14.1 Introduction
Political violence in modern societies results from social tensions developing for different reasons. It is largely directed against the state — considered the chief source of injustice and repression. Violence is a purposeful political action to register protest against “wrong” policies of the government.
Aristotle: men do not revolt because they catch cold — serious moral issues are involved. Political assassins cannot be equated with ordinary murderers. Supporters of political violence justify it on moral grounds (fighting against bad government for a just cause); opponents condemn it as acting against lawfully constituted government. Hence: one country’s terrorist is another country’s “freedom fighter.”
In modern times, revolution as a form of political violence is carried out to change the form of government and transform social structure.
14.2 Meaning of Political Violence
Political violence = collective violent action of a group of people against the government to highlight discontent. It may be:
- A protest against a particular government policy.
- An attempt to remove a government from power.
- An effort to change the political system.
Aggression and violence have been part of human history — men take to violence to secure what they do not possess or to preserve what they possess. Political violence is normally directed against the state, its property, and those who manage its institutions. It may begin with rioting or mass demonstrations but can assume different forms.
Aristotle: first political scientist to discuss the nature and causes of political disorder — change in the balance of social forces was responsible for political disorder. Kautilya (Chanakya): change in the attitude of one’s own people constitutes revolt — resulting from wrong government policies and immodest behaviour of the king.
14.3 Violence and State
Political violence is as old as the state itself. Violence is built into the institution of the state — the state has a monopoly of coercive power exercised through repressive agencies: army, police, jails, and courts. The state claims authority to rule and secures it through legal or popular sanctions. The degree of violence differs from state to state — depending ultimately on the state’s ability to secure compliance without coercion.
14.3.1 Political Violence and Political Integration
The modern state wants to establish total authority over people and territory — to amalgamate distinct cultural and ethnic groups into a single political unit under a single central authority. Historically, this process has involved extreme violence: physical murder of cultural minorities, forced deportations, forced religious and cultural conversion, and large-scale population transfers. The purpose: to extend state’s political authority over those who do not accept it as legitimate.
The modern state was built upon the demise of autonomous feudal and tribal communities. Once integration was achieved in West Europe, attempts were made to control the arbitrary exercise of state violence. At present, most countries of Asia and Africa are undergoing this process — hence politics in these states is the most violent.
14.3.2 Political Violence and the Process of Economic Development
The state exercised extreme violence in the early phase of economic development — during the transition from handicraft/agricultural systems to factory systems. A great majority of the population suffered; the state used violent methods to curb agrarian revolts and protect private industries by curbing workers’ rights (e.g., declaring trade unions illegal).
Example: during the “Captain Swing” troubles in rural England in 1830 — when agricultural machines were destroyed, animals killed, crops and bricks burnt — the state arrested 1,976 farmers, deported 481, and executed 18. Transportation, imprisonment, the lash, and death were the lot of those agitating against the early factory system.
Even in planned economies, economic development involved the exercise of force — new economy required capital formation by curbing working-class consumption levels. Conclusion: in both political integration and economic development, the level of political violence is extremely high — the state has considerably greater potential of internal violence than its citizens.
14.4 Causes of Political Violence
People resort to violence as a last resort — normally exhausting legally available avenues first. People use violent methods when they believe their survival as a community is at stake.
14.4.1 General Causes
Kautilya (Arthashastra): wrong government policies and immodest behaviour of rulers give birth to revolts. Also: impoverishment, greed, and disaffection are causes of revolt.
Specific general causes: excessive taxation; hike in prices of essential commodities; deliberate disregard of law and morality in exercise of power; unjust treatment of certain sections; deliberate neglect of certain regions; political incompetence and misgovernment; excessive and tactless use of force to put down peaceful agitation.
14.4.2 The Concept of National Self-Determination
During the last two centuries, Third World countries came under Western colonial control. Liberation struggles were largely violent — examples: Vietnam, Algeria, Indonesia. India’s movement was largely non-violent due to Gandhi, though armed revolutionaries like Savarkar, Bagha Jatin, Bhagat Singh, and Subhash Chandra Bose were also present.
After WWII, newly independent Third World countries faced nation-building challenges. Distinct cultural or religious regions demanded the right to self-determination — called “national liberation” by supporters, “secessionism” by opponents. Examples in India: Jammu and Kashmir, Nagaland, Manipur, and Assam. Even developed countries faced this: Northern Ireland (Great Britain), Quebec (Canada). Most dreaded separatist groups: the Irish Republican Army (IRA) and the LTTE in Sri Lanka.
14.4.3 Ideology
Ideology mobilises people, gives them a cause, and asks them to change the existing system.
- Fascism (Italy) and Nazism (Germany): glorified force and violence; used extreme violence to capture political power between the two World Wars.
- Revolutionary socialism: sought abolition of the capitalist system through violent revolution. Successful examples: Russian Revolution, Chinese Revolution (1949), Cuban Revolution (1961). Socialist uprisings also witnessed in India (Naxalites), Nepal, Indonesia, Burma.
Three ideological phases of political violence: (i) national independence, (ii) revolutionary socialism (post-WWII), (iii) religious fundamentalism or ethnic separatism (contemporary).
14.4.4 Religious and Ethnic Conflicts
Most countries are inhabited by people of different religious faiths and ethnic communities. The modern state tries to bring them under a single central authority; minorities resist for fear of losing their separate identity.
- Inter-religious conflicts: Catholics vs. Protestants in West Europe (17th–18th centuries); Christians vs. Muslims, Jews vs. Muslims, Hindus vs. Muslims.
- Intra-religious conflicts: fundamentalist groups wanting to “purify” religion — Algeria, Egypt, Afghanistan.
- Ethnic/cultural minorities: Quebec (Canada), Nagaland (India), Northern Ireland (Great Britain), Chechens (Russia), Tibetans (China), Kurds (Iraq/Iran). In Sri Lanka, the minority struggle culminated in insurrection.
14.4.5 Political Disputes between Different Groups of the Elite
Elite factions use violent methods (street demonstrations, communal riots, sabotage) to secure popular support; incumbent groups use coercive state power to curb opposition. Dissident groups may incite violence against the ruling group or enlist military factions. Examples: Afghanistan after 1972, military takeovers in Pakistan and Bangladesh.
14.4.6 Economic Conditions and the Concept of Relative Deprivation
Wrong government policies that favour certain sections and push large numbers below the poverty line — causing inflation, declining living standards, price rise, unemployment, and non-availability of essential commodities — force people into violent demonstrations.
Poor living conditions alone are insufficient — workers and farmers must develop consciousness of their deprivation. Relative deprivation: when people begin to believe they are being deliberately deprived of valued goods to which they are entitled, they take to agitation. Modern factors creating relative deprivation: education, new skills, new consumption levels, and advertisements. Even rapid economic development can cause resentment if the fruits of growth are not fairly distributed.
14.4.7 Support by Neighbouring Countries
Sustained political violence always gets support from hostile neighbouring countries — in the form of arms, money, training, and shelter. Examples: Pakistan’s support for violence in Jammu and Kashmir; US support for rebels in Cuba and Nicaragua; Libya and Iraq accused of supporting Islamic terrorist networks.
14.5 Forms of Political Violence
14.5.1 Violent Protest by the People against the Government
People resort to violence when all constitutional means fail. Forms: unorganised mob violence (attacking symbols of government authority — offices, railways, buses); strikes, bandhs, hartals; organised violent demonstrations and marches. Such violence is largely sporadic in nature — its impact is temporary; the government uses repressive measures to control it, though sometimes amends policies to avoid spread of violence. A well-organised demonstration may cause the downfall of a government only if central authority is weak and lacks legitimacy.
14.5.2 Terrorism
Terrorism has become one of the most important forms of political violence in modern times. Terrorists cannot launch open war against the state (which has superior force); instead they use methods of surprise. Activities range from blowing up bridges to sabotage, murder, mass killings, hijacking, kidnapping, political assassinations, extortions, arson, and inciting caste and communal riots.
Major terrorist organisations: IRA, LTTE, various Palestine guerilla outfits, Al Qaeda. In India: Jammu and Kashmir, Punjab, Nagaland, Assam, Manipur, Tripura, Mizoram.
Terrorists are not ordinary criminals — they are ideologically motivated with a vision of a better society. Terrorist activities are legitimised by their ideology. Guerilla warfare succeeds only when state authorities are extremely weak. Example: the Viet Cong succeeded in South Vietnam because of the weakness of the South Vietnamese state.
14.5.3 Military Revolts and Takeovers
The military plays an important role in Third World politics — the only well-organised force in societies that have not completed state and nation-building. Two forms:
Mutiny: disgruntled soldiers rebel against government due to economic or political reasons (e.g., the Indian Sepoy Mutiny of 1857 against the British East India Company). Without an ideological base, mutinies are controlled by state authorities.
Coup d’état: sharp armed insurrection by army officers to capture political power by seizing key state installations — the masses are bypassed. Can be bloodless (Pakistan’s military takeovers) or extremely violent (Bangladesh 1975 — President Sheikh Mujibur Rehman and his entire family were killed; Indonesia 1965–66; Afghanistan after 1973).
14.5.4 Revolts and Rebellions
Unlike terrorism or military revolts, revolts and rebellions require popular disaffection. They represent the anger of certain sections of society aimed at changing government policy or the government itself.
Revolt → with high degree of organisation and broad popular approval, can assume serious form including large-scale terrorism and civil war → Rebellion (second stage): rebels are ideologically committed with a vision of future society, backed by socialist or nationalist ideology, concentrating in peripheral areas outside efficient state control. Uses guerilla tactics to compensate for lack of military strength — promising land to the landless, regional autonomy, political equality.
Successful revolutionary guerilla warfare: China, Vietnam, Cuba. Failed in Greece, Philippines, Iran. Guerilla success characteristics: near-perfect intelligence, mobility, freedom from fixed logistic bases, and surprise.
14.5.5 War
War is the culmination of political violence — two contending forces settle the issue on the basis of armed forces balance. Two types:
- External war: involves massive armies, modern weapons of mass destruction, and air force. WWI — a million deaths; WWII — the most destructive of all wars; USA used atomic weapons.
- Internal war (civil war): fought between central government forces and secessionist forces. Example: US Civil War (1860s) on the issue of abolition of slavery; violent internal wars in Lebanon, Yugoslavia, Nigeria, and India. Equally destructive — causing widespread destruction and massacres.
14.6 Revolution
Revolution is essentially a modern phenomenon — it seeks the total transformation of society. Modern revolutions are marked by widespread violence, social unrest, and ideological commitment. Modern revolutions are not confined to replacing a bad ruler — they have a modernist agenda of restructuring the entire socio-political order by legitimate representatives of the community.
14.6.1 Meaning of Revolution
Revolutions aim at changing the basic structure of society — rapid transformation of state and class structures, carried through by class-based revolts from below. Unlike earlier revolts (which only sought change in government), modern revolutions have clearly defined goals, backed by a well-defined theory that legitimises revolutionary violence.
14.6.2 Three Phases of Revolution
Phase 1 — Classical Phase:
- British Civil War (17th century): destroyed royal absolutism in England.
- French Revolution (1789): destroyed feudalism; paved way for modern capitalist society; unprecedented violence and bloodshed.
- American Revolution: ended foreign domination; established modern constitutional democracy.
All three transformed state organisations, class structures, and dominant ideologies.
Phase 2 — Socialist Phase:
- October Revolution (Russia, 1917).
- Chinese Revolution (1949).
- Cuban Revolution (1961).
Leaders were more radical — seeking total transformation of social, economic, and political structures. All ideologically grounded in Marxist philosophy and Leninist politics of international proletarian revolution, though following different methods.
Phase 3 — Third World Revolutions:
- Egyptian revolt (1953): paved way for new politics in Arab countries.
- Islamic Revolution of Iran (1979): the last great revolution — tried to reorder Iranian society on the principles of radical Islam.
14.6.3 Theories of Revolution
Ted Robert Gurr (Why Men Rebel!): Revolution is a form of political violence challenging the state’s monopoly of force. Features of revolution: turmoil, conspiracy, and internal war. Main cause: relative deprivation — more intense the deprivation, the greater the degree of violence. Process: discontent → politicisation of discontent → actualisation in violent action. The discontented elite plays a major role.
C. Johnson: Revolution = systemic imbalance. Revolution takes place due to social imbalances and systemic disequilibrium caused by sudden and intense changes in people’s values or in the social environment. Two causes: (i) power deflation — when the system fails to fulfil obligations, loses confidence and legitimacy, and must use force to maintain order; (ii) inability of legitimate leaders to effect “synchronisation” to overcome power deflation — leading to ultimate loss of authority, the state can no longer justify its monopoly of force, and a sudden break in the effectiveness of armed forces occurs.
Marxist theory: History is a history of class struggle between haves and have-nots. Contradiction between capitalists and workers comes to a head in the capitalist stage — capitalists extract surplus value, causing widespread poverty and misery. The state as an instrument of class rule supports the capitalists. Workers bring about a violent proletarian revolution to overthrow capitalism and establish a classless, stateless society.
Common thread: all three theories recognise that violence plays an important role in revolution because revolutionaries want to challenge and end the state’s monopoly over the use of force and establish their own control over the state.
14.7 Methods of Overcoming Political Violence
14.7.1 Methods of Reforms and Remedies (Liberal Approach)
Political violence is built into the system as an antidote to state violence — hence the government must take remedial measures to reduce dissatisfaction. Remedies include: equality of opportunity, reducing tax burden, equitable distribution of wealth, removal of all disabilities, and just treatment for all sections of society.
Liberals believe in education — violence is irrational; it brings out base elements in man. Economic compulsions should convince people that more can be gained in peace than in war. Minimum use of state violence; conflicts to be resolved by consensus and contract and through constitutional machinery. Basic problems of society can only be resolved by consensus.
14.7.2 The Method of Force
Rebels have consciously chosen violence and cannot be persuaded to abandon it — violence of rebels must be countered by superior state violence. The state should strengthen intelligence, penetrate the inner rings of terrorists, follow policies of dissension and punishment, and isolate and confuse rebels.
Kautilya: the king should initiate action against leaders of revolt (who provide leadership), but must not use force against the multitude — widespread bloodshed must be avoided. Foreign support to rebels must be cut off. The cause of revolt must also be addressed.
14.7.3 The Policy of Carrot and Stick
A dual policy — driving a wedge between moderate and extremist elements in the opposition. The government offers rewards and concessions to moderates while continuing military operations against extremists. If moderates generate support for a deal, extremists lose support and become ineffective. If moderates fail, extremists may brand them as government agents and destroy their base.
Must be used very carefully. Ultimately, the state must remove the causes of revolt — Kautilya: by merely killing rebels, rebellion cannot be stopped; it is necessary to remove the cause that creates new rebels.
Broader conclusion: state practices themselves give birth to violence — it is not rebels or terrorists who divided Ireland, drove Palestinians to exile, imposed white rule in South Africa, or killed thousands in Iraq. “State violence is the womb of terrorism, betrayal and humiliation is its cradle and revenge its mother’s milk.” States committed to imperial interests by force are unlikely to recognise that political violence is both a response to their policies and an imitation of their style. States must reorganise policies on the basis of justice and fair play and stop oppression of classes, nations, and ethnic communities to remove the root cause of violence.
14.8 Summary (Key Takeaways)
- Political violence is built into the political process because the state seeks to monopolise the use of force; loss of legitimacy and the system’s inability to accommodate different sections’ demands are its important causes.
- Causes: bad government, national self-determination, ideology, religious/ethnic conflicts, elite disputes, relative deprivation, and foreign support.
- Forms: violent protests, terrorism, military revolts and coups, revolts and rebellions, war (external and civil), and revolution.
- Revolution seeks total social, economic, and political transformation — three phases: classical, socialist, and Third World. Three theories: Gurr (relative deprivation), Johnson (systemic imbalance), Marxist (class struggle).
- Methods of overcoming violence: liberal reforms and remedies (consensus, education, constitutional machinery); force (intelligence, targeting leaders, cutting foreign support); carrot and stick (wedge between moderates and extremists).
- Removing the root causes of violence — injustice, oppression, deprivation — is ultimately more effective than any method of suppression.
