The Science Work
Site is for sale:
Category: History

Violence rationing

violence normirovaniye *

V.I. Krasikov **

It is known that in Paris 16th century of a plebs slow burning of cats was popular entertainment and the nobility, and: they were suspended on a rope over on -

the bridge with a fire and slowly lowered in fire. While the audience modulatingly laughed loudly, animals heart-rendingly cried out and howled from pain, opalivatsya, zape-

* Article is prepared with financial support and within performance of a grant of the Russian Federal Property Fund project No. 07-06-00067-a.

** Published article in our magazine "Crime as the sotsioantropologichesky phenomenon (2005. — No. 1).

be heated and, at last, charred. After representation the cheerful and excited public among which there were also persons of royal blood dispersed in pleasant mood on houses and the next tavernam1. Pleases that it were nevertheless not bloody gladiatorial fights. Over time feelings of people, apparently, were considerably softened and humanized. But whether means it that pleasure from contemplation of violence left human life? Perhaps it was denaturalized, took virtual shape of modern criminal novels, blockbusters and thrillers of serial killers and maniacs and at any time again will return, and the humanistic film which is pulling together human nature, inclined to violence, with a deafening crash will tear how already was in the first half of the 20th century?

What is violence in the world of the person as far as it is necessary, is effective and as it is regulated? What factors and how they affect dynamics of violence? Whether we became more humane, more gentle in the feelings and whether our cruelty decreased? These questions will also be clues of our further reasonings.

Where there is a competition, a meryaniye of forces, there is a phenomenon based on force, as in the form of direct physical collisions, and, what is more often, in the form of demonstrations of force — for an influence okazyvaniye at formation and redistribution of resources. All this is, it seems, connected mainly with the world live where among a great number of potential applicants for limited supplies of power and reproduction and there are closely bound violence and aggression.

In the biological world the violence is directly connected with physical demonstration of force and to a lesser extent — with symbolical actions. Here it, first of all — a collision phase in aggression expansion. Consciousness extremely complicates and diversifies social processes that is connected with such characteristics of human intelligence as steady long-term memory and unique abilities of instant coding and decoding of values of behavior of people around. The need for physical collision for definition of the strongest — for the benefit of redistribution or leadership — in most cases already disappears, there are quite enough comparisons and estimates of physical potency and a strong-willed tone in ritual collisions demonstrations. Already at high-organized (gregarious) animals the physical collisions are limited to configuration of hierarchies "domination submission" by means of ritualizovanny behavior. Respectively, violence at social animals, including the person, can be interpreted as process of imposing of the will by another through demonstration of force.

What will? Will to the power where the last also forms a basis and biopoliticians in fauna, and politicians at the person. Violence always policy. It is possible to speak only about its levels: macro - — for big groups or micro — for an individualnobytovy cell. But everywhere violence is driven by the idea of search of leaders and hierarchies.

Aggression and violence, thus, integral elements of structuring social relations. The unseemly reputation to them was created by the thinkers of radical humanistic, democratic sense (from Russo to Fromm) who wrote off everything sins for "brutal" sociality. In this tradition the right, culture, morals, social norm — measures, ways of the organization of violence, alienation of a part of freedom of one public force in favor of another.

However there is a so-called useful and necessary violence. It is intended for social whole, for formation of individual self-conscious warm-heartedness. This organized mental coercion what, actually, any community — "impersonal reservoirs of the external bringing-up will is also based on, the "decencies" which are behind imperceptible shape and "step", shown in a flow of "orders" and "laws", supported by simple and impersonal "condemnation", fastened with action of the whole system of organized institutions" 2. Respectively, in understanding of the law and norm to the forefront there is not a restriction and violence, and "a good samozastavleniye" and suppression. "Law", "norm" — the formulas of mature sense of justice fixed by reason, which are put forward by will, going to help the member of society who is bringing up himself. Physical impact here — a last resort of the forcing coercion stopping the sincere act of hatred and hostility seeking to escape outside and to objektivirovatsya in irreparable acts.

Thus, there are socially regulated violence and crime, violence forbidden, supporting limits of norms and laws. Both types are closely dialectically interconnected:

— the "allowed" violence is intended to stop a sociopathy and to maintain the social balance set by historical rationality;

— a sociopathy are born, on the one hand, as an emansipatsionny protest against severity of laws, with another — as a revolt of passions and irresponsibility.

Really, a sociopathy, the general pattern of violation of the rights of other people — the constant satellite of human development. It is shown in chronic falsity, impulsiveness, aggression, lack of empathy and a remorse. Sociopaths — "deceivers" among normally socialized individuals, their strategy are to benefit from

altruistic installations of others, having pretended that similar motives move them. The genetic predisposition distributed among naseleniya3 and depending also on degree of adversity of the sociocultural environment is the cornerstone of a sociopathy. However natural sociopaths are adjoined sometimes by normally socialized people owing to the fact that they, first, have no spontaneous love for work and, secondly, arguments of reason are often powerless against their passions.

Violence, thus, is connected with the most important sotsioobrazuyushchy processes of generation of social hierarchies and formatting of a social order, has the objective logic out of moral estimates. At the same time we, being beings moral, we cannot remain indifferent to own hostel, not excepting its retrospectives. Therefore we will address the questions "normalization" of violence — its historical rationing, restriction and symbolization.

From what starting point the violence evolution takes off and whether features of an initial state leave on it a mark? The first myth created here — a dichotomy "harmony violence". Since Modern times in understanding of initial characteristics of civilization advance two opposite points of view, russoistsky and gobbsovsky prevail forward. Or "the noble savage philosopher", or the individual who affektivnoagressivno is adjusted, "war of all against all". And both of these positions found the real ethnographic confirmations: Bushmen, whose peacefulness is sung not by one generation etnologov4, or the broken skulls of Australopithecuses and a kannibalstvo of Maori.

Possibly, originally was both. So, M. Meade notes coexistence in one ecological and sociocultural space of Papua New Guinea of absolutely different communities: individualistic, with a cult of vigor and aggressive initiative at nationality Manus, and collectivist, with a cult of "boundless trustfulness, mildness and dedication" at mountain arapeshey5. She is convinced that the measure of distribution of activist and aggressive and passive and contemplate psychotypes, in principle, has to be identical everywhere, but the installations which here are culturally developing then deform improper for themselves in a certain homogenizing direction.

Noted extremes, undoubtedly, took place. They are more noticeable, grab a foreign look quicker. However in general there was more likely an ambivalent, i.e. boundary, constantly fluctuating situation.

Rigid hierarchies meet strong leader-domi-Nantes and the strict violently supported order, according to biopolity-

ki6, the lowest primacies, but also at them have friable, unstructured associations, especially at young individuals. The highest humanoid "are more democratic", here the lowest monkeys have no accurate hierarchy as. So, at gorillas the senior serebristospinny males have a high social rank. At anthropoids, especially at the closest to us chimpanzees and bonobo, prevail cooperative horizontals: the caress, game behavior, a grooming, rituals of greetings and giftings of each other food making disperse type of society. Are characteristic of the last sprayed liderstvo7, the labile structure of groups. However, and it should be emphasized, significant decrease in level of violence in kinship groups was immediately compensated by its escalation outside: at a chimpanzee systematic destructive aggression between packs, acts of deliberate cruelty, massacre of strangers, nothing inferior to our valors in this field are observed.

So, at start of civilization development we would hardly see unambiguity — the philosophizing cherub or the blood-thirsty cannibal. Sotsiobiologiya, the ethology, evolutionary psychology believe that our ancestors could be more likely mobile, dependent on ecology and resources in which the unstable balance of lines of tolerance and aggression reproducing the previous state transitional a hominid would be observed.

The tolerance harmonizing communities is a kinship and neighbour's altruism, tendency to an indoktrination (assimilation of common goals as the), a ritualization of intra communal aggression. The xenophobia derivative of the reached high level of warmth and tenderness to relatives; territoriality and domination of males — here the lines fraught with the subsequent blossoming of violence.

Paradoxically, but positive causes negative, the tolerance existed only due to carrying out of intolerance inside outside. Decrease in level of violence became possible not only due to gradual transformation of the imperious relations, their legal orderings within political communities (public entities), i.e. by means of restriction of samtsovy (aggressive) qualities of will to the power and creation of hierarchies. It became possible more due to change deep, root, in fact women's, structures: altruism only in "a close circle" (care), conservatism of fascination prejudices ("live for today"); due to gradual "expansion" of humanity to universal and development of idealism of utopias, critical, reflexive faculties.

We will risk to assume that were the major factors normalizing violence in human civilization history turnover poly-

tichesky communities (a dogosudarstvennost — the early state — the mature state) and transformation of world outlook and value formats of existence of people (standard views gave way to search of the purpose and meaning of life).

Dialectics of this area is as follows: though the sotsiomateriya including an institutionalization of the imperious relations is primary, however the idealistic (world outlook) factor is the catalyst of high-quality transformations of organizational aspect of evolution of society.

Other myth which developed in an explanation of start of civilizations — imputation of fault for untwisting of a flywheel of social violence to settled farmers, but not peaceful hunters, collectors and nomads. Say, the settled life, a binding to oases of fertile lands, impossibility to disperse at the conflict, unlike dynamic, labile hunters, collectors and nomads, became the reason of the forced extreme density and origin of despotic, cruel early state hierarchies of agricultural civilizations. Similar happens also at the animals placed in zoos. But more appropriate analogy to people whose freedom is limited looks and it is controlled tightly (prison, the concentration camp, partly army, "educational" houses). For the rest an argument "it is impossible to disperse" does not maintain any criticism. First, as the history of the agrarian states with the most rigid orders shows, an exit always is: it is possible to get over to live in colony, boundary regions (Cossacks). At the same time the rigidity of orders intensifies their internal processes. Secondly, in any society it is impossible to escape from himself, i.e. from the origin and dwelling. The person without support of large social whole had a dangerous and disastrous share of the derelict and outcast — even in the Great steppe quickly all knew of such destiny in the smallest details.

First, recorded by historians and cultural anthropologists, the wave of violence is connected with transition from a matriarkhatny (matrilokalny) form of the organization of patrimonial life to patriarchy. It was the first social revolution and the first mass violence, not former intergregarious or trans-species wars, and violence "the against the" on a certain mentally fixed ideological preferences. Male chauvinism in this plan was probably the first form "class", or "ideological", the consciousness directed against the by birth, but another on a way of life, psychology. The situation had a talk so-called men's houses with own ideology of superiority of men, secret ceremonies, special language and systematic acts of intimidation of women and not entering into the called structure with -

male nephews. At the same time men's houses were also one of the first forms politogene-for. In reply there were women's unions, but they did not become the effective opponent. Why? Not clearly not to take for an explanation foggy verbalizations of historians about already far come "steam-tsializatsii of work and property". Anyway, it is possible in the principle to agree with radical feminists that establishment of millennial enslavement of women — up to the middle of the 20th century which was marked by the feminist revolution was a result of these oppositions.

The unwritten nature of the societies remote from us on tens of thousands of years provided a veil of forgetfulness on those events. However, if social revolutions and civil wars in which there is a change of property and the power are followed by mass "bloodbaths", then it is possible to guess scales, duration and systematicity of violence when the watershed of interests passed on a marriage bed and the general children's cradle only. Yet the civilization which we connect with the city, writing and the state was not formed actually, and the man usurping a historical role of "person" already made real in fact, but not the bible and metaphorical act of fall — made violence way of existence with similar: treachery of mother, wife and daughter through a vverzheniye them in position of the speaking tools, genital cars and means of sensual pleasure.

The following large wave of social violence is also connected with a context further poly-togeneza — transition from a social potestarnykh of communities (the power functionally does not separate from the people) to new forms of domination, early statehood. Speak about three ways, stages politogeneza8: military and hierarchical, plutocratic and aristocratic. Through progress in war, ability to play an active role in ceremonial exchange ("prestige economy") or by means of outstanding economic abilities to accumulation of material resources in violently growing agricultural economies, at the corresponding fixing in tradition of family inheritance and a sacralization one part of people monopolizes resources and centralizes sprayed among professionals (the military leader, the sorcerer, the elder wise man, the priest, the skillful handicraftsman, the farmer, the Aesculapian and so forth) the power.

The new systems of domination based on monopolization of resources (through taxation and concentration of means the cities) and centralization of the power (allocation of separate groups, as a rule, of the hereditary carriers of the power which are not perceived as a part of the population) needed the large volume of severely ostentatious, instructively cruel violence. These new systems of domination, kind of

is more frightening perfectly and grandiosely they did not look, were still very unstable education, a certain compromise between archaic communal structures and new growths of the hereditary dominating clans or castes. Taxation had a tribute appearance, the territoriality coincided with the people living on them, the state came down to the personal and vassal relations, was absent or the professional bureaucracy was still small. There were no stable attributive institutes of violence also — mass regular army, police and prisons. But the most important, the central power operated not rather homogeneous people, citizens, the nation, and the same tribal, ethnic communities as independent complete subjects against which early forms of statehood had no adequate levers of control.

Communities could be intimidated, subdued exclusively gathered troops, for the rest it was necessary to agree. Successful dynasties, successful nomadic vozhdestvo created oases of ancient cultures and at the same time area of superdense, deliberately cruel violence which as clamps held these fragile hierarchies falling sooner or later in feudalism — a relic of the patrimonial power of the leader of the tribe. "Actually, feudalism per se can be considered as the political structure arising when falling the empire in an hour, unhappy for it. So was in Western Europe, in Egypt and China during various mezhdudinastichesky periods and also in many other societies, including Persia, Byzantium, India and Japan at the different moments of their history" 9.

Normalization of violence in early phases poly-togeneza, most likely, was perceived by people as "unprecedented degradation of morals, traditions, customs and justice per se", transition from egalitarian orders to frank injustice, uzurpation of the power and violence by the most ambitious, cruel men was everywhere made.

With the instrument of normalization of violence tens of thousands of years prior to a patriarkhatny revolution it is also watered - genesis was talion: violence has to be equivalent, irrespective of the subject and a situation — "an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth" — and any unnecessary cruelty. But as soon as there is a religious ideology transforming the myth, and, unlike the last, serving already as the instrument of consecration of new, obviously unfair systems of the power, norms of the use of violence become odious, i.e. serve the interests of separate groups, and is more frightening cruel.

With transition to social hierarchies and early statehood talion loses former universal character: the social equality acts as an indispensable condition of equal punishment

parties. Some ideas are imposed, doing them artificially supervaluable, and the neglect stated by someone to them ruthlessly is stopped. At this particular time appear, and in various places of an oykumena, Draconian laws and barbaric practicians. By the way, the naritsatel-nost of the mentioned laws immortalized a name of quite real political figure and Athenian legislator Drakont (7th century BC). Its laws "are known for the unreasonable cruelty: the stolen vegetables and fruits bore the same punishment that patricides — the death penalty". The ideology of the legislator is remarkable: "When Drakont was asked — Plutarch writes — why he for the most part of crimes appointed the death penalty, he as speak, answered that minor offenses, according to him, deserve this punishment, and for large it did not find bigger" 10. And Drakont managed to convince others of expediency of the approach abolished later by Lycurgus.

In laws of Hammurapi the death penalty is mentioned in 30 cases, and it is painful: burning, drowning, a posazheniye on a stake. Manu's laws in India extended chlenovreditelsky punishments to "genitals, a belly, language, both hands, both legs, eyes, a nose, both ears". Branding practiced — on a forehead of the drunkard burned out the sign of the seller of alcohol, the forehead of the thief was decorated with the image dog lapy11.

The Bible which is considered as the primary source of moral values often eulogizes the genocide which is carried out by the bogoizbranny people conducted by Sabaoth. It also orders death as punishment for nonviolent actions (idolatry, homosexuality, blasphemy, an adultery, insult of parents, work on Saturdays). We hear familiar barbaric motives in Denmark now — in appeals by death to authors of caricatures of the prophet Mokhkhamed. Of course, it is impossible to call behavior of caricaturists moral, however the frenzied fanaticism devout gives rise to serious alarm, as well as destruction by Talibs of statues of Buddha in Afghanistan.

Certainly, Jews not an exception. Cruelty as entertainment, tortures and mutilation as routine punishments, the death penalty for minor offenses and differences in opinions — gained such experience all leading civilizations of the West and East up to Modern times. The main reason here — specific idea of human nature before processing by her social and religious education. Other important reason — a condition of the state and its contractor — the population. Only in the most powerful, large and rich empires of antiquity, and only during the periods of their blossoming, the point of the state development close to modern bureaucracy, institutes of division of the authorities, regular army, police was reached and

prisons. However and the population in these empires rose in the ethnocultural relation: ellinizirovatsya, latinisen, exposed to Christianization, Islamization, in other words, with different degree of success gradually evolved from ethno-territorial communities to a certain homogeneous structure, with the general culture and the system of values.

These processes were very unstable and unsuccessful: empires arose and fell, and inert, self-sufficient communities existed in the closed invariance during the millennia that allowed O. Spengler to call them "fellakha" 12, unlike the "historical" people which found the idea which is embodied in the national state or religion. Similar "fellakh" made the majority of empires except for the state-building people whose real superiority did not promote homogeneity of empires. The maintenance of big government, army, police, prisons assumes the patriotic uniform population sharing the state national idea. If there is no it, then the barbaric cruelty is rather effective.

Perhaps, the main difference of early statehood from mature, arising only during Modern times, that it was perceived as the personal structure identified with a concrete dynasty. Modern understanding of the state is identified with the idea of the fatherland, the territory and rather homogeneous ethnic community. In sheet Greece, republican Rome the first forms of mature statehood are already observed that, however, an exception of the general rule.

It is known that formation economic (the uniform market), political (absolutism, centralization) and spiritual (language, literature) bases of the modern nations happens in the Late Middle Ages and Modern times. New, ethnically homogenized from a set of localizations, the mature statehood finding the main sign — monopolization of violence in the form of three structures is inherent in community: regular National -


ache armies, police and tyurmy13.

Medieval wars, as well as the state, had pronounced personal character: dynasties battled for own interests and justice. Territories of the country were also considered as personal possession, and citizens were in the relations "the vassal — the sovereign", limiting personal freedom. Mercenaries, regular state armies only by 18th century are constituted as independent social groups of professional soldiers, they are not associated only with the nobility any more and are connected by a debt not with a dynasty, and with the state. Being on service of the state, they are obliged to reflect armed attack of the same employees of other state.

In XVP-XVSh of centuries the army separated from police, there was an institute of maintenance of public order which is earlier sprayed between local government officers under the contract: lamplighters, night watchmen, inspectors of the markets, city policemen, etc. The prison turns from exclusive, applied because of high cost only to bigwigs, into the mass correcting violence. Ordinary people were easier to be executed before (from here and excessive cruelty at punishment for very frivolous, from the modern point of view, crime) or to banish on galleys and a hard labor.

The new ideology (education, liberalism) approves the concept of the contractual structure of the state, reasonable management, control and correction of stray. Strictly dosed, verified violent acts in relation to stumbled — isolation, enforced silence, the strict schedule, work — allows the pastor - to the state to return lost sheep.

Violence is finally usurped by the state which receives carte blanche on its rationing, a dosage and formatting of the social field in the sense of qualification of what to consider violence, and that "protection of the fatherland", "restoration of a constitutional order" or "fight against the social evil". Attempts of smaller groups and certain people to use violence in the purposes are branded: such acts are called a revolt, a revolt, crime, gangsterism, civil war or terrorism.

Violence does not decrease, it only stops being in sight, accepts bureaucratic, ordinary and legitimate character. Violence becomes anonymous, functional ("nothing personal — service!"), ordinary, loses an ekstraordinarnost that can prepare the population for non-standard actions of the state (not to persons like Nero or Ivan il Terribile) when it becomes the carrier of any messianic ideology, like fascist or communistic.

1 See: A History of Violence by Steven Pinker//& lt; index.html>.
2 I.A. I.A. About a zastavleniye and violence//& lt;>.
3 A ratio of men and women in distribution of sociopaths 20 to 1, and traditional and anthropological carriers of violence — young men at the age of 15-25 years.
4 See: Gilburd O.A. Sotsiobiologiya and war (the report at the scientific conference "The Fourth World War", Moscow, November 6-8, 2005)//& lt; id=193>.
5 See: M. Kultur's MFA and world of the childhood. Chosen works. — M.: Main edition of east literature of Nauka publishing house, 1988. — Page 221, 294.
6 See: A.V. Oleskin. Biopolicy. Political potential of modern biology: philosophical, politological and practical aspects. — M.: MSU, 2001.

> The individual, the most competent of that sphere where there was a problem becomes 7 the leader for a while: in hunting, war, craft, settling of disputes, etc.

8 See: History of primitive society. Klas-soobrazovaniye era. — M.: Nauka, 1988. — Page 227-247.
9 M. Kreveld. Blossoming and decline of the state. — M.: IRISEN, 2006. — Page 70.
10 Tsit. on: Chernihiv Z.M. General history of state and law (history of state and law of foreign countries): textbook. — the 2nd prod., reslave. and additional — M.: The higher school, 1983. — Page 49.
11 In the same place. — Page 35, 39.
12 See: O. Spengler. Decline of Europe: essays of morphology of world history. — Minsk: LLC Popurri, 1999. — T. 2: World-wide and historical prospects. — Page 216.
13 See: M. Kreveld. Decree. soch. — Page 195-212.
George Ballard
Other scientific works: