Prison riots, criminological theories and hegemony in the Brazilian context

The orderliness of prison regimes is a central theme of criminological literature and continues to have great historical importance in the field. Yet, despite riots generating academic interest into prison (Sparks et al, 1996), riots as a phenomenon themselves have generally attracted rather less theoretical attention (Adams, 1992). This is partly reflected by the view that riots are perceived as a pathology within the system, an outcome of disorder, either caused by prisoners (Fleisher and Decker, 2001) or the authorities (Boin and Rattray, 2004). However, as I will argue, that might not necessarily be the case. Instead of the order/disorder dyad that has predominated since the era of the Chicago School (Whyte, 1943), in this chapter I argue that riots can be understood as part of the hegemony of the prison apparatus – that is, an aspect that reveals its central functioning mechanisms, rather than representing an exception to it. The argument here draws upon results from three case studies in Brazil that discuss the dynamics of prison riots, their potential causes and perceived outcomes.

The work of Useem and Kimball (1991, 1987) and Salla (2006; Adorno and Salla, 2007) are key references to understand prison riots and their specificity in Brazil – one emanating from a North American right-realist perspective and the others from the Brazilian context. In their analysis of a series of riots occurring in the United States, Useem and Kimball (1991) found that a common cause of prison riots was a systemic type of crisis that stemmed from lack of adequate administrative control. In their view, riots were neither ‘purposeless emotional outpourings’, nor instruments of prisoners to express ‘grievances’ and ‘persuade elites’ (Useem and Kimball, 1991: 202). Social dynamics are insufficient causal explanations to these events – although they did identify increasing ideological militancy among prisoners, for example, the Black Panther Party, Black Muslims, Latin Kings, and so on. Instead, Useem and Kimball (1991) argue that the effective causal mechanisms that maintain order are twofold: the establishment of a presumption of legitimacy among inmates; and a capacity of the state to contain and disrupt disturbances.