Well-designed institutions can make violence structurally unavailable rather than merely prohibited.

Evidence

Corporal punishment did not exist at Dom Sierot. This was not a rule, in the sense of a prohibition. It was a design consequence. In a community organized around the principle that children are rights-bearing individuals whose grievances deserve adjudication rather than suppression, the hit is not an available response — because the hit is, by definition, the suppression of a grievance rather than its adjudication. The system Korczak built at Dom Sierot did not need to prohibit corporal punishment, because the system had no place for it. — , The Rod and the Child, 8863

Categorization

  • SEED: Article angle: design-consequence vs. prohibition approaches to violence prevention in institutions beyond schools.
  • XREF: Echoes design-based versus rule-based governance arguments seen elsewhere in the book’s anti-corporal-punishment season. — connects to: Institutional accountability constrains violence exercised by authority figures. — , The Rod and the Child: A Global History…, 2000; Law that excludes adversaries from fighting fails to restrain their violence — Grégoire Chamayou, A Theory of the Drone, 1040; The discipline-abuse legal line may facilitate rather than prevent abuse. — , The Rod and the Child: A Global History…, 6685 (+4 more)

Broader Connections