Vigilantism Against Migrants and Minorities; First Edition

19 COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVES ON VIGILANTISM AGAINST MIGRANTS AND MINORITIES Tore Bjørgo and Miroslav Maresˆ The notion of vigilantism covers a wide variety of phenomena. This volume has concentrated on vigilantism targeting migrants and minorities. Even within this broad category, our 17 case studies have described a wide variety of vigilante activities, diverging in modus operandi, target groups, levels of violence used, and degrees of support or opposition from the police, other governmental agencies, and political organizations. This concluding chapter will explore the research questions we listed at the beginning of the Introduction chapter: How do these vigilante activities operate, and how are they organized? What are the external justifications, group strategies and individual motivations behind this form of vigilante activism? Under what kinds of circumstances do these vigilante activities emerge, flourish or fail? What are the facilitating and mitigating – or permissive and repressive – factors? What are the vigilante groups’ relationships with the police, other authorities and political parties, and how does it influence the group and its activities? How can our empirical material and findings contribute to the broader aca- demic discussion on the phenomenon of vigilantism? In addition, we will also discuss some other patterns that recurred in the empirical chapters, such as the transnational dimensions of these vigilante movements, vigilantism as performance, and gender dimensions. Modus operandi in vigilantism against migrants and minorities: a typology The first research question – how do these vigilante activities operate, and how are they organized – calls for a typology of such movements. Based on the descriptions 306 Tore Bjørgo and Miroslav Maresˆ of a large number and wide variety of vigilante movements and groups we have been able to identify four main types of vigilante activities based on the ways they primarily operate (modus operandi): vigilante terrorism/pogroms/lynchings paramilitary militia movements border patrols street patrols The preceding case study chapters have been presented and ordered roughly according to this typology, starting with cases of vigilante terrorism and ending with street patrols. However, the distinctions between the various types are sometimes rather fuzzy. These four types should be seen as ideal types, as specific groups may have traits of more than one type. In particular, militia type movements may engage in both border patrols, street patrols and terrorist death squads but in most cases in our data material, they don’t. We treat militias here as a distinct type but with a view to the fact that such militias might develop in the direction of one of the three other types. Vigilante terrorism, pogroms and lynchings Several leading terrorism scholars have identified vigilante terrorism as a subtype of terrorism (Schmid 2011: 171; Sprinzak 1995). One variety has been death squads operating with the tacit support of state agencies, sometimes conducted by military and police officers in their free time, in effect being right-wing state terrorism in disguise. This was the case with the quasi-official death squads in several Latin American countries (Argentina, Brazil, Guatemala, Mexico and El Salvador) during the 1970s, targeting and killing thousands of suspected communists and other left- wing radicals (Sprinzak 1995: 29–31). A similar death squad, known as GAL (Grupos Antiterroristas de Liberación), was set up illegally by officials of the Spanish government to suppress the ETA and its Basque supporters during the mid-1980s (Woodworth 2003). In our collection of case studies, certain varieties of the Jewish vigilantes on the Israeli-occupied West Bank share some similarities and traits of this type of vigilante terrorism, which operates with tacit or active state support (Gazit 2015, this volume). Some of these settlers are part of the state security system as military (reserve) officers or as part of the settlements’ defence squads, which are organized, trained and armed by the Israeli Defence Forces act and tend to be more restrained. Others belong to right-wing extremist groups, or loose youth movements. They committed acts of vandalism, arson of Palestinian fields, cars and houses, beatings, and in rare cases also acts of manslaughter. Some of the settler violence was revenge in the aftermath of Palestinian acts of violence. A more general justification for Jewish vigilantism was to demonstrate Israeli sovereignty over the West Bank and Jewish dominancy over the Palestinian population living there. Comparative perspectives 307 This has some resemblance with another case described in this volume (by Blee and Latif): the Ku Klux Klan and their campaigns of terror, lynchings and intimi- dation to enforce white supremacy over the black population in the US. The Ku Klux Klan is often seen as the classic case of vigilante terrorism but its modus operandi has varied considerably during its four historical phases. The highest number of lynchings and other forms of violence against blacks took place during the era of the first Klan, immediately after the end of the Civil War during the 1860s and 70s. According to Blee and Latif (this volume), Klan groups insisted that their vigilantism was necessary to protect southern white women, who they saw as particularly vulnerable with the collapse of the former slavery state to what the Klan described as the vengeance and sexual depravities of now-freed black men. Another justification was to keep the formally emancipated slaves down and enforce continued white supremacy. Although the Klan during this era was largely loosely organized gangs that operated outside the official law, they had a clear acquiescence of the white controlled law enforcement and judicial system of the post-Civil War southern states. Terrorist violence was a means of controlling the freed blacks and their allies (ibid.). The second Klan of the 1920s and 1930s was different, more of a broad and well-organized movement with 3–5 million supporters, including large numbers of women. Although violence still happened, large rallies, parades and racist political propaganda and boycott campaigns against immigrants, Catholics, Jews and blacks were more prominent features, and sometimes quite successful. The third Klan, during the 1960s and 1970s, was a violent response to the Civil Rights movement and challenge to the segregation of the blacks in the South, using terror tactics. The third Klan’s vigilantism was directly and intensely violent, using techniques that ranged from arson, murders, bombing campaigns, threats, assaults, and cross burnings to other forms of racial terror. In many instances in the 1950s and 1960s, Klan violence was closely coordinated with local law enforcement and judicial officers (some of whom were openly associated with the Klan, or later exposed as Klan members) who declined to arrest or prosecute Klan members for even very flagrant crimes and violence (Blee and Latif, this volume). The fourth Klan, during the 1970s and 1980s in particular (and declining towards the 2000s), was violent as well and continued to attack racial minorities, immigrants and leftists, but even the state itself became a target for some Klan groups. By this time, backing or tacit support from law enforcement was no longer as common as previously, and some Klan groups came under close surveillance by the FBI, or were infiltrated by law enforcement. Moreover, they were bankrupted by effective legal actions from anti- racist organizations. The Klan could obviously continue their campaigns of terror as long as they could operate relatively freely, without any interference (or even with the blessing) of the local sheriff, judge, pastor and mayor. When repressive forces from law enforcement and NGOs put pressure on them, and the general social and 308 Tore Bjørgo and Miroslav Maresˆ FIGURE 19.1 Vigilante “justice”: The Duluth Lynching postcard is one of many postcards widely distributed in the aftermath of lynchings in the USA during the first decades of the 20th century. On June 15, 1920, three black men were taken from jail in the town In Duluth, Minnesota, and lynched by a mob of several thousand men, accused of having raped a nineteen-year old local girl. However, a medical examination found no evidence that the girl had been raped. This was apparently not a Ku Klux Klan lynching. For more infor- mation of the Duluth lynching, see http://www.mnhs.org/duluthlynchings/ lynchings.php, and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1920_Duluth_lynchings and http://zenithcity.com/archive/legendary-tales/the-victims-of-the-1920- duluth-lynchings/2/. political environment was no longer as permissive with their racism and violence, their leeway became severely restricted. Another example of this type of vigilantism can be seen in India, where there have been several instances of Hindu cow protection groups attacking Muslims and other minority groups on the pretext of alleged cow slaughter or consumption. Although the state does not overtly support such cow vigilantism against Muslims or other minorities (rather it has publicly condemned it), the perpetrators involved are invariably linked to the state establishment (Ahuja, this volume). The cow protection groups across the country have links to and are members of cultural and charitable organizations affiliated to the ruling political party, the BJP. Even though members of the BJP, including the Prime Minister himself, have condemned the acts of violence

Load more