Afterword: Violence and the State in South Asia
In reflecting on the contributions to this collection, the afterword outlines three ways of understanding violence—direct physical force, structural violence and cultural or symbolic violence—and relates these to Steven Lukes’ three faces of power. It revisits Weber’s definition of the modern state...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Asian journal of social science 2017-01, Vol.45 (6), p.779-788 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 788 |
---|---|
container_issue | 6 |
container_start_page | 779 |
container_title | Asian journal of social science |
container_volume | 45 |
creator | Gellner, David N. |
description | In reflecting on the contributions to this collection, the afterword outlines three ways of understanding violence—direct physical force, structural violence and cultural or symbolic violence—and relates these to Steven Lukes’ three faces of power. It revisits Weber’s definition of the modern state as claiming a monopoly of the legitimate use of the first kind of violence, and contrasts that with the ways in which the actual practice of South Asian politics implies or requires violence. The example of state and non-state violence in Nepal in 2015 is used to illustrate these themes. This example brings out, as several contributions do, the importance of borders as violence-provoking sites of state sensitivity. |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2008349674</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>26567214</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>26567214</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-j504-578ad63d5bc881e50033f0fec7fd7661d55cf96d40add64c2a29b61340ffa0c13</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNotjU1rAjEUAIO00K3tT-jJc-Alee8lOYpYWxB68b7EfECXtqvJivjvK-hpLsPMTHRaKy2NI_sgOkXsJDr0T-K5tQFAMXvXiW5ZplzPY00v4rGEn5Zf75yL3ft6t_qQ26_N52q5lQMBSrIuJDaJ9tE5lQnAmAIlR1uSZVaJKBbPCSGkxBh10H7PyiCUEiAqMxeLW_ZQx-Mpt6kfxlP9ux57DeAMerZ4td5u1tCmsfaH-v0b6qXXTGy1QvMPvMc7Hg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2008349674</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Afterword: Violence and the State in South Asia</title><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><creator>Gellner, David N.</creator><creatorcontrib>Gellner, David N.</creatorcontrib><description>In reflecting on the contributions to this collection, the afterword outlines three ways of understanding violence—direct physical force, structural violence and cultural or symbolic violence—and relates these to Steven Lukes’ three faces of power. It revisits Weber’s definition of the modern state as claiming a monopoly of the legitimate use of the first kind of violence, and contrasts that with the ways in which the actual practice of South Asian politics implies or requires violence. The example of state and non-state violence in Nepal in 2015 is used to illustrate these themes. This example brings out, as several contributions do, the importance of borders as violence-provoking sites of state sensitivity.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1568-4849</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2212-3857</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Leiden: BRILL</publisher><subject>Borders ; Political violence ; State ; Violence</subject><ispartof>Asian journal of social science, 2017-01, Vol.45 (6), p.779-788</ispartof><rights>KONINKLIJKE BRILL NV, LEIDEN, 2017</rights><rights>Copyright Brill Academic Publishers, Inc. 2017</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/26567214$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/26567214$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,800,33755,57998,58231</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Gellner, David N.</creatorcontrib><title>Afterword: Violence and the State in South Asia</title><title>Asian journal of social science</title><description>In reflecting on the contributions to this collection, the afterword outlines three ways of understanding violence—direct physical force, structural violence and cultural or symbolic violence—and relates these to Steven Lukes’ three faces of power. It revisits Weber’s definition of the modern state as claiming a monopoly of the legitimate use of the first kind of violence, and contrasts that with the ways in which the actual practice of South Asian politics implies or requires violence. The example of state and non-state violence in Nepal in 2015 is used to illustrate these themes. This example brings out, as several contributions do, the importance of borders as violence-provoking sites of state sensitivity.</description><subject>Borders</subject><subject>Political violence</subject><subject>State</subject><subject>Violence</subject><issn>1568-4849</issn><issn>2212-3857</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><recordid>eNotjU1rAjEUAIO00K3tT-jJc-Alee8lOYpYWxB68b7EfECXtqvJivjvK-hpLsPMTHRaKy2NI_sgOkXsJDr0T-K5tQFAMXvXiW5ZplzPY00v4rGEn5Zf75yL3ft6t_qQ26_N52q5lQMBSrIuJDaJ9tE5lQnAmAIlR1uSZVaJKBbPCSGkxBh10H7PyiCUEiAqMxeLW_ZQx-Mpt6kfxlP9ux57DeAMerZ4td5u1tCmsfaH-v0b6qXXTGy1QvMPvMc7Hg</recordid><startdate>20170101</startdate><enddate>20170101</enddate><creator>Gellner, David N.</creator><general>BRILL</general><general>Brill Academic Publishers, Inc</general><scope>7U4</scope><scope>7UB</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>WZK</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20170101</creationdate><title>Afterword</title><author>Gellner, David N.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-j504-578ad63d5bc881e50033f0fec7fd7661d55cf96d40add64c2a29b61340ffa0c13</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Borders</topic><topic>Political violence</topic><topic>State</topic><topic>Violence</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Gellner, David N.</creatorcontrib><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><jtitle>Asian journal of social science</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Gellner, David N.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Afterword: Violence and the State in South Asia</atitle><jtitle>Asian journal of social science</jtitle><date>2017-01-01</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>45</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>779</spage><epage>788</epage><pages>779-788</pages><issn>1568-4849</issn><eissn>2212-3857</eissn><abstract>In reflecting on the contributions to this collection, the afterword outlines three ways of understanding violence—direct physical force, structural violence and cultural or symbolic violence—and relates these to Steven Lukes’ three faces of power. It revisits Weber’s definition of the modern state as claiming a monopoly of the legitimate use of the first kind of violence, and contrasts that with the ways in which the actual practice of South Asian politics implies or requires violence. The example of state and non-state violence in Nepal in 2015 is used to illustrate these themes. This example brings out, as several contributions do, the importance of borders as violence-provoking sites of state sensitivity.</abstract><cop>Leiden</cop><pub>BRILL</pub><tpages>10</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1568-4849 |
ispartof | Asian journal of social science, 2017-01, Vol.45 (6), p.779-788 |
issn | 1568-4849 2212-3857 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2008349674 |
source | Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; Sociological Abstracts; Jstor Complete Legacy |
subjects | Borders Political violence State Violence |
title | Afterword: Violence and the State in South Asia |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-19T14%3A37%3A25IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Afterword:%20Violence%20and%20the%20State%20in%20South%20Asia&rft.jtitle=Asian%20journal%20of%20social%20science&rft.au=Gellner,%20David%20N.&rft.date=2017-01-01&rft.volume=45&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=779&rft.epage=788&rft.pages=779-788&rft.issn=1568-4849&rft.eissn=2212-3857&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E26567214%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2008349674&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=26567214&rfr_iscdi=true |