Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Preface
- State Repression and the Domestic Democratic Peace
- INTRODUCTION
- 1 REPRESSION AND THE SEARCH FOR PEACE
- 2 DISAGGREGATION AND CONTEXTUALIZATION
- 3 DATA AND METHODOLOGY
- 4 DEMOCRATIC PACIFICATION: THE DIRECT EFFECTS OF VOICE AND VETO
- 5 PEACE UNDER FIRE: THE INTERACTIVE EFFECT OF DEMOCRACY AND CONFLICT
- 6 (RE)CONSIDERING DOMESTIC PEACE
- Appendix I
- Appendix II
- Bibliography
- Index
- Titles in the series
1 - REPRESSION AND THE SEARCH FOR PEACE
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 July 2009
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Preface
- State Repression and the Domestic Democratic Peace
- INTRODUCTION
- 1 REPRESSION AND THE SEARCH FOR PEACE
- 2 DISAGGREGATION AND CONTEXTUALIZATION
- 3 DATA AND METHODOLOGY
- 4 DEMOCRATIC PACIFICATION: THE DIRECT EFFECTS OF VOICE AND VETO
- 5 PEACE UNDER FIRE: THE INTERACTIVE EFFECT OF DEMOCRACY AND CONFLICT
- 6 (RE)CONSIDERING DOMESTIC PEACE
- Appendix I
- Appendix II
- Bibliography
- Index
- Titles in the series
Summary
Repression is one of those concepts that everyone believes he or she understands – not particularly well but well enough. People want to venture only so far into the dark side of human behavior. For instance, if asked to define repression, most would respond by identifying some high-profile campaign(s) such as the purges in Russia during the 1930s, the European Holocaust during the 1940s, the political harassment of communists throughout the United States in the 1950s, or the mass killings that took place in Cambodia during the 1970s and Rwanda in the 1990s. Alternatively, individuals would identify some high-profile event(s) such as the beatings that occurred at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago in 1968 or the massacre of protestors that took place at Tiananmen Square in 1989. Of course, the list could be extended (both spatially and temporally), but the basic point would not change: repression consistently evokes images of specific instances of state coercive action directed against those within the government's territorial jurisdiction. As for why authorities use this behavior, most would point to specific objectives (influencing the target's thought and/or action or fulfilling certain needs within the state), particularly ruthless government officials (Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, Hoover, Stroessner, and Bagosora), or specific political systems (for example, totalitarianism or autocracy). Again, the list here is not exhaustive.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- State Repression and the Domestic Democratic Peace , pp. 33 - 44Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2007