Cultural Violence Johan Galtung Journal of Peace Research, Vol. 27, No. 3. (Aug., 1990), pp. 291-305. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0022-3433%28199008%2927%3A3%3C291%3ACV%3E2.0.CO%3B2-6 Journal of Peace Research is currently published by Sage Publications, Ltd.. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/journals/sageltd.html. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. The JSTOR Archive is a trusted digital repository providing for long-term preservation and access to leading academic journals and scholarly literature from around the world. The Archive is supported by libraries, scholarly societies, publishers, and foundations. It is an initiative of JSTOR, a not-for-profit organization with a mission to help the scholarly community take advantage of advances in technology. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. http://www.jstor.org Wed Feb 13 08:19:44 2008 Journal of Pcacc Kcscarch, vol. 27. no. 3. 1900. pp. 291-305 Cultural Violence* JOHAN GALTUNG College of Social Sciences, University of Hawaii, Manoa This article introduces a concept of 'cultural violence'. and can he wen as a follu~-upof the author's introduction of the concept of 'structural violence'over 20 ye'rrs ago ((i~~ltung,1969). '(l'ultural violence' is defined here as any aspect of a culture that can be used to Iegitimirc violence in its direct or \tructural form. Symbolic violence built into a culture does not kill or maim Ilh-c dircct violence or the violence bullt into the structure. However, it is used to legitimize either or both, ar lor Instance in the theoryof :I Hrrrrtttwlk. or a superior race. The relations betmeen direct, structural and cultural violence arc explored, using a violence triangle and a violence strata image, with varlous types of casual Rows. Examples of cultural violence are indicated, uaing a div~aionof culture into rcliplon and ideology, art and language, and empirical and formal science. The theory of cultural violence is then related to two basic polnts in Gandhism, the doctrines of unity of life and of unity of means and end.;. Finally. the inclusion of culture as a major focus of peacc research is seen not only as deepening the quest for peace, hut also as a possihlc contribution to the as yet non-existent general discipline of 'culturology'. 1. Definition only one but a set of aspects so violent, exten- By 'cultural violence' we mean those aspects sive and diverse, spanning all cultural of culture, the symbolic sphere of our exist- domains, that the step from talking about ence - exemplified by religion and ideology. cases of cultural violence to violent cultures language and art, empirical science and may be warranted. For that, a systematic formal science (logic, mathematics) - that research process is needed. This article is can be used to justify or legitimize direct or part of that process. structural violence.' Stars, crosses and One place to start would be to clarity 'cul- crescents; flags, anthems and military tural violence' by searching for its negation. parades; the ubiquitous portrait of the If the opposite of violence is peace, the sub- Leader; inflammatory speeches and posters- ject matter of peace researchipeace studies, all these come to mind. However, let us post- then the opposite of cultural violence would pone the examples until section 4 and start be 'cultural peace'. meaning aspects of a cul- with analysis. The features mentioned above ture that serve to justify and legitimize direct are 'aspects of culture', not entire cultures. A peace and structural peace. If many and person encouraging a potential killer, shout- diverse aspects of that kind are found in a ing 'Killing is self-realization!', may prove culture, we can refer to it as a 'peace culture'. that the English language is capable of A major task of peace research. and the expressing such thoughts, but not that the peace movement in general, is that never- English language as such is violent. Entire ending search for a peace culture - proble- cultures can hardly be classified as violent; matic, because of the temptation to institu- this is one reason for preferring the expres- tionalize that culture. making it obligatory sion 'Aspect A of culture C is an example of with the hope of internalizing it everywhere; cultural violence' to cultural stereotypes like And that would already be direct violence,- 'culture C is violent'. imposing a culture. On the other hand, cultures could be Cultural violence makes direct and struc- imagined and even encountered with not tural violence look. even feel. right - or at least not wrong. Just as political science is * Presented as a lecture at the University of Melbourne about two problems - the use of power and Peace Studies Group. March 1989: at the summer the legitimation of the use of power - Schoola in Peace Studies at the University of Oslo and the University of Hawaii. July 1989; and at the Inter- violence studies are about two problems: the national Peace Research Institute. Oslo. August 1989. 1 use of violence and the legitimation of that am indebted to discussants at all these places. use. The psychological mechanism would bc rithlz I. A Typology of Violence Survival Well-beins Identity Freedom Need< Nceds Needs Needs Direct Violencc Killing Maiming Desocial~zation Repression Siege. Sanctions Resocialization Detention Misery Secondary Citizen Expulsion Structur;tl Violence Exploit;ttion i\ Ewploit;ttion H Pcnctration Marginalization Scgnnentation Fragmentation interna~ization.~The study of cultural violence (see 'Table I). A first comment could violence highlights the way in which the act be that Table I is anthropo-centric. A fifth of direct violence and the fact of structural column could be added at the beginning for violence are legitimized and thus rendered the rest of Nature. the sine qua non for acceptable in society. One way cultural human existence. 'Ecological balance' is violence works is by changing the moral color probably the most frequently found term of an act from rediwrong to greeniright or at used for environment system maintenance. least to yellowiacceptable; an example being If this is not satisfied, the result is ecological 'murder on behalf of the country as right, on degradation, breakdown, imbalance. Eco- behalf of oneself wrong'. Another way is by balance corresponds to survival + well-being making reality opaque, so that we do not see + freedom + identity for human basic main- the violent act or fact, or at least not as tenance. If not satisfied. the result is human violent. Obviously this is more easily done degradation. The sum of all five, for all, will with some forms of violence than with define 'peace'. others; an example being abortus provocu- But 'ecological balance' is a very broad firs. Hence, peace studies is in need of a category encompassing abiota (non-life) and violence typology, in much the same way as a biota (life) alike. Violence defined as insults pathology is among the prerequisites for to life would focus on biota, only indirectly health studies. on abiota. Moreover, there are difficult and important questions, such as 'balance for whom?' For human beings to reproduce 2. A Tl'yology of Direct rindStr~ictural themselves'? At what level of econonlic Violence activity and what numbers? Or, for the I see violence as avoidable insults to basic 'environment' (what an anthropo-centric human needs, and more generally to life, term!) to reproduce itself? All parts, equally, lowering the real level of needs satisfaction at what level, what numbers'! Or for both'? below what is potentially possible. Threats of Second, the mega-versions of the pale violence are also violence. Combining the words used above for violence should also be clistinction between direct and structural contemplated. For 'killing' read extermi- violence with four classes of basic needs we nation, holocuust, genocide. For 'misery' get the typology of Table I. The four classes read silent holocal~sr.For 'alienation' read of basic needs - an outcome of extensive spirit~iuldeath. For 'repression' read gulugi dialogs in many parts of the world (Galtung, KZ. For 'ecological degradation' read eco- 1980a)-are: survival needs (negation: death. cide. For all of this together read 'omnicide'. mortality); well-being needs (negation: mis- The words might sound like someone's effort ery, morbidity); identity, merrning needs to be apocalyptic - were it not for the fact (negation: alienation); and ,freedom needs that the world has experienced all of this (negation: repression). during the last 50 years alone. closely asso- The result is eight types of violence with ciated with the names of Hitler, Stalin and some subtypes, easily identitied for direct ~eagan'and Japanese mi~itarisrn.~In short, violence but more complex for structural violence studies, an indispensable part of peace studies, may be a horror cabinet: but aspect: to be desocialized away from own like pathology they reflect a reality to be culture and to be resocialized into another known and understood. culture - like the prohibition and imposition Then some comments on the content of of languages. The one does not presuppose the Table as it stands.