Understanding Violence
By Marianne Perez
July 2008

As we saw last month, violence and conflict are not the same thing. I define violence as physical, psychological, social, economic, or political force or power—threatened or actual—that either results in or has a high likelihood of resulting in injury, death, psychological harm, maldevelopment, or deprivation to oneself, another party or the environment. (This is based on the World Health Organization's definition.)

Conflict is defined as when two or more parties perceive that they have incompatible goals. (See June discussion) The parties may resolve their conflict in a violent way (This piece of territory is mine and only mine and I'll kill you if you so much as look at it!) or a nonviolent way (Let's figure out how we can all use this piece of territory to meet our needs.). Violence is only one possible option for resolving a conflict. Contrary to what the media--and sometimes even society—seem to imply, violence is not deterministic.

Peace scholars generally break violence down into three categories: direct, structural and cultural.

Direct violence is the type we are most familiar with because it is the most visible. Physical, verbal and psychological abuse all fall into this category. A school shooting is a very clear example of direct violence.

Structural violence is where a structure, usually understood as a system of political, social, cultural or economic processes and relations, creates barriers that people cannot remove--barriers to attaining food, shelter, education, jobs, security, etc. This often leads to certain groups or individuals becoming marginalized and frustrated. Another aspect to structural violence is the laws and institutions that allow violence to happen. Gun laws which make it possible to obtain small arms and government permits which are (legally) issued to gun manufacturers are both examples of structural violence.

Cultural violence is a group's attitudes, norms and values about violence that give the perception that violence is permissible and acceptable as a form behavior. Examples include racism, public glorification of war, pervasiveness of violence in the media (in journalism, entertainment, etc.), viewing competitions and other forms of conflict as purely win-lose situations, and metaphors such as the "War on Poverty." Video games that (realistically) simulate shooting other players contribute to cultural violence.

Direct violence is often only the tip of the iceberg. Usually there are strong structural forces and cultural attitudes that feed direct violence. By being aware of structural and cultural violence, we can see that the perpetrator of a school shooting is not simply acting in a vacuum and lashing out with an act of direct violence. We can ask, "What systems was the shooter a part of and which ones did not serve him well? What could have led him to feel marginalized? What social and cultural cues did he receive that led him to think that a school shooting was a legitimate way to deal with his conflict?" This line of thinking can help us understand how to make structures more inclusive and identify where we need to bring to light a culture of peace.