State Crime and Resistance

Elizabeth Stanley, Jude McCulloch, Elizabeth Stanley, Jude McCulloch

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2012
• Print ISBN: 9780415691932
• eBook ISBN: 9781136233630
• Topic: Social Sciences
• Subtopic: Criminology
• Index: Social Sciences

Within criminology 'the state' is often ignored as an active participant, or represented as a neutral force. While state crime studies have proliferated, criminologists have not paid attention to the history and impact of resistance to state crime. This book recognises that crimes of the state are far more serious and harmful than crimes committed by individuals, and considers how such crimes may be contested, prevented, challenged or stopped.

Gathering together key scholars from the UK, USA, Asia, Australia and New Zealand, this book offers a deepened understanding of state crime through the practical and analytical lens of resistance. This book focuses on crimes ranging from gross violations of human rights (such as genocide, war crimes, mass killings, summary executions, torture, harsh detention and rape during war), to entrenched discrimination, unjust social policies, border controls, corruption, fraud, resource plunder and the failure to provide the regulatory environment and principled leadership necessary to deal with global warming.

As the first to focus on state crime and resistance, this collection inspires new questions as it maps the contours of previously unexplored territory. It is aimed at students and academics researching state crimes, resistance, human rights and social movements. It is also essential reading for all those interested in joining the struggles to champion ways of living that value humanity and justice over power.

1 Resistance to state crime

Elizabeth Stanley and Jude McCulloch

In the middle of even the most grotesque of state crimes, such as genocide, there are extraordinary tales of courage, rescuing and resistance. Acts of altruism, compassion and pro-social behaviour are woven into the social fabric.

(Cohen 1993: 113)

Within most criminology texts, ‘the state’ is ignored as an actor or represented as a neutral force. This occurs despite the centrality of the state in crime and justice issues, including the political acts of defining ‘crime’ and responding to those identified as ‘criminals’ or ‘victims’. From the perspective of state crime scholars, the state is also ‘criminal’. Moreover, their research demonstrates that state crimes are far more serious and harmful than other crimes. The capacity of state officials and state institutions, particularly through the police and military, to kill, maim, exploit, repress and cause widespread human suffering is unsurpassed.

Over recent years, state crime scholarship has become an increasingly active area within criminology (see, for example, Barak 1991; the British Journal of Criminology 2005 special edition; Chambliss et al. 2010; Friedrichs 1998; Green and Ward 2004; Grewcock 2008; Kauzlarich and Kramer 2000; Pickering 2005; Rothe 2009). State crime scholars have critiqued the state by challenging state-centred definitions of crime. They have illustrated how perpetrators are ‘made’; the way bystanders fail to intervene; the frequent disregard of victims; and the way state violence is typically directed at the least powerful. They have refused to accept victims of state crime as unworthy of compassion or as deserving of harsh treatment, punishment or elimination, and have exposed the psychological, social, cultural, bureaucratic and structural underpinnings of criminal states (see, for example, Cohen 2001; Huggins 2010; Stanley 2009; Tombs and Whyte 2003). In this positioning, these analyses are imbued with a sense of resistance. Nonetheless, resistance is underdeveloped and unanalysed as a fundamental aspect of state crime scholarship (although, for some discussion, see Lasslett 2012; Pickering 2002; Stanley and McCulloch 2011; Ward and Green 2000). Criminologists have generally failed to consciously consider a number of key questions related to resistance, such as: how are state crimes contested, prevented, challenged or stopped?

On one level, state crime literature has helped to confront what Stanley Cohen (2001) terms ‘denial’. Cohen's seminal work catalogues and describes the various strategies states use to justify, excuse or downplay involvement in atrocities. Naming the state as criminal and exposing the way that states work to hide or obscure state-perpetrated crimes challenges this denial. Cohen, however, is alive to numerous subtleties and the complex ways that observers or bystanders shut out confronting stories and distance themselves from taking action. People may fail to act against state crime because they are unable to conceive of any actions that might be effective. State crime scholarship, by highlighting the power and impunity of the state, without adequate attention to the ongoing history of resistance, paradoxically may consolidate state power by creating a sense of powerlessness, undermining people's confidence to act. The failure of state crime scholars to include resistance as a core aspect of the study of state crime may lead to feelings of despair, disinterest or impotence among students and other audiences and, flowing from this, states of mind that facilitate passivity, even in the face of irrefutable knowledge about state crimes.

A failure to engage with resistance is also a failure to acknowledge history ‘from below’. People's struggles against power may, as Milan Kundera (1978: 3) puts it, be ‘the struggle of memory against forgetting’. State power and impunity is always opposed in some way and by some people, and through these struggles history is made. In 2011, Time Magazine named ‘The Protester’ as ‘Person of the Year’; with the rise of new technologies, protests have been relayed in real time and have inspired others around the world. Yet protest is, of course, not new. Many of the most inspiring and dramatic milestones in the course of human history have involved protests and other acts of resistance (see, for example, Roberts and Ash 2009). It is not only the dramatic and infamous that warrant attention, however. To understand state crime and resistance, criminologists need to include the study of the everyday harms and violence that are embedded within the fabric of society. Focusing on state crimes and resistance exclusively in the context of the foremost exemplars of state crime risks overlooking the pervasive state-perpetrated violence and harms that occur as normalized, hidden or denied aspects of society, including in democratic states.

With this in mind, this collection focuses on resistance to crimes ranging from gross violations, such as genocide, war crimes, mass killings, summary executions, torture, harsh detention and rape during war, through to entrenched discrimination, unjust social policies, border controls, corruption, fraud, resource plunder and the failure to provide the regulatory environment and principled leadership necessary to deal with global warming.

The following three chapters consider the role of criminologists in resistance practices. Friedrichs (Chapter 2) reflects on the revolutions of the ‘Arab Spring’ and considers the engagement of mainstream and critical criminologists in exposing state harm and violence. Following that, Green and Ward (Chapter 3) detail the importance of civil society as a counterweight to state crime, and the role of criminologists in researching how civil societies are built and maintained in contexts of widespread state violence. Kramer (Chapter 4) calls on criminologists to speak in the ‘prophetic’ voice about global warming and to work with global movements to confront the denial and normalization of carbon emissions and environmental harm.

The collection then progresses to present a number of case studies that analyse resistance in liberal democratic as well as repressive states. Grewcock (Chapter 5) reflects on the resistance of unauthorized migrants in Australian detention and illuminates how resistance persists in the face of alienation, criminalization and abuse in bleak conditions. Nadarajah and Sentas (Chapter 6) focus on Tamil resistance to Sri Lankan state crime and consider the complicated ways that identities and campaigns are formed and managed through resistance and repression. Stanley (Chapter 7) highlights how West Papuans have resisted Indonesian-led state–corporate crimes while affirming a space for cultural identity and survival in the face of destruction and violence. Cunneen (Chapter 8) explores Indigenous Australians' resistance to systematic state-sponsored fraud in the form of ‘stolen wages’, noting the consistent failure of governments to provide adequate redress. Pantazis and Pemberton (Chapter 9) detail how the counter-terrorism agenda of the United Kingdom (UK) has been challenged by frameworks of resistance that focus on human rights, freedom and the contestation of community criminalization. White (Chapter 10) considers the tactics and strategies employed by activists in response to environmental harm, as well as the conciliatory and confrontational countermeasures used by corporations and states to deny, disrupt, accommodate or incorporate resisters and their claims. Morrison (Chapter 11) examines the use of photography in witnessing the Holocaust and reflects on the necessity of visualization and empathy in retaining a humane approach to resistance. Kauzlarich (Chapter 12) considers the role of musicians in spreading knowledge about state crimes and supporting and building resistance among audiences in the United States (US).

The final four case studies examine the value of law as a resistance tool. McCulloch and Blair (Chapter 13) illustrate how radical lawyers, involved in the establishment of Community Legal Centres in Australia, have changed the culture of law in ways that enable it to be used as a protective force against state crimes. Pickering and Weber (Chapter 14) demonstrate the capacity of courts to provide a check against state violence and harm, such as the forced deportation of asylum seekers. Rothe (Chapter 15) argues that the development of international law and criminal justice including the ‘responsibility to protect doctrine’ serves an ideological as well as a control function in relation to state crime, impunity, and the protection of civilians. Michalowski (Chapter 16) reflects on the effectiveness of resistance, arguing that the ‘master's tools’, such as the courts and law, are incapable of bringing about meaningful change to the core economic, social and political conditions that give rise to state crime. The book concludes with a short chapter by McCulloch and Stanley, as we reconsider the position of intellectuals in relation to state crime and resistance, outlining what has been accomplished and what still needs to be done.

What is resistance in the context of state crime?

Resistance ranges from the small, silent and personal through to the multitudinous, spectacular and momentous. The scope of activities that might be defined as resistance is broad (Pile 1997: 14; Urquhart 2011: 37). It may be violent or non-violent, passive or active, hidden or open, verbal or physical, spontaneous or strategic, local or global, and frequently a combination of some or all (Pickering 2002; White 2010). The contributors to this volume expose the breadth of resistance acts. These include riots, sit-ins, hunger strikes, self-harm, escapes from detention (Grewcock); marches, flag-raisings, armed guerrilla violence, traditional songs, theatrical acts (Stanley); strikes, political lobbying (Cunneen); trespassing, eco-sabotage, petitions (White); art, photography (Morrison); music, radical fashion, occupations (Kauzlarich); self-immolation, suicide, revolutions (Friedrichs); court cases (Pantazis and Pemberton; Pickering and Weber); adoption of human rights laws and policies (Pantazis and Pemberton; Rothe); legal representation, creative legal information, street theatre (McCulloch and Blair); Internet campaigns, strategic networking, street demonstrations (Nadarajah and Sentas); mass social movements (Michalowski); and research and education (Green and Ward; Kramer).

In its focus on the nature and dynamics of resistance, this collection extends state crime scholarship, beyond illustrating and reflecting upon the destructive power of the state or the experience of victimization, towards recognition of the power of people to challenge state impunity through acknowledgement, accountability, redress and prevention. The contributions are designed to provide insight and inspiration without underplaying the enormous challenges and difficulties. The contingent nature of ‘successful’ resistance is acknowledged, as is the heavy toll it often takes on individuals and communities. There are no easy lessons. History does not repeat itself, although injustice does. Each struggle against state crime is unique and each generation finds new ways to resist. Rapid changes in technology have provided new tools for resistance, exemplified in the ‘Facebook revolts’ of the Arab Spring (Friedrichs), the use of WikiLeaks to counter state secrecy (Green and Ward) and the role of the Internet in enabling communications among, and the mobilization of, global audiences (Stanley; White). While younger generations can draw upon the experience of those who went before, states and institutions also learn, developing new ways to deny events or to co-opt people and struggles. Tactics, tools and strategies that worked at one time will not necessarily have the same impact when used again (McCulloch and Blair).

What are the criteria for resistance?

The context of resistance to state crime changes not only from place to place but also over time: states differ; socio-cultural understandings of state violence and harms vary; new tools and technologies emerge to victimize, incapacitate or enable people; networks, courts and laws develop to counter as well as facilitate denial and impunity, and so on. Yet the fundamentals remain the same. We identify four essential elements of resistance: opposition, intention, communication and transformation.

Opposition is a central element of resistance. Resistance to state crime may oppose a regime, an economic system, or particular practices, cultures, laws or events that are perceived as unjust, harmful or damaging. Some contend that the word ‘resistance’ should be reserved only for acts that constitute opposition to something. For instance, Abowitz (2000) contrasts acts that are an assertion of something with acts that are a resistance to something. In considering resistance to state crime, we argue that it should include assertive or creative acts. That is, opposition linked to resistance is not simply critique as it can also be productive or creative. Resistance can be about becoming or creating something – it may produce alternatives for harmful products or processes, such as the development of new energies to combat global warming; it may reinvigorate traditions or affirm values, such as cultural identity, integrity or a sense of self (Bargh 2007; Blagg 2008); it can invoke a competing claim of universalism or attempt to set the boundaries of a ‘viable’ or ‘liveable’ life (Butler 2000). Alternatives can be imagined, embodied or produced.

For some, resistance allows new forms of subjectivity to emerge beyond those constructed by the state (see Foucault 1982; cf. Pickett 1996). While the state may be viewed, in an Althusserian sense, as the ‘site and stake’ of struggles, some groups or individuals seek to move beyond the state. In this regard, it is crucial to understand that, as a result of the cultural, social and political shifts of history, divergent meanings attach to state institutions. In addition, some groups hold ‘radically incommensurate interpretations’ of past experiences (Blagg 2008: 47). Living according to values that have historical, social, cultural and personal resonance may, according to our definition, be resistance; however, for those living by these values, it may be simply living an appropriate life or even just living. For some, to survive – culturally, psychologically or even biologically – may require acts of everyday resistance.

Intention is another central part of resistance. Resistance is opposition with social, moral or political intent (Abowitz 2000). Intention, even if not directly articulated, is crucial. Without it, any act ‘against the state’ – from opportunistic rioting to tax evasion – could be labelled resistance. We argue that, to be defined as resistance, an ‘event’ (or an omission) requires some level of consciousness or human agency. In resisting, people act on their conscience and put themselves ‘on the line’. Thus, intention reframes mere opposition into morally and politically meaningful acts (Giroux 1983: 106–11).

The third essential element of resistance is that it is a form of communication. Communicating, or sending messages, about state crime is a means to challenge denial and state control over...

Table of contents

• Cover
• State Crime and Resistance
• Routledge studies in crime and society
• Full Title
• Copyright
• Dedication
• Contents
• Notes on contributors
• Acknowledgements
• List of acronyms and abbreviations
• 1 Resistance to state crime
• 2 Resisting state crime as a criminological project in the context of the Arab Spring
• 3 Civil society, resistance and state crime
• 4 Public criminology and the responsibility to speak in the prophetic voice concerning global warming
• 5 The great escape: refugees, detention and resistance
• 6 The politics of state crime and resistance: self-determination in Sri Lanka
• 7 Resistance to state-corporate crimes in West Papua
• 8 The race to defraud: state crime and the immiseration of Indigenous people
• 9 ‘Frameworks of resistance’: challenging the UK's securitization agenda
• 10 Environmental activism and resistance to state-corporate crime
• 11 Witnessing the gorgon: remarks on normative visuality in confronting state crime
• 12 Music as resistance to state crime and violence
• 13 Law for justice: the history of Community Legal Centres in Australia
• 14 Hardening the rule of law and asylum seekers: exporting risk and the judicial censure of state illegality
• 15 A global resistance movement? From human rights to international criminal justice
• 16 The master's tools: can supranational law confront crimes of powerful states?
• 17 Beyond state crime
• Index