Anthropology 601.

76
Anthropology of Violence
Megan McDonald
02.02.2011

Annotations for:
“Critique of Violence” by Walter Benjamin

In “Critique of Violence,” Walter Benjamin seeks to exemplify his theory that in

order to analyze violence, one must understand its correlation to (legal) law and justice,
which he believes began with mythic and divine violence. To illustrate this he uses the
old maxim “the ends justify the means” to explain natural law (the ends justify the
means) and positive law (“‘guarantee’ the justness of the ends through the justification of
the means. (Benjamin et al. 1978:278) His focus is in the legal systems attempt to remove
the publics’ natural ends towards violence with the use of lawmaking violence and law-
preserving violence.
He supports this argument by showing the antithetical violent nature between
certain state establishments and policies: military law, the death penalty, the police, and
union strikes. The union strike was a particularly good example of the way violence is
handled by most (European) states for it exemplified that the “freedom” to strike (“the
right to use force in attaining certain ends. (Benjamin et al. 1978:282)”) could be
rendered illegal at any time the state feels their power is threatened. The state then has the
right to take away the people’s right to use force and replace it with their own at any
time.

Annotations for:
“The Phenomenon of Violence” by David Riches
The main point of Riches article is that violence cannot be studied effectively
without taking cultural definitions of violence into account. One cannot understand
violence as a whole until each of these cultural factors is examined. In the search for a
universal cultural foundation, Riches claims that most scholars offer “the view that
violence has a genetic basis … [in] aggression. (Riches 1986: 21)” However, Riches
believes that only through studying the cultural specifics of violence can we hope to find
that universal theme.
The approach to the study of violence comes from the dualistic nature found when
defining violence based on cultural standards. An act that is defined as violent in one
culture may be considered nonviolent to another. This is exemplified by the actions of the
Eskimos (witnessed during Riches field work in 1970). Within their society “party
drinking (Riches 1986: 20)” (and the subsequent in-group or domestic fighting) is
considered a legitimate form of violence used to deal with grievances caused by the
European-Canadian government. From the point of view of the Inuit, according to
Riches, party drinking and brawling is a ritualized way to prevent uncontrollable
violence. This perspective is a definition of legitimate violence, though not all cultures
would define it as such.

Annotations for:
 “Entering a Dark Continent” by Stanley Tambiah
In this chapter of Rethinking Collective Violence, Tambiah strives to define a
rioting crowd as an entity with goals and fears through understanding the communication
and interaction between individuals within a group and the group itself. He uses this to
conceptualize the dualistic nature of crowds, both the individual base self and the crowd
mentality including the possibility of “jubilant destruction. (Tambiah 1996:297)”
Another dualistic nature of crowd mentality deals with fight or flight. A mob or
crowd could be considered a “hunting pack (Tambiah 1996:278)” or “the rioting crowds
out for killing [or destruction] and it knows whom it wants to kill and to expropriate
(Tambiah 1996:278)” or it also can turn itself “into a “flight crowd” the moment it feels
that the enemy who survives…is on the warpath. (Tambiah 1996:278)” These
mentalities and actions are illustrated by the 1983 Shri Lankan riots when the Sinhales
used fear and rumors against the Tamil Tigers which caused even greater violence within
the crowds (Tambiah 1996: 283-287).