Critique Of The Galtung 's Concept Of Structural Violence

2627 Words11 Pages
Critique of the Galtung’s concept of structural violence:
Violence is a concept which can be felt more aptly than defined. The word ‘violence’ rightly mentions the causation of injury or harm.It is an umbrella term that incorporates a broad range of violence.Different political analysts and psychologists have defined violence in their own institutionalized way. Violence is the opposite of Peace as peace is defined as “absence of violence”. Here violence becomes a broad concept and demands to be distinguished. Johan Galtung, defines violence as 'the difference between the potential and the actual, between what could have been, and what is '. He has broadened the road of violence by dividing it into three parts depending on the basis of how they operate:Personal or Direct Violence,Structural Violence and Cultural Violence.
Direct violence is the manifestation of the anger or frustration and the intention is to strike the person directly. The mode of manifestation can be both verbal and non-verbal.
This type of violence is most threatening and fearful type because human beings are being harmed directly using actions or words.
Cultural violence can be defined as a violence that is justified by using certain aspects of the culture. This violence is invisible but there is a clear intention to harm or even kill.Basically,this violence is used as a justification to direct and structural form of violence. Structural Violence emerges out of the creation of social structures and

More about Critique Of The Galtung 's Concept Of Structural Violence

Get Access