structurally induced problems of police corruption and legal cynicism cannot fully explain the patterns of enduring violence I observed. Residents and police situationally endorsed and authorized violence specialists and extrajudicial punishments as legitimate elements of the local security system. In doing so, community members played a key role in constructing violence as an acceptable practice for enhancing security and placating locals who had been assaulted. This study augments the state-centric literature on urban violence with social psychological theories of legitimation. It leverages rare in situ data on violence to advance an interactional, meaning-based perspective on a longstanding problem in poor urban communities. .................................................................................................................. As Bruno, Chico, and Simón wrapped up day patrol, a resident shouted, claiming that a man carried her groceries home, seized her purse, and fled toward the bakery. Bruno and Simón dashed in pursuit, as the resident described her attacker to Chico. Chico initiated a series of text mes- sages and calls. Within the hour, seven men returned with the resident’s effects and a man who she identified as the assailant. The men guided the assailant to the creek parting the zone’s center. After sunset and amidst foliage, Bruno and Simón beat the assailant. Chico punctured his cheek with a knife. Lalato drove him to a hospital. (Fieldnotes 2015, Medellín, Colombia) .................................................................................................................. I am grateful to Colin Jerolmack for his unwavering support. I also thank Gianpaolo Baiocchi, Edward Crowley, John Halushka, Lynne Haney, Ruth Horowitz, Mary Beth Hunzaker, William Kelly, Jerome Marston, Robert Riggs, Patrick Sharkey, Iddo Tavory, Gerard Torrats-Espinosa, David Trouille, and the anonymous reviewers for developing this paper. Direct Correspondence to Jon Gordon, 295 Lafayette St, 4th Floor, New York, NY 10012, USA; email: [email protected] .................................................................................................................. © The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the University of Social Forces 98(3) 1174–1195, March 2020 North Carolina at Chapel Hill. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals. doi: 10.1093/sf/soz015 [email protected]. Advance Access publication on 18 March 2019 The Legitimation of Extrajudicial Violence 1175 The violence that these men used to punish people who assaulted residents in a zone of Medellín, Colombia was legally unsanctioned. All of the men who 2020 09 May on user Library Medicine of School NYU by https://academic.oup.com/sf/article-abstract/98/3/1174/5382469 from Downloaded engaged in such vigilante surveillance and punishment and who I followed from 2012 to 2018 were former operatives of a paramilitary-drug cartel coalition. They now used their violence proficiency and patrols to deter assailants who preyed on local residents. Most scholarship on violence in urban communities still accepts the Weberian association between legitimate violence and the state. Under this assumption, extrajudicial violence of the sort that I observed would be explained as a product of negligent state institutions (Anderson 1999), police corruption (Auyero and Berti 2015), and legal cynicism—that is, distrust of legal authority (Kirk and Papachristos 2011). Some scholars suggest that extrajudicial punishment is inex- tricably linked to an illegitimate state apparatus (Vilas 2007). However, my ethnographic observations of everyday life in the zone indicated that residents saw the men not as outlaws who supplanted police officials, but as violence specialists who augmented police. In the eyes of many locals, the men’s use of violence protected against assaults, satisfied a desire for retribution, and was legitimate, meaning accepted as the way security was or should be done (Zelditch 2006). Residents facilitated—not merely tolerated—the men’s security operation. However, if residents who had been harmed felt that the men did not adequately redress their grievances, they readily called Colombian National Police officials (hereafter, Police). Police reacted to such calls by occupying the zone, which obviated the men’s role. Once displays of Police might waned, residents resumed supporting the men. The fact that residents routinely appealed to both the men and Police to supply security and redress grievances suggests that structurally induced problems of police corruption and legal cynicism cannot fully explain the patterns of enduring violence I observed. A few scholars have insinuated that extrajudicial violence can be perceived as a legitimate complement to, rather than a replacement for, legal recourse (see Garland 2005). Building on Garland (2005), I consider extrajudicial violence ac- cording to social psychological theories of legitimation. The concepts of endorsement and authorization, in particular, clarify how and why practices (in this case, extrajudicial violence) that are accepted in specific structural conditions endure despite structural shifts (Walker 2004). On the ground, actors’ (e.g., the armed men’s) peers (e.g., residents) are said to endorse their practices not merely by the absence of protest, but through interactional displays that actively support or negatively sanction noncompliance with their practices (Walker 2014). Actors’ superiors (e.g., Police), in turn, authorize their practices through similar interactional displays. My analysis suggests that patterns of violence may endure in communities, in part, because residents and police officials situationally endorse and authorize violence specialists and extrajudicial punishments as legitimate elements of a local security system. In doing so, community members may play a key role in constructing violence as an acceptable practice for enhancing security and placating locals who have been assaulted. This article has two main objectives. First, I illustrate endorsement and authorization of the men’s role and practices in order to demonstrate how 1176 Social Forces extrajudicial violence and legal authority can be viewed as legitimate simultaneously. Second, I demonstrate how social psychological theories of legitimation 2020 09 May on user Library Medicine of School NYU by https://academic.oup.com/sf/article-abstract/98/3/1174/5382469 from Downloaded —which to my knowledge, have never been applied to the study of violence— help explain the ways in which interactional dynamics and meaning-making per- petuate violence. To start, I review structural accounts of urban violence. I then describe Garland’s (2005) analogous case of lynching in the postbellum South, before turning to a discussion of social psychological concepts that specify the mechanisms of legitimation of extrajudicial violence. After detailing my research method and setting, I present ethnographic data on patterns of interaction that endorsed and authorized extrajudicial punishment. To conclude, I discuss the significance of my findings for scholarship on violence and legitimacy. This study augments the state-centric literature on urban violence with social psychological theories of legitimation. It leverages rare in situ data on violence to advance an interactional, meaning-based perspective on a longstanding problem in poor urban communities. Urban Violence and the State Most scholars associate violence at the urban margins with negligent, neoliberal, or corrupt state institutions (Auyero, Lara, and Berti 2014). In poor areas, distrust of legal authority—legal cynicism (Kirk and Papachristos 2011)—induces self-help, meaning that people may resort to violence to settle disputes (Vargas 2016; Venkatesh 2002), intimidate potential aggressors (Anderson 1999; Jankowski 1991), and execute economic transactions (Contreras 2012; Gambetta 1993). The state’s ostensible failure to protect its most marginalized citizens creates a sense of ambiguous authority (Goldstein 2012), “governance voids” (Kruijt and Koonings 1999, 12), and space for illegal armed groups to thrive (Jimeno 2001). Studies show that illegal armed groups—especially in the Global South—exploit the state’s absence (Imbusch, Misse, and Carrión 2011). In some accounts, armed groups coerce residents to pay for services (e.g., protection) that

Load more