<< 躺椅漫談後-Pathologies of Power (Introduction)的讀後節錄 (吳佳慶) | 回blog首頁 |
躺椅漫談後 ─ The end of poverty 小感(蔡君儀) >>
October 14,2007
躺椅漫談後-Structural Violence (吳佳慶)
Structural violence, a term which was first used in the 1970s and which has commonly been ascribed to Johan Galtung, denotes a form of violence which corresponds with the systematic ways in which a given social structure or social institution kills people slowly by preventing them from meeting their basic needs. Institutionalized elitism, ethnocentricism, classism, racism, sexism, adultism, nationalism, heterosexism and ageism are just some examples of structural violence. Life spans are reduced when people are socially dominated, politically oppressed, or economically exploited. Structural violence and direct violence are highly interdependent. Structural violence inevitably produces conflict and often direct violence including family violence, racial violence, hate crimes, terrorism, genocide, and war.
In 1984, Petra Kelly wrote (in her first book, Fighting for Hope): A third of the 2,000 million people in the developing countries are starving or suffering from malnutrition. Twenty-five per cent of their children die before their fifth birthday […] Less than 10 per cent of the 15 million children who died this year had been vaccinated against the six most common and dangerous children's diseases. Vaccinating every child costs £3 per child. But not doing so costs us five million lives a year. These are classic examples of structural violence.
The violence in structural violence is attributed to the specific organizations of society that injure or harm individuals or masses of individuals.
In explaining his point of view on how structural violence affects the health of subaltern or marginalized people, a medical anthropologist, Paul Farmer, writes, "Their sickness is a result of structural violence: neither culture nor pure individual will is at fault; rather, historically given (and often economically driven) processes and forces conspire to constrain individual agency. Structural violence is visited upon all those whose social status denies them access to the fruits of scientific and social progress."[1] This perspective has been continually discussed by Farmer, as well as by Phillipe Bourgois, and Nancy Scheper-Hughes.
In his book "Violence: Reflections on a National Epidemic," James Gilligan (former director of Massachusetts prison mental health services and presently a faculty member at Harvard Medical School) defines structural violence as: "the increased rates of death and disability suffered by those who occupy the bottom rungs of society, as contrasted with the relatively lower death rates experienced by those who are above them." Gilligan largely describes these "excess deaths" as "non-natural" and attributes them to the stress, shame, discrimination and denigration that results from lower status. He draws on Sennett and Cobb who examine the "contest for dignity" in a context of dramatic inequality.
以上節錄自WIKIPEDIA
The violence in structural violence is attributed to the specific organizations of society that injure or harm individuals or masses of individuals.
In explaining his point of view on how structural violence affects the health of subaltern or marginalized people, a medical anthropologist, Paul Farmer, writes, "Their sickness is a result of structural violence: neither culture nor pure individual will is at fault; rather, historically given (and often economically driven) processes and forces conspire to constrain individual agency. Structural violence is visited upon all those whose social status denies them access to the fruits of scientific and social progress."[1] This perspective has been continually discussed by Farmer, as well as by Phillipe Bourgois, and Nancy Scheper-Hughes.
In his book "Violence: Reflections on a National Epidemic," James Gilligan (former director of Massachusetts prison mental health services and presently a faculty member at Harvard Medical School) defines structural violence as: "the increased rates of death and disability suffered by those who occupy the bottom rungs of society, as contrasted with the relatively lower death rates experienced by those who are above them." Gilligan largely describes these "excess deaths" as "non-natural" and attributes them to the stress, shame, discrimination and denigration that results from lower status. He draws on Sennett and Cobb who examine the "contest for dignity" in a context of dramatic inequality.
以上節錄自WIKIPEDIA
引用URL
http://cgi.blog.roodo.com/trackback/4303079
回應文章 
We are all under the structure of violence.
Posted by dilidili
at October 14,2007 14:39
structural violence = structure of violence?
or
structural violence = violence of stucture?
好像是個文法問題...
or
structural violence = violence of stucture?
好像是個文法問題...
Posted by 英文能力持續退步的sophia
at October 18,2007 11:30

I think, its meaning is closer to "the violence of structure", rather than "the structure of violence".
However, when you say "structural violence", its likely that you are saying that "the structure" causes "the violence".
Posted by Saw Chien
at October 21,2007 15:54
Ha, i agree with Sophia and Saw-chien.
In fact, "the structure of violence" is my careless mistake.
Posted by dilidili
at October 21,2007 20:43