Whose violence, whose security? Can violence reduction and security work for poor, excluded and vulnerable people?

Abstract

This paper probes behind the assumptions underpinning the violence reduction agendas of the UN and the World Bank: that all forms of violence are commensurate and fit neatly into causal models; that violence is 'development in reverse' and inseparable from state fragility; and that security is a self-evident public good. It presents a framework to classify global, state and non-state or local violences and the interactions amongst them. It suggests that the starting point for any evaluation of security as well as violence reduction should be the vernacular understandings and day-today experience of poor, excluded and vulnerable people, including those living at insurgent margins. Whosoever contracts with violence-and every politician does-must live with its specific consequences. Max Weber, Politics as a Vocation