Power, Race, and Justice

The Restorative Dialogue We Will Not Have

Theo Gavrielides

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2021
• ISBN:
  9781000449938
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Law
• Subtopic: Law Theory & Practice
• Index: Law

We are living in a world where power abuse has become the new norm, as well as the biggest, silent driver of persistent inequalities, racism and human rights violations. The COVID-19 socio-economic consequences can only be compared with those that followed World War II. As humanity is getting to grips with them, this timely book challenges current thinking, while creating a much needed normative and practical framework for revealing and challenging the power structures that feed our subconscious feelings of despair and defeatism.

Structured around the four concepts of power, race, justice and restorative justice, the book uses empirical new data and normative analysis to reconstruct the way we prevent power abuse and harm at the inter-personal, inter-community and international levels. This book offers new lenses, which allow us to view power, race and justice in a modern reality where communities have been silenced, but through restorative justice are gaining voice. The book is enriched with case studies written by survivors, practitioners and those with direct experiences of power abuse and inequality. Through robust research methodologies, Gavrielides's new monograph reveals new forms of slavery, while creating a new, philosophical framework for restorative punishment through the acknowledgement of pain and the use of catharsis for internal transformation and individual empowerment. This is a powerful and timely book that generates much needed hope.

Through a multi-disciplinary dialogue that uses philosophy and critical theory, social sciences, criminology, law, psychology and human rights, the book opens new avenues for practitioners, researchers and policy makers internationally.

Part I Power, race, justice and restorative justice challenged

The beginning of awakening

1 Challenging the power that racialises us all

DOI: 10.4324/9781003194576-3

1.1 Impetus and a change from within

If you were given a choice between power, money or knowledge, what would you choose?

I believe you have already made that choice without knowing it. In fact, you lead your life based on that choice. I also believe that most consequences that we face in life as individuals (or as group members) are the results of our choices, whether they are conscious or subconscious. The question here is not about the choice that you have already made but about the processes, influencers, enablers, and leavers that directed this choice.

It is part of human nature and basic needs to seek power, just as natural as it is to seek the air that fills our lungs or the food that charges our cells. The literature on power, its definitions and different forms, how to develop or diminish it whether at the inter-personal, inter-community or inter-state level is rich (Gargi et al., 2002; Chitty et al., 2017). The views on what constitutes power are diverse, and they can stretch from being an abstract cloud that shadows all our actions and relations (Weber, 1976; Foucault, 1988) to being a tool for domination (Braithwaite, 2003). Domination is not a bad thing in itself; it can be used towards the attainment of utility for the individual and the community (Mill, 1993). History, of course, is littered with bad examples of power domination. But it is also embellished with beautiful stories of our humanity and the use of power for selfless happiness.

The key objective of this chapter is twofold.

First, it aims to put power in the context of this book while helping us to understand our own relationship with it. And we do have a relationship with power, even if you have never read any of its literature. I believe that the way we see and use power depends very much on where we sit – on our own positions and identities, age and psychological development, context and emotional states. And this position is not fixed. It is personal and very much alive. I believe that one of the goals in life is to develop, and with this evolution, to be able to change seats, positions and even identities. Along with this constant movement, our interpretation of power changes. Within this dynamic picture, normative interpretations of power from the extant literature become mere vehicles of temporary understandings. I also argue that non-governmental organisations (NGOs), donor agencies and even social and human rights movements that are trying to understand power and address power abuse are also part of the power picture themselves. But it is very easy to forget or ignore this, when it comes to understanding the dynamics of a situation, partly because it can be uncomfortable to have to examine our own power critically.

Second, the chapter aims to profile the individual, groups of individuals or communities who are faced with the negative consequences of power and its manifestation through domination and inequality. For the chapter title, I consciously chose the term “racialise” for two reasons. First, I want to start challenging what is accepted by the extant literature as “racial”, preparing the ground for the subsequent chapter, which is dedicated to this objective. Second, I believe that this term brings a sense of unity amongst us, as under its roof, we all feel a shared sense of injustice, independently of our positions. And it is these collective senses and experiences of injustices that I want to explore for restorative justice as a tool for addressing or preventing power abuse and restoring peace through equality and poverty relief (Pavlich, 2005, 2018, 2021; Johnstone, 2018).

I am aware that my way of approaching power relations and their interaction with race may create discomforts. It is with the utmost respect for the race equality movement that I take my thesis. In fact, I deeply believe that race equality work has been undermined by several powers that have often pushed it into isolation and silo thinking. I am also conscious that these discussions are more acceptable in certain cultures and settings than others. For example, whereas in the UK race discussions tend to be “polite” and “politically correct”, in the US, movements (such as Black Lives Matter) are more vocal and visible. I do not plan to ignore this reality. In fact, culture, identity and power are all interlinked, and the subsequent chapters aim to explore these dynamics in depth. Furthermore, for some, putting power issues on the table can be threatening to their own power or ideas for change. This chapter and indeed the entire book constitute an honest attempt to move things forward for race equality and equality. Discomfort does not trouble me. Don’t we need to be negatively affected in order to set things in motion for a better end?

A tip as you read further: this monograph will fail its objectives, if the reader adopts a “technical approach” to power, which disregards the need for personal reflection. By “technical”, I mean detached and removed from personal responsibility through the use of an institutional or societal approach. Understanding and using power are not so much about social change, but personal change from within. I thus invite you to approach the book with an openness to reflection and self-challenge.

We can all strive for a more balanced distribution of power in society where the poor have a louder voice and the powerful are more understanding and giving. But if we work towards these goals without a clear understanding of how power manifests itself within us, then our attempts will be mere procedural actions of short-term impact. Some have called this power “informal” as it is dispersed from us throughout our relationships and society (Weber, 1976). We often consent to it simply because we are socialised not to challenge it. Some other times, we consent to it because we have no choice. Independently of the reasons, repressive power always leads to violence. By exposing it, we create mechanisms for prevention and this is exactly where I want to take my first step.

So, let’s expose power.

1.2 Power is everywhere

Realism defines power as a capability to impose, enforce or exercise influence and dominance (Morgenthau, 1954; Waltz, 1979; Dunne and Schmidt, 2001, pp. 141–147). It views power as a necessary ingredient in the pursuit of goals and aims (Thucydides, 1972). It is power that gains results. This view is contrasted with the idealistic or liberal conception of power, which identifies it within law and order (Keohane and Nye, 1977; Howard, 1978; Doyle, 1983, 1997; Baldwin, 1993; Moravcsik, 1997). According to this perspective, it is the institutions that are mandated to exercise power in maintaining law and a state of justice. Power according to this view does not necessarily reside with states but rather with the institutions that promote justice, such as the United Nations (UN) or the International Court of Justice (Knapp, 2004, pp. 514–549; Frangonikolopoulos and Proedrou, 2010, p. 476).

Realists will look at power in the context of international relations and raise questions of military capabilities, security, sovereignty, colonialism and financial control (Morgenthau, 1960). Nietzsche, on the other hand, argued that the feeling of power [Gefuehl der Macht] has become both the greatest love of and a ‘demon’ to humans (1883). Other prominent writings are by Max Weber, Robert Dahl, Steven Lukes, Hans Morgenthau, Raymond Aron and Michael Mann. It is worth singling out Foucault and Weber’s interpretation of power as relational. Weber’s rich definition is helpful:

[Power is the] opportunity to have one’s will prevail within a social relationship, also against resistance, no matter what this opportunity is based on.

(Weber, 1976, p. 28)

Many scholars have argued that power influences global politics and that restorative justice may construct an appropriate framework that can bring balance. For example, Hobbes stressed the importance of controlling forces of power or authorities’ control in imposing compliance with treaties or agreed terms. In his view, justice, or injustice, depends on a political force without which nothing can be classified as just or unjust (Metaxopoulos, 1989, p. 213; Kersting, 1992, pp. 59, 62).

Power can also be viewed at different geographical levels. Some have argued that in order to challenge power, we must start locally as it is in the arenas of everyday life where people are able to resist power and to construct their own voice. Others argue for the importance of the nation state and how it mediates power, suggesting that the possibilities of local spaces often depend on the extent to which power is legitimated nationally but shared with the locality. Others challenge this view, arguing that “there is a new dialectic of global and local issues that do not fit into the scheme of national politics” (Beck, 2005, p. 81).

We can divert our personal, community or state responsibility of how we use power by engaging in frivolous debates that have captured the extant literature for years. These include issues such as the analysis of actors who use power as an instrument of coercion, whether power is a good or a bad thing, or indeed whether power is the only route to justice and change.

I will save you the time of answering these questions by positioning ourselves elsewhere. I must admit that this position is not new. It is where Foucault found himself. He said:

Power is everywhere, diffused and embodied in discourse, knowledge and regimes of truth.

(Foucault, 1995, p. 75)

Power is everywhere and comes from everywhere, so in this sense is neither an agency, nor a structure.

(Foucault, 1988, p. 63)

We are all prone to combat, domination and antagonism. But we are all impelled to associate with each other and to constitute ourselves into a series of (often rival) groups. These groups are what we now call “societies” with their complex historical, cultural, social, financial and ethical complexities. We learn to coexist and become accustomed to living with our fellow citizens in a civitas (Germino, 1972). We learn to regulate power.

Power is not just about politics, culture, civil society, knowledge or money. It is an everyday, socialised and embodied phenomenon, which is personal to you. It is exercised consciously or subconsciously. To challenge the way it is manifested, we need not find the absolute truth. We need merely to detach the power of truth from the forms of hegemony – social, economic, and cultural – within which it operates at the present time (Foucault, 1995, p. 75).

1.3 Three levers of power and control

If power is everywhere, then who is subject to the consequences of power abuse and what has been done to rebalance the distortions of power that led to inequality and poverty? To answer these questions, I present three levers that have been consistently used to achieve power abuse through control. I believe that by exposing and understanding these levers, we can expand our interpretation of “race equality” and thereby break silo thinking and work towards equality. These levers are neither exclusive nor timebound. They are singled out for two reasons. First, they are directly related to this book’s aims and its focus on power and its interaction with race, justice, and restorative justice. I accept that there indeed might be other ways of operating power. Second, these levers are relevant today. They are neither historical nor speculative. They are today’s reality.

Lever no. 1: Power and control through financial terror

According to many, poverty and the unequal distribution of wealth are the principal consequences of power monopoly (Dorling, 2011). Based on a number of studies, poverty has a direct impact on the equal enjoyment of our basic rights, including civil and political rights. In fact, poverty is closely related to poorer outcomes in terms of living conditions, overcrowding, crime in the neighbourhood and destitution – leading to poor health and low life expectancy.

Using the UK as an example, we know that the total net household wealth of the top 10% is £853,000, almost 100 times higher than the net wealth of the poorest 10%, which is £8,800 or below (Gavrielides, 2016). One person in 5 lives in households with less than 60% median income; this rises to nearly 1 in 3 for Bangladeshi-headed households. Nearly three-quarters of Bangladeshi children and half of black African children in Britain grow up in poverty. Moreover, 1 in 4 families with disabled people live below 60% median income, 29% of those with a disabled adult, 28% of those with a disabled child and 38% of those with both.

Williams and Collins argue that health disparities between African-Americans and whites are attributable to systemic differences in access to and the quality of medical care, poorer working and residential conditions and the impact of poverty and educational levels on health behaviour (Williams and Collins, 1995). We now have enough evidence to safely claim that a major catalyst of racial disparities in mortality rates and other health indicators is the disproportionate exposur...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Endorsement Page
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication
• Contents
• Foreword: Professor John Braithwaite, Australian National University, Australia
• Preface: Kay Pranis, independent trainer and facilitator for peacemaking circles, leader in Restorative Justice and Circle Process movements
• Introduction and acknowledgements
• Part I: Power, race, justice and restorative justice challenged: The beginning of awakening
• Part II: Rebalancing power for justice: Mermaids and sirens
• Part III: Restoring peace: Back on track
• Part IV: Case studies of power and restoration: Possibilities in action
• Index