Blog 8

Blog 8 

            Political violence ranges from civil wars, revolutions, and genocide to terrorism.  These forms of political violence are domestic and global issues that stem from a variety of sources, both materialistic and non-materialistic.  Political violence is defined as the use of force by states or non-state actors to achieve political goals (Samuels, p. 258, 2012).  In the Republic of Colombia spanning from the year 1948 to 1958 there was an undeclared civil war known as La Violencia (Wikipedia, La Violencia, 2012).

            A civil war, defined by David J. Samuels, is armed combat within the boundaries of a sovereign state between parties that are subject to common authority at the start of hostilities (Samuels, p. 259, 2012).  There are many possibilities to consider when trying to pinpoint the cause of the political violence that occurred within Colombia.  Two important aspects of clarifying civil war information are opportunities and interests.  Several categories for opportunities include colonial legacies, international support, poverty, and geography.  Categories to explain the interest of civil wars include cultural grievances, greed, social pressures and individual psychology.

            Under the definition given by Samuels La Violencia would best fit the description of a civil war because it was an armed conflict, within state boundaries, and between parties subject to a common authority.  To explain the opportunities and interests of this civil war it is essential to know the history of this armed conflict.  The liberal and conservative parties in Colombia are highly influential and spread to all corners of Colombian politics.  Ideological differences between the Liberal and Conservative elite reverberated throughout Colombian society often resulting in outbreaks of violence that repeatedly pitted loyal Liberal and Conservative factions, both peasant and elite, against each other (Colombia Journal, 2012).  The leading moment that sparked La Violencia was in 1948 when leading presidential candidate Liberal Jorge Eliécer Gaitán was assassinated.  This armed conflict was a matter of two rival political parties pitted against each other that involved harsh leadership, coup d’états, and hundreds of thousands of deaths.

            With the history background it is now possible to identify the opportunities and interests that led to La Violencia.  Because Colombia became a recognized state in 1819, it is safe to say that colonial legacies do not apply (Wikipedia, Colombia, 2012).  Internationally, other states did not support one party or the other, expatriates did not support one party or the other, and the spillover effect does not apply.  Poverty and geography are two opportunities that explain the state weakness within Colombia.  The majority of the deaths that accrued were in the countryside, and for this reason the fact that Colombia has a dispersed population shows that opportunities can occur due to geography because the state must expend greater resources to control the countryside (Samuels, p. 263, 2012).  Poverty also applies to this situation because many of the rebellions against the state came from peasant uprisings.  Due to the stagnant economy and national leadership that posed as a dictatorship, many of the citizens were upset with the government.

            Thus far it is recognizable that the definition given by Samuels is correct, pertaining to the opportunity aspect of civil wars.  The interest aspect can best be noted to be a combination of both cultural grievances and individual psychology.  The oppression that the Conservative party leader exhibited at the start of the war gives many logical explanations for political violence.  The Gómez regime, the Conservative party leader, responded to the uprisings with violent repression and the chulavistas, peasants from the Conservative party who were deemed the police force, soon became infamous for the brutal tactics they used to repress rebellious Liberals and communists (Colombia Journal, 2012).  Underneath the cultural grievances and individual psychology of the peasants and elites alike is the root reason why the political violence occurred, and occurred for so long. The basic cause of this 
protracted period of internal disorder was the refusal of successive governments to accede to the people's demands for socioeconomic change (Latin American Studies, 2012).

This basic explanation for the civil war in Colombia coincides seamlessly with the definition of civil wars given by Samuels.  Both the Liberal and Conservative parties were subject to common authority at the start of hostilities and the civil war was contained to Colombia alone.  Proven through the opportunity and interests as well as the history of the conflict, the definition of civil wars is strong and reliable.

Works Cited

            Colombia Journal, La Violencia, 2012, http://colombiajournal.org/fiftyyearsofviolence

            Latin American Studies, Colombia La Violencia, 2012, http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/colombia/la-violencia.htm

Samuels, David J, Comparative Politics, Political violence, page 258, 259 and 263, 2012.

Wikipedia, La Violencia, 2012, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Violencia.

            Wikipedia, Colombia, 2012, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colombia.