3 September 2014
Violence: Social Irrationality and Spontaneity Violence can be interpreted as a type of phenomenon, as it can be as unpredictable in masses as it is in individuals. The very moment when a crowd turns violent, or the moment a criminal pulls a trigger, is typically highly unexpected in most situations and leads one to think: what exactly is violence? Is it simply an action, or is it a state? I believe that violence can be a series of actions which an individual in a violent state may take. Violence is a physical and emotional state which holds various categories of intensity and origins. Bill Buford, in his novel Among the Thugs: The Experience, and the Seduction, of Crowd Violence, describes the experience and observations made of violence, namely within the masses of football teams. The human inclination towards control and dominance is a contributing factor towards most violence. Violence, from my interpretation of Buford's novel, holds its main origins from a spontaneous and irrational desire to establish either control or dominance over a certain event. The potential for spontaneous violence is innate within humans, but humans are not inclined towards violence by itself. The trigger for violence, as Buford notes, can suddenly occur from participation in mass events and the competitive nature of such events (namely, European football in his case.) When such violence is triggered in an individual within such a competitive atmosphere, there is a high chance that the rest of the mass group will follow suit; divisive physical violence (such as pulling or pushing) will cause a chain reaction escalating into a higher level of dangerous violence and a greater risk for potential injury. For example, Buford describes the surges of crowds after a spontaneous violent act (stabbing, in the case of p. 356-358) as creating a wave of irrational actions. Individuals caught in such aftermath of a spontaneous violent act will cause panic and rationality will disappear, causing more injuries and dangerous consequences. Violence itself develops quickly; as we have seen from Buford's experiences, there is a spontaneous action, a rush, and then consequences develop. However, a violent nature is a slowly developing poison caused by societal, political, and economic struggles, as well as environmental conditioning. Buford's observations of the Manchester United football club slowly caused his once-neutral nature to become similar to the violent, drunken supporters of the sports team. After all, Among the Thugs is a novel detailing the diffusion of Buford into the violent hooligan nature he sought to evaluate and observe. He admits that the majority of the football supporters were from a working-class, blue-collar background, and it is true that it is in human nature to assimilate into groups based on similarity; slowly, all the sports-watching, faithfully competitive fans of football developed violently-inclined natures due to the atmosphere they were exposed to. Note that they may not have been violently natured outside of football games, but that the chance for spontaneous violent action increased the more that they were around other football fans. Individual impulse is also a main driving force of violence; it simply takes one action to propel a chain of injurious consequences into full action. That sort of impulse is irrational. Most humans do not simply decide to harm others if there is no rationality, however little, behind such a decision. Brain chemistry is a contending factor in the driving forces of violence, since there are outlying individuals such as psychopathic serial killers who revel in violence, but most violent actions are committed by an individual who is either coerced or conditioned to hold a higher potential for violent action. That is to say, the majority of violent acts are committed due to "cultural" causes such as societal instability, political unrest, economic strife, or atmospheric irrationality. It is within the human nature to understand that violent acts result in injury, perhaps even death, with many more repercussions unforeseen at the time of action. That sort of avoidance towards violent actions due to the unpredictable nature of their consequences typically cause a rational human being to rethink their decision to commit violent acts. However, it is completely true and very common that most violent individuals do not have a choice. In Buford's case, many violent hooligans began a fight out of potential irrationality (drunkenness or anger), but finished a fight for survival. Other thugs fight for land ("turf"), wealth, or simply dominance over others. The human desire to attain control and stability overrides, ironically, the rationality to maintain it. Therefore, violence is born. In certain societies, however (again, Buford's M.U. hooligans provide a direct example), violence was probably not inherent in an individual, yet they had been conditioned to accept violence as a way of life. Sports fans brawl because it is not unusual to get become overly protective and competitive of a home team. In fact, dedication to a team, in Buford's case, nearly had a prerequisite of physical violence supporting such faith. Many large scale acts of violence in history have been committed due to grand faith, excessive zeal, and overall irrationality. Buford's hooligans are only a small example in which deep dedication to a group/cause eventually leads to violence. Larger evidence of this includes the Crusades, the Holocaust, and nearly every war in history. It can be questioned if human faith is a prerequisite to a potential for violence, as deep beliefs often lead to passionate, physical violence in protection of those beliefs. In terms of organization, violence can be organized for several reasons depending on who exactly is organizing it. Organized violence can have as many unforeseen consequences as spontaneous violence, if not more. Violence organized by "legitimate" governments (that is, governments recognized for their abidance of international human rights sanctions) is often used to enforce peace. In my personal opinion, this is counter effective. Though physical peace may be eventually reached, political peace and social peace are hard-won (if attained at all) through the use of violence. Various governments use police forces to maintain and enforce the peace, though excessive use of domestic police would obviously cause social unrest. (One example of this would be a current event featured heavily in the media, the Ferguson, Missouri shooting and subsequent use of organized violence by the government to enforce peace.) As violence can be organized by legitimate governments to enforce peace, it can also be organized by illegitimate and/or tyrannical governments to enforce control. Mentioned before, the human desire for control and stability often overrides rationality and the ability to maintain such control and stability. Control over a populace is most heavily enforced by fear, and as Buford's experience with the wild, shifting crowds of football fans has shown, fear is a direct cause of spontaneous, irrational violence. Violence organized this way, through the means of a dictating state and oppression of human rights, will most likely lead to less control of the populace than the enforcing state originally intended. As for society, most societies indirectly impose violence (or the means and causes for violent acts) upon their own people. Societies organize violence, and impose violent acts, to redistribute power and wealth. Examples would be low-income neighborhoods in almost every country; higher rates of crime occur, and citizens develop more violently inclined natures when they are forced to survive on minimum wage or lack of wages altogether. Slavery is also another example of violence imposed by society, not governments, in order to redistribute power and wealth. Violent acts involved in slavery are imposed by societies historically to gain control and economic stability as well. Violence is a highly complex and ever-developing feature of human nature. It holds many potential origins and can be completely spontaneous or organized by the state. Buford's experience in Among the Thugs can be interpreted as a case study of the effects of sports zealotry and societal conditioning, as well as an observational record of the experience of violence and violent actions altogether. Though the study of violence may be multidisciplinary, the social and political effects of violence will always be first and foremost in understanding those irrational, injurious facets of violence.