1

Critical Analysis of the Notion of Structural Violence

Student Name

University

Course

Professor Name

Date
 2

Outline

I. Critical Analysis of the Notion of Structural Violence.

A. Introduction.

II. The Origin of the Theory.

III. Terrill Thomas Case.

IV. Usefulness of Structural Violence for Understanding Conflict.

A. Structural Violence as Fundamentals on which Conflict Emerges.

B. Structural Violence as a Rationale for Understanding International Laws.

C. An Instrument for Indication of Challenges Associated With Change Acquisition.

V. The Rationale of Understanding Conflicts and Violence.

VI. Conclusion.

VII. References
 3

Critical Analysis of the Notion of Structural Violence

Introduction

In structural violence, social systems or institutions harm people by prohibiting them

from meeting their basic requirements. Although it is less evident, it is the most destructive type

of violence since it results in unnecessary deaths that would not occur in more equitable

societies. According to Galtung, regardless of the offender, direct and structural violence often

results in harm. In direct violence, a specific actor—a person, a group, or an institution—is

responsible for the violence. On the other hand, cultural violence refers to using replicated and

unchallenged social norms to legitimize direct or structural violence. However, in structural

violence, the conflict is inherent to the structures themselves (Shore & Kline, 2019). Despite the

differences, an understanding of international conflict through structural violence is intended to

improve the analysis and knowledge of the conflict's breadth. Structural violence is a useful way

of understanding conflict because it explains fundamental on which conflicts emerges, creates

rationale for understanding internal laws, and it is an instrument for indication of challenges

associated with change acquisition.

The Origin of the Theory

Structural violence has a clear foundation and framework for understanding conflict. It

occurs when a societal organization prevents individuals from attaining their fundamental

requirements. The theory was invented by a Norwegian sociologist known as Johan Galtung. The

innovation was based on the 1969 paper titled "Violence, Peace, and Peace Research" (as cited in

Ercoşkun, 2021). As postulated by Galtung, instances of structural violence comprise long-

standing bigotry, prejudice, and classism, among others (Shore & Kline, 2019). According to

Grauer and Buikstra (2019), domestic abuse, gender aggression, racial violence, ethnic cleansing,
 4

extrajudicial killings, state violence, extremism, and war strongly depend on structural and direct

violence. (Gilligan, 2020). It is strongly related to social injustice as it impacts individuals in

diverse social institutions differently (Herrick & Bell, 2020). Galtung compares structural

violence with classical violence: violence that is direct and defined by rudimentary, temporary

bodily devastation perpetrated by some person (Herrick & Bell, 2020). In this view, the purest

kind of structural violence is violence that has no specific origin and lacks an actor to have

perpetrated it.

The fact that structural violence is rarely detectable in comparison to direct violence is

one of the biggest challenges for structural violence scholars. At first appearance, the costs of

street violence or war seem to be considerably more significant, but structural violence's "calm"

waters are much more destructive (Lee, 2019). James Gilligan, an American expert on violence,

linked structural violence to the worst military battles in history (Lee, 2019. As indicated by the

historical origin of structural violence, the concept of institutional conflict is clearly discussed,

thus, a framework for understanding conflict.

Terrill Thomas Case

Structural violence is also prejudice against the poor, minorities, and the mentally ill.

Upon entering the penitentiary system, more marginalized people are in increased danger. The

poor treatment of correctional convicts of members of a marginalized group who are mentally

impaired may increase mortality rates within prisons. Terrill Thomas, who was a 38-year-old

African American suffering from mental retardation, is an example of structural violence

(Holmes & Boville, 2020). In April 2016, in Milwaukee, United states, Terrill died of

dehydration while being detained in solitary confinement, partly due to his actions in prison

(Holmes & and Boville, 2019). According to the BBC, convicts around Thomas heard him
 5

pleading for water days before he passed away (BBC, 2019). Correctional staff allegedly

switched off the water supply tap as a punishment for overflowing his former prison

compartment and for his unpredictable conduct due to mental illness.

Thomas had a bipolar illness, for which a doctor was giving medicine, and when he

joined the facility, he was categorized among the mentally ill. However, instead of ensuring that

he got care for his acute mental illness, the prison punished him for pretending (BBC, 2019). His

mental condition was treated as a behavioral issue, and he was penalized. He was arrested and

put in a cell at the Milwaukee County Jail without a mattress, blanket, or pillow after being

detained for allegedly shooting a person and then discharging a pistol inside a hotel and casino

(Victor, 2017). In prison, Thomas was deprived of accessing drinking water, making him

dehydrated. According to his attorney, he did not eat and dropped at least 30 pounds (BBC,

2019). Other detainees reported to corrections personnel that Thomas needed water but could not

request it himself, ultimately leading to his death.

Usefulness of Structural Violence for Understanding Conflict

Structural Violence as Fundamentals on which Conflict Emerges

As various groups engage with one another in a social setting, structural violence

examines the fundamental causes of international conflicts. Since structural violence deprives

individuals of their rights and privileges while others enjoy benefits and accolades, this sort of

violence should be seen as essential in international violation justifications (Lewis & Sagnayeva,

2020). Theories of international wars condemn the breach of social theory via structural violence

in accessible human contexts.

Healthcare inequality is a fundamental example in analyzing and understanding how

conflict emerges as a structural violence. . For instance, as it has been seen in the case of Terrill
 6

Thomas, structural violence may take on various forms and be so ingrained in the social order

that it is impossible to identify. As a contemporary existence of healthcare disparity,

approximately two million children die annually from preventable illnesses such as diarrhea and

pneumonia because they cannot afford excellent treatment (United Nations Children's Fund

[UNICEF], 2021). As a contemporary existence of healthcare disparity, approximately two

million children die annually from preventable illnesses such as diarrhea and pneumonia because

they cannot afford excellent treatment (UNICEF, 2022). In the United States, the maternal

mortality rate for black women has been four times that of white women during the previous 50

years (Alang, 2019; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], 2022). The above

illustrations indicate a health disparity within a mirage of social constructs.

It is consequently believed that structural violence is more likely to occur in regions of a

country's health care system where biosocial approaches are disregarded. Since structural

violence is primarily considered biological, it disregards issues induced by people's

surroundings, such as poor social behaviors or the prevalence of inequality, addressing the issue

ineffectively (Kumar & Sinha, 2020). Notably, Paul Farmer argues that the biggest weakness in

the prevalent healthcare model in the United States is that health services are promoted as

utilities and remain available only to the rich (Christiansen, 2017). As medical practitioners need

to be educated to appreciate the social dynamics that lead to disease, they are compelled to

neglect the social factors that impact access to treatment. Consequently, medical treatments in

low-income communities are much less successful, resulting in systemic violence against the

poor, as shown by Thomas's case.

Structural Violence as a Rationale for Understanding International Laws

 7

The contemporary world is dominated by recurring international wars, with studies

demonstrating that most international laws result from structural violence. This primarily

involves humanity's social, cultural, geopolitical, and economic system within a comprehensive

ecosphere (Woehrle, 2022). In essence, structural violence is understood as a hypothetical tool

that gives speculation deemed tentative to develop an accepting of legally admissible facts. In

addition to justifying the use of international laws, it also helps in interpreting international laws.

This suggests that structural violence involves a cognitive error in supposing that violent

conflicts are employed to deprive other people of their rights and advantages. For instance,

Terrill Thomas, an African-American, may have been a victim of institutionalized violence due

to breaks of international laws with regards to prisoners’ rights and privileges, a kind of

structural violence. Consequently, even though an investigation suggests Thomas may have died

from dehydration, the circumstances inside the jail might have led to pneumonia or other health-

related illness that could have been combated with strong international laws enactments. In this

regard, understanding is further enhanced by the fact that people or groups harmed or infected by

structural violence are indirectly exposed to it. Therefore, they urge thorough monitoring and

oversight to promote the efficacy of international law. Therefore, it provides a comprehensive

explanation of applicable international law and a forecast of what just laws would entail in

society.

An Instrument for Indication of Challenges Associated With Change Acquisition

Structural violence is a helpful indicator of problems related to change adoption. For

example, recent years have seen significant changes in many fields, and every international

organization must accept new concepts. Poor governance and oversight of multinational

organizations have already compromised the employment system, leading to violence. According
 8

to Väyrynen (2022), land disputes have also been a cause of international wars when weak

governing systems impede the possibility of maintaining peace via dialogue. The results are

peace enhancement and the elimination of international conflicts. Inadequate methods of

governance that do not accommodate the weak and downtrodden in society also contribute to the

incidence of structural violence.

However, systemic violence from uneven resource distribution enhances the

understanding of international conflicts. The reality that successful governments are always

entitled to advantages leads to international conflict and bloodshed (Väyrynen, 2022). In this

instance, Thomas's death might have resulted from restricted access to illness prevention as a

social construct and structural violence. Based on this understanding, the study of conflict is

more plausible as it bases structural violence as caused by challenges in change acquisition

within structural institutions, in this case, prison environment.

The Rationale of Understanding Conflicts and Violence

Understanding international disputes and violence facilitate the implementation of

peaceful characteristics. Awareness is essential for individuals who study peace and conflict

since it is simple to develop a foundation for constructive coexistence. It is usually seen as

commendable when prevention is prioritized over treatment. Whenever this knowledge is

accessible, government regimes and policymakers are more aware of the common structural

violence concerns affecting their local society. Therefore, handling the issues with more effective

methods that prevent international wars is simpler.

Unlike direct and cultural violence, the ability to analyze the impacts of structural

violence on global conflicts facilitates the establishment of the groundwork for peacebuilding.

For instance, according to Galtung, direct violence is believed to be the worst type of violence
 9

since it is the most prevalent and evident (Lee, 2019). However, this is not true because its

exposure makes it simpler to recognize and, thus, combat (Lee, 2019). On the other hand,

cultural violence is metaphorical aggression represented in many media –religion, belief,

linguistics, artwork, technology, journalism, and schools, among others — and helps to justify

direct violence and limit or repress the victims' reactions (Keestra, 2021; Malešević, 2022). As

such, understanding the link between violence and international conflict is an effective tool for

stabilizing the economy, governance, and social systems. This is accomplished by using several

ways to improve all systems' interoperability. With an appreciation of the challenge posed by

structural violence, cultural differences may be resolved with relative ease.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it is plausible to assert that structural violence is a valuable framework for

comprehending conflict because the fundamentals of the emergence of conflict can explained,

creates a rationale for comprehending international laws, and acts as a tool for identifying

challenges linked to change acquisition within a society. As previously stated, structural violence

is interwoven into societal systems and may seem to be nothing more than the everyday

challenges of life, as shown by Thomas's situation. Understanding this sort of violence should

result in reevaluating social movements and transformation to minimize or eradicate structural

damage. Therefore, structural violence is not only the establishment of societal manipulation or

subjugation, but also a systemic and proven means through which the strong exploit the

vulnerable. In this case, as compared to direct and cultural violence, structural violence is a

useful way of understanding conflict.

 10

References

Alang, S. M. (2019). Mental health care among blacks in America: Confronting racism and

constructing solutions. Health Services Research, 54(2), 346-355.

https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.13115

BBC. (2019). Terrill Thomas death: Family to receive $6.75m settlement.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-48454224

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2022). Working together to reduce black maternal

mortality. https://www.cdc.gov/healthequity/features/maternal-mortality/index.html.

Christiansen, I. (2017). Commodification of healthcare and its consequences. World Review of

Political Economy, 8(1), 82-103. https://doi.org/10.13169/worlrevipoliecon.8.1.0082

Ercoşkun, B. (2021). On Galtung’s approach to peace studies. Lectio Socialis, 5(1), 1-8.

https://doi.org/10.47478/lectio.792847

Gilligan, J. (2020). Shame: The emotions and morality of violence. In Crime, inequality and the

state (pp. 245-250). Routledge.

Grauer, A. L., & Buikstra, J. E. (2019). Themes in paleopathology. In Ortner's identification of

pathological conditions in human skeletal remains (pp. 21-33). Academic Press.

https://doi.org/10.1016/C2011-0-06880-1

Herrick, C., & Bell, K. (2020). Concepts, disciplines and politics: On ‘structural violence’and the

‘social determinants of health’. Critical Public Health, 1(1), 1-14.

 11

https://doi.org/10.1080/09581596.2020.1810637

Holmes, I., & and Boville, D. (2020). The Chase Key: How a Black man died of dehydration in a

US jail. Aljazeera. https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2020/7/9/the-chase-key-how-a-

black-man-died-of-dehydration-in-a-us-jail

Keestra, S. (2021). Structural violence and the biomedical innovation system: What

responsibility do universities have in ensuring access to health technologies? BMJ Global

Health, 6(5), 1-4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2020-004916

Kumar, S., & Sinha, N. (2020). Preventing more “missing girls”: A review of policies to tackle

son preference. The World Bank Research Observer, 35(1), 87-121.

https://doi.org/10.1093/wbro/lkz00

Lee, B. X. (2019). Violence: An interdisciplinary approach to causes, consequences, and cures.

John Wiley & Sons.

Lewis, D. G., & Sagnayeva, S. (2020). Corruption, patronage and illiberal peace: forging

political settlement in post-conflict Kyrgyzstan. Third World Quarterly, 41(1), 77-95.

https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2019.1642102

Malešević, S. (2022). Why Humans Fight. Cambridge University Press.

Shore, M. K., & Kline, S. T. (2019). Religion and peacebuilding in the European Union. Religion

and European Society: A Primer, 143-157. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119162766.ch9

UNICEF. (2021). Under-five mortality. https://data.unicef.org/topic/child-survival/under-five-

mortality/#:~:text=Children%20living%20in%20poorer%20households,ranged%20from

%202%20to%20102.

UNICEF. (2022). UNICEF’s commitment to ending child poverty and achieving the SDGs:

measurement, advocacy and evidence based policies.

 12

https://www.unicef.org/media/123281/file/UNICEF%E2%80%99s%20Commitment

%20to%20Ending%20Child%20Poverty%20and%20Achieving%20the%20SDGs.pdf

Väyrynen, R. (2022). To settle or to transform: perspectives on the resolution of national and

international conflicts. In Raimo V (Ed.), Raimo Väyrynen: A Pioneer in International

Relations, Scholarship and Policy-Making (pp. 279-299). Springer.

Victor, D. (2017). Milwaukee inmate died after being deprived of water for 7 days. New York

Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/25/us/milwaukee‐inmate‐died-after‐being‐

deprived‐of‐water‐for‐7‐days.html

Woehrle, L. M. (2022). Conflict Analysis. In Lester, R. K. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of violence,

peace, & conflict (3rd ed., Vol. 1, pp. 329–338). Elsevier.