Week 1- Violence in Political History: The Challenges of Teaching about the Politics of Power and Resistance By Kellie Carte Jackson https://www.historians.org/publications-and-directories/perspectives-on-history/may2011/violence-in-political-history Notes “Most major benchmarks in history revolve around the markers of violent events” (1) “Riots, rebellions, and revolutions all contain (and perhaps even require) elements of political violence” (2) “As political language, violence has expressed and altered outcomes in intense political eras, particularly among oppressed and marginalized people” (2) Jackson’s goal- explore both the successes and failures of political violence. Three practices to better understand/ teach political violence. o 1. Understand/discuss the difference between violence vs. force. Force “African Americans sitting at a segregated lunch counter in the South in 1960 were able to exert enormous and persuasive force on the public mind” (3) Nonviolent anticolonial movements in India (based on Gandhi’s “truth force”) U.S.- nonviolent civil rights movement led by MLK. Violence African civil wars Urban rioting (mostly of young immigrants) in Europe Both force and violence are two political strategies that have the same goals Violence, just like force, “intended to secure social, political, and economic changes as well as freedom from discrimination and disenfranchisement” (3) o 2. To view political violence as symptomatic Violence is a political language. Manifests “… not only in acts, but in speeches, writings, and even in the arts” (4) Reveals its successes and failures in producing desired change (4) Ask- “why violence? “AND “why not violence?” This compels us to “…ask the harder questions of motive and morality as well” (4) o 3. Consider whether political violence is ever legitimate/ justified. “Political violence committed by oppressed or marginalized people can thus be seen as an expression of a deep, unmet need” (5) It is often because we fail to examine the political and historical context for such violent action” (6) Many students only see unrest and violence as black or white- educators rarely take students into the “gray areas of politics” (6) Educators should encourage students to be analytical- to argue, challenge, question, and even defend “… the utility and justice of varying episodes we label riots or rebellions” (8) “Violence has often been used to prevent change and suppress opposition” (8) MLK’s “I Have a Dream” Speech- “A riot is the language of the unheard.” “As educators it is our responsibility to be informed on the history of our past to interpret best practices for its future” (9) Notes for 2/3The Perils and Challenges of Teaching about the Politics of Violence Some quick definitions What do we mean by “Political Violence”? o Violence that is outside State Control where the actors have political motives Who are the actors? o Can have many or several actors acting synchronously. o State elements/ entities seeking autonomy or sovereignty. o Internal groups/ actors seeking changes of systemic issues. o International groups in cahoots with local groups or acting alone. o Organized crime groups/ terrorists against states using all methods. o And many more The common ground is- all are politically motivated Some Common Forms of Political Violence 1. Revolutions o A complete seizure of the state and its government by the PUBLIC To bring radical changes in governmentality Can be massively bloody (the French, American, Haitian, Russian,) Or mildly violent like the recent Iranian 2. Coup d’état o A successful takeover of the government by the ELITE STATE MILITARY Not the whole army- just the elite parts of the army o Bloody or surgical like swift (when the military is already very powerful) o Can sometimes make a revolution less bloody, but not always o It involves reshaping the nature of the state and its government/ regime change o Generally, does NOT involve public participation. The public can rally behind the coup d’etat but are not active participants 3. Insurgencies o Violent, armed rebellion (involving members of the public or followers of certain political leader) against an established authority. o Revolt against a government is less than an organized and that is not recognized as belligerency. (set of recognized political causes_ o A more illegal take over of the government by certain members of the public o Ex- EARLY minute men of the American War of Independence o Those participating in the rebellion are not recognized as belligerents (lawful combatants/ fighting) 4. Violent Protests and Reformation movements with political agenda o The revitalization of revival of something by force o The resurrection of the country under a charismatic leader o The violent reimagination or reordering of established norms and authorities and claims. 5. Riots o An unorganized rebellion- is quick. o Usually are instigated by a particular incident. o are symptomatic of a huge systematic inequality. Needs some kind of action to instigate this violence. Questions we need to ask when talking about political violence. How have forms of political violence changed in contemporary socio- political conflicts? Does the socio- political context effect the forms of political violence? Do forms of political violence change and/or coexist during the same episode? Do we need different analytical approaches to study different forms of political violence? Are periods of economic crisis conducive to particular forms of political violence? Are some forms of political violence more effective than others? o Ex Malcolm X VS MLK Why are some groups more sued to adopt particular forms of political violence? Do forms of political violence change across geographical areas, type of conflicts or historical periods? More importantly How are different forms of political violence legitimized OR delegitimized? - the central question of Jackson’s article Why do we label certain political actions behind such labeling? What is the political motivation behind such labeling? How can we separate Violence from Force? o resistance Today’s Reading: Violence in Political History What is the author’s main points and concerns in this article? Why do we study history? o Because we are interested in the phenomenon of change over time The problematic ways in which we teach history o History as a list of battles, wars, contestations & struggles, over/ for power o History as a cite of contestation that sometimes concludes itself in violence. o In short as events that has a linear directionality with a beginning and an end This approach has limitations that eschew major distinctions: o Violence and force Why is this a problem? Because rather than seeking to capture the chain of events in political violence: We need to acknowledge the role of violence and politics of violence in driving history In other words, we need to acknowledge and seek to understand not just chain of events but also o 1. The power behind political violence and o 2. The ideology behind the justification In other words, How can we distinguish between various political acts? How should we understand violence? What are the effective questions that can make us understand violence? Distinguish violence from other forms of political acts such as resistance? o For ex, how can we distinguish the following Force- based political movements from other violent based political movements: Mohandas Gandhi’s nonviolent anticolonial movements in India (based on “truth- force” MLK’s forceful yet nonviolent civil rights movement in the United States Recent, essentially nonviolent regime change effected in the Middle East and North Africa (Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen) led by ordinary unarmed people.” Why is this distinction important? Because we need to understand and be accountable to the following: o Whether in some contexts actual political violence can carry a sense of legitimacy Outline for Response Paper I. II. III. IV. Paragraph 1- summary of work a. Identify- author, title, publisher, and publication date. i. Dr. Kellie Carte Jackson ii. “Violence in Political History: The Challenges of Teaching about Politics of Power and Resistance” iii. 2011 iv. American Historian Association magazine Perspectives on History b. Summary of work – use direct quotes. Paragraph 2- Reactiona. how does the assigned work relate to ideas and concerns for which you are preparing the paper? b. how does this paper relate to class + class discussion/ lectures? Paragraph 3- Reaction a. How is the work related to problems in the present-day world? Paragraph 4- Conclusion – a. did the work increase my understanding of political violence? b. Do you recommend this article to others?
