Devlet ve Vijilantizm İlişkileri Üzerine Bir Tipoloji

Abstract

Modern devlet düşüncesi, liberal temellerinden yola çıkarak şiddet kullanma tekelinin sadece devlete ait olabileceği ön kabulüne dayanmaktadır. Bu bakış açısı Avrupa merkezci bir yaklaşımı içerisinde barındırsa da modern devletin iddia ettiği mutlak egemenlik düşüncesi, şiddet kullanma tekelinin kesin olarak devlette olması gerekliliği üzerine kurulmuştur. Ancak devletin, güvenlik ve düzeni, her zaman ve her koşulda sadece kendisinin sağladığını ifade etmek oldukça güçtür. Devletin bu temel ihtiyaçları karşılayamaması durumunda vatandaşların güvenlik ve düzen sağlama süreçlerine aktif olarak katıldıkları görülmektedir. Vatandaşların güvenlik ve düzenin sağlanmasına yönelik bu aktif katılımları da vijilantizm (vigilantism) olarak adlandırılmaktadır. Vijilantizmin asıl amacı müesses nizamın devamlılığını sağlamaktır. Aktif vatandaşın kendisini var olan sistemin bir parçası ve temsilcisi olarak görmesi ve hatta bazı durumlarda şiddet kullanması, modern devletin temel özelliklerinden olan şiddet tekelinin de vijilantizm eylemleri aracılığıyla bozulabileceğini göstermektedir. Vijilantizm eylemleri, bazı durumlarda devletten tamamen özerk bir biçimde gerçekleşmekteyken bazı durumlarda da devletin bu eylemlere göz yumması veya bu eylemleri açıktan desteklemesi söz konusudur. Vijilantizmin bu farklı karakteristikleri de ilgili literatürde farklı yönleriyle ele alınmış ve çeşitli tipolojiler sunulmuştur. Bu kapsamdaki tipolojilerden otonom vijilantizm, devlet tolereli vjilantizm ve devlet destekli vijilantizm tipleri bu çalışmada ayrıntılı bir biçimde sorgulanmakta ve yeniden kavramsallaştırılmaktadır. Çalışmada öncelikle vijilantizm kavramı ele alınmakta, bunun sonrasında da ilgili literatürde sıkça başvurulan tipolojiler analiz edilmektedir. Çalışmanın sonunda ise devlet ve vijilanti(ler) [vigilante(s)] arasındaki ilişkileri açıklama potansiyeli olduğu düşünülen bu tipoloji geliştirilmeye çalışılmaktadır.

Keywords

• Vijilantizm
• Özerk Vijilantizm
• Sözde Özerk Vijilantizm
• Devlet Güdümlü Vijilantizm

Ethical Statement

Bu çalışma yazarın Hacettepe Üniversitesi Siyaset Bilimi Anabilim Dalında halihazırda yürütmekte olduğu doktora tez çalışmasından türetilmiştir.

A Typology on Relations of State and Vigilantism

Abstract

The modern state idea, based on its liberal foundations, assumes that the monopoly of using violence can only belong to the state. Although this perspective contains a Eurocentric approach, the idea of absolute sovereignty claimed by the modern state is based on the necessity of the monopoly of using violence being in the state. It is quite difficult to say that the state always provides security and order alone and under all circumstances. In cases where the state cannot meet these basic needs, citizens are seen to actively participate in the processes of ensuring security and order. This active participation of citizens in ensuring security and order is also called vigilantism. The main purpose of vigilantism is to ensure the continuity of the established order. The fact that the active citizen sees themselves as a part and representative of the existing system and even uses violence in some cases shows that the monopoly of violence, which is a basic characteristic of the modern state, can be disrupted through acts of vigilantism. In some cases, vigilantism acts are carried out completely autonomously from the state; in other cases, the state turns a blind eye to these acts or openly supports them. These different characteristics of vigilantism are presented as a summary typology by Can (2023); but this typology is not based on a deep analysis. The types of autonomous vigilantism, state-tolerated vigilantism and state-supported vigilantism included in this summary typology are examined in detail and within the framework of different country examples in this study. in this study firstly, the concept of vigilantism is addressed, and then the typologies frequently used in the relevant literature are analyzed. At the end of the study, this typology, which is thought to have the potential to explain the relations between the state and vigilantes, is tried to be developed.

Keywords

• Vigilantism
• Autonomous Vigilantism
• Pseudo-Autonomous Vigilantism
• State-Directed Vigilantism

References

1. Abrahams, R. (1998). Vigilant Citizens: Vigilantism and the State. Polity Press.
2. Bajoria, J. (2019). Violent Cow Protection in India: Vigilante Groups Attack Minorities. Human Rights Watch.
3. Bateson, R. (2021). The Politics of Vigilantism. Comparative Political Studies, 54(6), 923-955. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414020957692
4. Bayrak, E. (2019). Şiddet Tekelinin Tarihsel Gelişimi ve Bugüne Dair Notlar. Ankara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, 68(1), 57-82. https://doi.org/10.33629/auhfd.553895
5. Bjørgo, T., & Gjelsvik, I. M. (2019). Sheep in Wolf’s Cloathing?: The Taming of the Soldiers of Odin in Norway. T. Bjørgo & M. Mareš (Ed.), Vigilantism Against Migrants and Minorities İçinde (ss. 257-271). Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
6. Bjørgo, T., & Mareš, M. (2019). Comparative Perspectives on Vigilantism Against Migrants and Minorities. T. Bjørgo & M. Mareš (Ed.), Vigilantism Against Migrants and Minorities İçinde (ss. 305-334). Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
7. Blee, K., & Latif, M. (2019). Ku Klux Klan. T. Bjørgo & M. Mareš, Vigilantism against Migrants and Minorities içinde (1. bs, ss. 31-42). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429485619-2
8. Burrows, W. E. (1976). Vigilante ! Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

9. Can, C. (2021). Vijilantizm: Bir Şiddet veya Baskı Türünün Kavramsal Analizi. Dicle Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 26, 129-140.
10. Can, C. (2023). Terörizmle Mücadele Eden Vijilanti Grupların Dönüşümü: Nijerya ve Güney Sudan Örnekleri. Politik Ekonomik Kuram, 7(Özel Sayı), 181-195. https://doi.org/10.30586/pek.1341161
11. Chalmers, D. M. (2000). Hooded Americanism: The history of the Ku Klux Klan (7. print). Duke Univ. Press.
12. Chukwuma, O. A. (2017). Nigeria: Volunteer Vigilantism and Counter-Insurgency in the North-East. Conflict Studies Quarterly, 20, 34-55. https://doi.org/10.24193/csq.20.3
13. Cohen, M. (2007). “The Ku Klux Government”: Vigilantism, Lynching, and the Repression of the IWW. Journal for the Study of Radicalism, 1(1), 31-56. https://doi.org/10.1353/jsr.2008.0015
14. Eriksen, S. S. (2005). The Politics of State Formation: Contradictions and Conditions of Possibility. The European Journal of Development Research, 17(3), 396-410. https://doi.org/10.1080/09578810500209163
15. Gattinara, P. C. (2019). Beyond the Hand of the State: Vigilantism Against Migrants and Refugees in France. T. Bjørgo & M. Mareš (Ed.), Vigilantism Against Migrants and Minorities İçinde (ss. 213-227). Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
16. Giddens, A. (2008). Ulus Devlet ve Şiddet. Kalkedon Yayınları.
17. Gürcan, E. C., & Donduran, C. (2021). The Formation and Development of the Black Lives Matter Movement: A Political Process Perspective. Siyasal: Journal of Political Sciences, 30(1), 151-167. https://doi.org/10.26650/siyasal.2021.30.1.871276
18. Haas, N. E., De Keijser, J. W., & Bruinsma, G. J. N. (2014). Public Support for Vigilantism, Confidence in Police and Police Responsiveness. Policing and Society, 24(2), 224-241. https://doi.org/10.1080/10439463.2013.784298
19. Hine, K. D. (1998). Vigilantism Revisited: An Economic Analysis of the Law ofExtra-Judical Self-Help or Why Can’t Dick Shoot Henry for Stealing Jane’s Truck? American University Law Review, 47(5), 1221-1255.
20. Hodgson, G. (1973). The Establishment. Foreign Policy, 10, 3-40.
21. Huggins, M. K. (Ed.). (1991). Vigilantism and the State in Modern Latin America: Essays on Extralegal Violence. Praeger.
22. Johnston, L. (1992). The Rebirth of Private Policing. Routledge.
23. Johnston, L. (1996). What Is Vigilantism? British Journal of Criminology, 36(2), 220-236. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.bjc.a014083
24. Kowalewski, D. (1996). Countermovement Vigilantism and Human Rights: A Propositional Inventory. Crime, Law and Social Change, 25(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00227367
25. Mareš, M., & Milo, D. (2019). Vigilantsim Against Migranst and Minorities in Slovakia and in the Czech Republic. T. Bjørgo & M. Mareš (Ed.), Vigilantism Against Migrants and Minorities İçinde (ss. 129-150). Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
26. Mazzei, J. (2009). Death Squads or Self-Defense Forces? How Paramilitary Groups Emerge and Challenge Democracy in Latin America (1st ed). University of North Carolina Press.
27. Meagher, K. (2012). The Strength of Weak States? Non‐State Security Forces and Hybrid Governance in Africa. Development and Change, 43(5), 1073-1101. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7660.2012.01794.x
28. Mortensen, E. (2018). The Mode of Lynching: One Method of Vigilante Justice. Canadian Review of American Studies, 48(1), 20-39. https://doi.org/10.3138/cras.2017.014
29. Mulloy, D. J. (2004). American Extremism: History, Politics and the Militia Movement. Routledge.
30. Norman, I. D. (2022). The Axis of Hate: Identitarianism, Afroxenophobia and Vigilantism. European Journal of Development Studies, 2(5), 38-51. https://doi.org/10.24018/ejdevelop.2022.2.5.168
31. Ochoa, J. A., & Tomas, C. L. (2016). Democracy and Vigilantism: The Case of Michoacán, Mexico. International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy, 5(4), 17-28. https://doi.org/10.5204/ijcjsd.v5i4.320
32. Paker, M. (2006). Lincin Psiko-Politiği: Nedir, Niçin, Nasıl? Birikim, 211, 28-35.
33. Rose, P., Beeby, J., & Parker, D. (t.y.). Academic Rigour in the Lived Experience of Researchers Using Phenomenological Methods in Nursing. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 21(6), 1123-1129.
34. Rosenbaum, H. J., & Sederberg, P. C. (1974). Vigilantism: An Analysis of Establishment Violence. Comparative Politics, 6(4), 541-570. https://doi.org/10.2307/421337
35. Rotberg, R. I. (2003). State Failure and State Weakness in a Time of Terror. Brookings Institution Press. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7864/j.ctvbd8j54
36. Sederberg, P. C. (1978). The Phenomenology of Vigilantism in Contemporary America: An Interpretation. Terrorism, 1(3-4), 287-305. https://doi.org/10.1080/10576107808435415
37. Weber, M. (1946). From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology (H. Gerth & C. W. Mills, Ed.). Oxford Univ. Press.