structural violence: an American perspective on the institutions of a downgraded democracy; part 1

by preston lindsay

The world is suffering from a rise in white nationalism, neo-Nazism, all under authoritarianism’s growing influence found in institutionalized democratic parties. They are found in conservative and isolationist rhetoric on the continents of Eurasia, North and South America, and Africa. This paper investigates the United States of America as it’s case study. This paper seeks to understand the underlying structural and social narratives and microcosms contributing to this rise, hoping to provide possible insights and hopeful bearing in this strange and surreal sea.

Currently the United States of America poses a particularly dumbfounding case study for the longitudinal effects of structural violence in a democratic state. For the last 241 years there has been at the very foundations of the United States’ republic institutionalized racism, misogyny, and class warfare. All of this has occurred through the use of propaganda and war economies under the guise of liberal democracy and Judeo-Christian theology. It is understandable then, that there have been consistent and recurring social divides and conflicts on these lines throughout her history.

This paper seeks to investigate the U.S.’ current state regarding structural violence using ten points drawn from the historian Timothy Snyder’s book ‘On Tyranny.’ This is done due to Snyder’s credentials on the rise and fall of governments and social indicators within these strata. Timothy Snyder is one of the leading American historians and public intellectuals. What makes Snyder’s points relevant here is that they are indicators of authoritarianism and fascism; closely following the rise and fall of both during the decades leading up to World War II–his particular area of expertise. In addition to his points, I will also use human needs theory, identity and group narratives, along with intergroup competition theory to further explain events and processes within the frameworks here.

Part I:

Points

1-Do Not Obey [Authority] in Advance;

6-Be wary of paramilitaries

2-Defend Institutions;

5-[Tyranny needs intra-institutional obedience]

Do not speak of ‘our institutions’ unless you make them yours, [they] do not protect themselves. Defend the rules of democratic elections. The symbols of today enable the reality of tomorrow. Notice the swastikas and the other signs of hate. Do not look away, and do not get used to them. Remove them yourself and set an example for others to do so.

Just in the last decade, folk’s identities in the U.S., which have traditionally been directed and framed by theological frameworks, have transitioned to the onus being placed on political party. A 2017 study by Shanto Iyengar, professor of communication and political science at Stanford, found that this was the case. Iyengar and his co-authors conclude, “defined in terms of affect, voters’ sense of partisanship seems to represent a dominant divide in modern democracies and the strongest basis for group polarization.”

When political polarization occurs, there is a large empathy gap. Intimately interwoven within this gap is othering. As this occurs the citizenry is then more likely to default to platform politicking with other citizens as outward indicators of in-group party affiliation and loyalty are displayed. This then subconsciously primes conversations and outcomes toward increased party adherence. Thus, people begin to obey in advance by adhering to default party politicking without the hard work of laboured thought over policy, and in the end undermine the very institutional norms they believe they’re participating in, rather than reacting to.

At the core of every government’s duty, however, is the goal of satisfying basic human needs. Party politicking undermines the processes and institutions needed to fulfill these needs. Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs are integral to the peace and conflict studies theories and the grassroots, regional and national processes in accommodating those needs; and are indeed inseparable from interventions and critical strategies and evaluations. We will use the expanded hierarchy of needs here:

1- Biological and Physiological Needs;

2- Safety Needs;

3- Love and Belonging Needs;

4- Esteem Needs;

5- Cognitive Needs;

6- Aesthetic Needs;

7- Self-Actualization Needs, and

8- Transcendence Needs

Not all needs are physical. Roger Mac Ginty has said, “human needs are not necessarily innate, instead they can be socially constructed in the forms of [the] bonds of identity.”

John Burton has also addressed this within peace and conflict studies and only minimally altered the verbiage in his theory. Human Needs theory is not to be undervalued as it has considerable explanatory and predicative power within conflict assessments.

According to the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights Charter nation states are obligated to provide for the needs of their peoples. But in application, they consistently fall far short. Boulding states, “the holes are so large, in both market and centrally planned economies, that non-mainstream populations fall through the (safety) net.

Intergroup competition theory is also extremely pertinent in explaining the entrenched nature of American structural violence, and the interplay of identity, schemas, and conflict that has brought Americans to this point. Mac Ginty continues,

'The basic premise is that individuals are engaged in constant cognitive processes of categorization to understand and systematize their environment . . . This is a relational and discriminating process in that other groups (out-groups) are viewed negatively. The

group is capable of the simultaneous occupation of a number of mutually reinforcing roles . . All humans attach high salience to esteem, or positive self and group evaluation. [This] pursuit of positive self-esteem is dependent upon the discrepancy between how a

person perceives herself and how she thinks she should be and is a major motivating factor in human behaviour.'

In Elise Boulding’s book, ‘Cultures of Peace,’ she affirms Mac Ginty’s insights.

Each society has its own fund of adaptability, built on the knowledge of the local environment and lifeworld and the historical memory of times of crisis and change . . The knowledge is woven into religious teachings, into the music, poetry, and dancing of

ceremonies, celebrations, and play.'

According to Jay Rothman, identities surrounding these institutions are, “deeply rooted in underlying individual human needs and values that together constitute people’s social identities, particularly in the context of group affiliations, loyalties, and solidarity.” As persons consistently default to party politicking and othering in daily life, institutions can no longer function as political parties themselves now hold more action directive than the traditionally moral or religious imperatives, undermining once effective norms and values, and streamlining non-conscious obedience to the party. Or put another way, as morals become as changeable as party platforms from year to year or election cycle to election cycle, consistent grounded moral Indigenous frameworks whither from neglect and disuse. This further infuses Thomas Boudreau’s assertion of human agencies in opposition; which state, that in the struggle for resources, the “social imprints” left cause further social struggles among the defeated and victor alike.

Identities make up the structural skeleton of how people individually and collectively see themselves. They form the foundational underpinnings holding them up, and together. People have attached their party affiliation to their core identities so intimately that all other motivation factors lose their predictive power. This identity is now the ‘me’ one holds within herself. There are a plethora of communal sub-groups for preferences and dislikes making up each individual, group, society and culture enveloped in these identities. Celia Cook-Huffman states identities are often, “created by a transformation in the process of a social struggle. Identities are complex, historically bound, socially constructed , and thus ever moving . . [they are] bound and shared through story, myth, history, and legend.”

As I wrote in ‘structural violence, narrative control, identity and purpose’,

'Definitions of identity and narrative fold in on themselves and become institutionalized within political or hierarchical systems (government, let’s say), this can then lead to out-group cultural discrimination woven into the very fabric of an ethnonational identity; engendering a potentially hazardous national identity. . . [For example,] the American systems of justice have, in fact, created their own criminals by othering them through mirror-images, narrative control and labeling.'

In addition to these, in a study by Matthew Feinberg and Robb Willer in the Society for Personality and Social Psychology 2015, it was found there are two completely different conceptual understandings of the world within the current party politics in the U.S. And as a result, not only is it most difficult to resolve social problems, but it’s also increasingly treacherous to communicate effectively with someone from another party.

As these modes of thinking and understanding the world have developed further in the U.S.’ bi-polarized cultures, echo chambers have resulted. There are currently two core modes of thinking:

1. the path to a better life is through free markets and personal

responsibility

2. the path to a better life is through social responsibility and guaranteed human rights.

Although these modes of thinking are not mutually exclusive, the application of these modes have been polarized by toxic politicking. These modes of thinking are then further militarized due to a buzzword culture that both reinforce political party cultural norms through confirmation and desirability bias. Ben Tappin, Leslie Van Der Leer, and Ryan McKay in a study this year conclude that even if echo chambers were to be dissolved somehow, the damage has already been done.

'Our study suggests that political belief polarization may emerge because of peoples’ conflicting desires, not their conflicting beliefs per se. This is rather troubling, as it implies that even if we were to escape from our political echo chambers, it wouldn’t help much. Short of changing what people want to believe, we must find other ways to unify our perceptions of reality.'

Eitan D Hesh, professor of political science at Tufts University, has also recently written on the failures of contemporary participatory democracy. Also in an op-ed in the New York Times he emphasized the development of an armchair political hobbyism that is undermining the validity and proper vetting of political candidates, replacing local organizing, and displacing face to face interaction.

New research by Yascha Mounk, a lecturer at Harvard University is also pointing to what some would call a counter-intuitive precedent: democracies are in great risk, and are currently unstable. It is worth noting here, the United States was just downgraded in two very important liberal democratic spheres: one, the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU)’s Democracy Index demoted the United States from a full democracy to a flawed democracy; and two, debt ceiling brinksmanship in the United States Congress has resulted in a downgrade from a AAA rating to an AA+ rating. Although the latter rating may seem slight, when this downgrade occurs within the borders of the current world hegemon, it is more than disconcerting.

Othering has continued apace. As a result of increased diversification and multiculturalism, and with an economic downturn that has yet to raise wages and the quality of life the vast majority of Americans, many white persons have felt their identities threatened by multiculturalism, and ironically, not necessarily due to the economic downturn that has has the most tangible effects.

Republican Party-affiliated lenses and mental frameworks have resulted in public displays of anger and resentment. For example, a ‘unite the right’ rally (a collection of white nationalist and neo-nazi groups) was held in Charlottesville, North Carolina on August 12, 2017. During this rally, Heather Hayer was killed by a hit and run car offence perpetrated by a white nationalist. The night before, white men dressed in polo shirts and khaki pants (to emulate President Trump) carried tiki torches and marched to downtown Charlottesville to protest the removal of statue of Confederate General Robert E. Lee; who fought for slavery during the American Civil War. It has been described as one of the largest white supremacist events in recent US history. Marchers were yelling slogans such as "white lives matter,” “Jews will not replace us,” and "blood and soil.” Blood and soil is a well documented and very important philosophy for Nazi Germany during the reign of Adolf Hitler.

On the other side of these offences lies the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement. This isn’t to say that these movements are equal in their goals and strategies; they’re not. Black Lives Matter seeks to bring attention to police brutality against black people and structural racism within the U.S. systems, which readily exist. In many instances white nationalists don’t believe these exist, and of those that do, many express desires to retain these structures and perhaps increase them. White Nationalists and neo-Nazis and have used BLM as a scapegoat for cultural and economic grievances, which have occurred as a result of class warfare, not multiculturalism.

Another indicator directly related to white nationalism is the sudden rise in paramilitary groups. PBS recently investigated and found, “there are more than 500 militia groups in the U.S., more than double the number in 2008, according to the Anti-Defamation League. Most of the [men] are right-wing and anti-government.” The narrative these white men carry is the one sold by the National Rifle Association (NRA), and believe they’re right to bear arms, guaranteed by the second amendment, is in jeopardy. These white men consistently believe their rights are being infringed on by what they call a Marxist, communist, and socialist idea of governing; and are also threatened by Islam. They are actively involved in the perpetuation of the toxic party politicking of Republican Party. As such, although these anti-government white men aren’t yet wearing the uniform of the state, they were escorted to the public square in Charlottesville by state representatives. This does not bode well for American democracy.

Underlying these clearly overt conflicts and institutionalized structural violence, lay a number of institutionally covert ones. As previously mentioned, lack of economic opportunity is a major conflict, as well as other health and community social supports. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the average household income for a married couple in 2016 was $75,062. For an single mother it was $41,027. But this figure can be misleading. It is the difference in income distribution that has considerable predicative power. And it is the difference in income distribution that has caused the vanishing of the American middle class. To put things into perspective, a single top income earner could buy a house for every homeless person in the United States. In the most recent count in 2017, there are roughly 549, 928 homeless on any one night in America. In a paper I wrote on income inequality in 2014, I stated,

'. . Income disparity is at at levels not witnessed since 1929. The parallels between the present climate and the crash of the great depression are many. Presently vast amounts of wealth continue to trickle up to those inhabiting the top 20 percent income bracket, but even more so in the top 5 percent income bracket. This, while wages for everyone else continue to stagnate, falling well behind the inflation rate, making poverty levels both rise and widen. This inequity is highly correlated to decreased levels of trust, increases instances in and of mental illness (including drug and alcohol addiction), causes a decrease in life expectancy and an increase in infant mortality, an increase in obesity, a decrease in educational performance, an increase in teenage births, rises in imprisonment rates, and a decrease in social mobility.'

Income inequality does still more. According to Frederick Soft, in a paper in 2008 in the Journal of Political Science, he reported,

'. . higher levels of income inequality powerfully depress political interest, the frequency of political discussion and participation in elections among all but the most affluent citizens, providing compelling evidence that greater economic inequality yields greater political inequality.'

As the economic and political institutions continue to deteriorate in the United States and fail to meet basic human needs, health outcomes will continue to fester and decline. According to the National Economic and Social Rights Initiative, an international organization focused on human needs and human rights as outlined by the United Nations, “The market-based health insurance system in the United States has caused a human rights crisis that deprives a large number of people of the health care they need.” This is understated, and doesn’t do justice to the thousands of lives lost every day due to a poor healthcare system; the worst in the developed world.

Part II:

Points

9-Be kind to our language;

12-Make eye contact and small talk

10-Believe in truth;

13-Practice corporeal politics;

11-Investigate [claims];

17-Listen for dangerous words

Avoid pronouncing the phrase everyone else does. Think up your own way of speaking, even if only to convey that thing you think everyone is saying. Make an effort to separate yourself from the internet. Read books. ‘It is easy to follow along. Power wants your body softening in your chair and your emotions dissipating on the screen. Get outside.’ To abandon facts is to abandon freedom. If nothing is true, then no one can criticize power, because there is no basis upon which to do so. If nothing is true, then all is spectacle. The biggest wallet pays for the most blinding lights. Figure things out for yourself. Spend more time with long articles. Subscribe to print media. Take responsibility for what you share with others. Be alert to the use of the words extremism and terrorism. Be alive to the fatal notions of emergency and exception. Be active in organizations, political or not, that express your own view of life . . help others do good. Speak face to face with others. This is not just polite. It is part of being a citizen and a responsible member of society.

The state of facts in America is less than ideal. The Brookings Institute, a century old research institute in Washington D.C., said of the 2016 election news cycle, “ . . entire news ecosystems for partisans existed wholly outside the reach of those who at least aim for truth. . . the media scandal of 2016 isn’t so much about what reporters failed to tell the American public; it’s about what they did report on, and the fact that it didn’t seem to matter.”

This clearly illustrates that as identities are continuously rooted in partisan politics and in-group norms, intergroup competition holds more and more sway as schemas and thought architectures framed by these narratives matter more than the facts themselves. As found by Tappin, Van Der Leer, and McKay’s study referenced earlier, facts don’t matter as much as something someone wants to believe.

This was first identified in 2005 by Stephen Colbert in his Comedy Central Show, “The Colbert Report.” Tappin, Van Der Leer, and McKay’s study gives ground and empirical foundational footing to Stephen Colbert’s ‘truthiness’ of 2005. It has never been more applicable, or prophetic. Truthiness, as defined, is the quality of seeming to be true according to one's intuition, opinion, or perception without regard to logic, factual evidence; or the belief in what you feel to be true rather than what the facts will support. Colbert first coined this term as a satirical play on the ‘gut’ decision making by then U.S. president, George W. Bush. He later won word of the year and a Peabody Award in 2006 for it. The word of the year for 2016, a decade later, was ‘post-truth.’

As these post-truths/truthiness have continued to hold sway in conservative talk shows and news outlets, a rise in conspiracy theories and fear have resulted. These toxic echo chambers have also resulted in almost half of Americans denying evolution, and with only half of Americans believing human activity is behind climate change, and a resultant half of members of congress acting as climate-deniers.

In an Article by PBS it was found,

'55 percent of Americans, including 19 percent of Republicans, say President Trump is someone who lies.  35 percent say he is someone who tells the truth.  But, is the president

all bluster?  Nearly half of Americans, 49 percent, including 38 percent of Republicans, say foreign leaders should wait to see what the president does and not listen to what he says.'

The Rolling Stone calls this development the, “brave new world of bullshit.” And say, “Trump was elected following a campaign in which 70 percent of his statements were rated "mostly false," "false" or "pants on fire" by PolitiFact, and he has since demonstrated a penchant for spontaneously creating his own fake news with just a few keystrokes on his Blackberry.”

What is also quite relevant is not only that he lies more often than he tells the truth, but how he frames his lies, priming his audience and base. He uses lies as propaganda and a diversion, much as Adolf Hitler did. Charles M. Blow in a piece in October, pointed readers to Ivana Trump and President Trump’s connection to Mein Kampf. In an excerpt from Mein Kampf, which, according to his x-wife Ivana, was housed along with the rest of Hitler’s collected speeches in his nightstand, it reads,

'In the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than

consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie [rather] than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. . . It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. [The] grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying.

Conclusion

What all these developments show is a mistrust in societal institutions based in a failure to provide even the most basic of human needs. They show an understandable disdain for the out-group as these needs have yet to be fulfilled, with conservative media outlets readily providing scapegoats mingled with falsehoods and conspiracy. The United States of America is holding on by the skin of her teeth as her hegemonic powers age and sluff away; all while the leader of this fading hegemon displays its fading influence by taunting and provoking North Korea into a nuclear confrontation. The core identities for half of Americans are grounded in party politics which are fueled by a commodified media and multiple oppressive societal structures. There is a contempt for facts in conservative right circles that make conversations or debates based in facts implausible. The misuse of language and lack of face to face interaction in political spheres have undermined institutional norms. It is no surprise then that levels of trust in government are also at an all-time low; only nine percent of Americans reporting to have confidence in Congress. The United States is, in its current state, a whole nation of others as intergroup competition gains more ground in its predicative power. And if people aren’t grounded then in national community norms, or if they’ve been manipulated by conservative outlets, as they have in this case, little hope remains for constructive discussion based in factual world events, or even holding leaders accountable for spreading lies and making public decisions based in them. The current state of the American disunion is a well-deserved downgrade in what was once considered a democracy.