State Violence Sociology

Police acting without a sense of fear in regards to punishment is an unfortunately common occurrence throughout various socioeconomically challenged communities of the world. A complex set of systemic forces which allow individual officers to behave freely and without punishment further promote state violence, as the lack of penalty for individual officers perpetuates such cycle. According to Keenga-Yamahtta Taylor, the structure of state violence as whole must be examined in order to gain a better understanding of the channels which allow individual officers, or even particular police departments to work above the law and without consequence (Taylor 167). Ethnographic investigation into such realities offers a more holistic comprehension,

As Jauregui stated, “Police violence in UP is ubiquitous and woven into the fabric of everyday sociality” (Jauregui 90). The conditions of state violence operating with a sense of social tolerance provokes the police to abuse such powers, which when stretched too far, are at times disapproved of by the media, as well as civilians. When state violence is questioned however, the police fall back on the notion of skirting ethical and moral lines for the good of society, as they often claim that in order for them to maintain a “clean” society, they must break ethical boundaries and operate in a “dirty” fashion (Jauregui 65). While direct pressure from civilians at times demands violence from individual officers, indirect pressure from the state demanding that officers complete their work by whatever means necessary also leads to police brutality by officers. This structure places officers between civilians and the state both demanding action, all the while, the officers are often left without proper resources to complete their jobs. With a commitment to satisfy civilians as well as the state, officers turn to jugaad, as a way to make up for the lack of resources to maintain a “clean”

At the center of this issue lies class division and the mundane assignments tasked to French police, namely the anti-crime units which Fassin often worked with. As such monotonous work was contrary to the often imagined life of a police officer, an alternate fantasy war, as well as an illusionary enemy had to be created for younger recruits. As Fassin wrote, “For 20 years, those expressions of intolerance and that fantasy of war had been maintained, and even fostered, by governments that consistently returned to the themes of both national identity in danger, and the Republic under threat.” (Fassin 44). This mode of thinking brought about an “us versus them” mentality, which aids in promoting a false sense of reasoning for policing, as well as a division between civilians living in poorer neighborhoods opposed to less urban neighborhoods, or neighborhoods which are better off