Armed non-state groups emerge to replace states that abandon caretaking for pure repression

Evidence

While there is a sense to this, it is oversimplistic, and predicates the picture on a contrast and competitor to “legitimate” and conventional state formations. I think it more compelling to understand both as representing robust, organized responses from the realm of civil society to the sort of state demise and destruction that an aggressive, militarized neoliberalism has come to signal for those state formations not passing the latter’s test for legitimacy. Here, such organizations are as much complements as competitors to states shirking their longerstanding caretaker commitment in favor overwhelmingly of their purely state repressive functionalities. — David Theo Goldberg, The Threat of Race, 652

Categorization

  • XREF: Parallels the social service provisioning noted in many governance gaps; ties to the reader’s work on how institutions behave when state capacity retreats. — connects to: Repression drives nonviolent movements to armed rebellion — Michael A. Sells, The Bridge Betrayed: Religion and…, 32; A protected outsider group dissolves when the protecting state decays — Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 294; Negative sanctions and repression typically precede and provoke collective political violence — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 4357 (+3 more)

Broader Connections