Violence, fear and anti-violence: the Batek of Peninsular Malaysia
| Date | 07 October 2014 |
| Published date | 07 October 2014 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JACPR-03-2014-0114 |
| Pages | 203-215 |
| Author | Ivan Tacey,Diana Riboli |
| Subject Matter | Health & social care,Criminology & forensic psychology,Aggression, conflict & peace |
Violence, fear and anti-violence: the Batek
of Peninsular Malaysia
Ivan Tacey and Diana Riboli
Ivan Taceyis a PhD Candidate,
based at Faculty of
Anthropology, Sociology and
Political Science, University
Lumie
`re, Lyon, France.
Diana Riboli is an Assistant
Professor in Social
Anthropology, based at
Department of Social
Anthropology, Panteio
University of Social and
Political Sciences, Athens,
Greece.
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to identify and analyze socio-cultural and political forces which have
shaped anti-violent attitudes and strategies of the Batek and Batek Tanum of Peninsular Malaysia.
Design/methodology/approach – Data collection during the authors’ long-term, multi-sited ethnographic
fieldwork among the Batek and Batek Tanum in Peninsular Malaysia. Methodology included participant
observation, semi-structured interviews and a literature review of texts on the Orang Asli and
anthropological theories on violence.
Findings – Traumatic experiences of past violence and atrocities greatly influence the Batek’s and Batek
Tanum’spresent attitudes toward direct and structural forms of violence. A variety of anti-violent strategies
are adopted, including the choice to escape when physically threatened. Rather than demonstrating
“weakness,”this course of action represents a smart survival strategy. External violence reinforces values
of internal cooperation and mutual-aid that foraging societies, even sedentary groups, typically privilege.
In recent years, the Batek’s increasing political awareness has opened new forms of resistance against the
structural violence embedded within Malaysian society.
Originality/value – The study proposes that societies cannot simply be labelled as violent or non-violent on
the basis of socio-biological theories. Research into hunter-gatherersocial organization and violence needs
to be reframed within larger debates about structural violence. The “anti-violence”of certain foraging groups
can be understood as a powerful form of resilience to outside pressures and foraging groups’ best possible
strategy for survival.
Keywords Violence, Malaysia, Anti-violence, Batek, Foraging societies, Orang Asli
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
This paper examines the impact of external violence and the fear it creates on attitudes,
behavior and strategies of anti-violence among the Batek De
`’ and Batek Tanum, two
indigenous peoples of Peninsular Malaysia. Unquestionably, there is plenty of evidence of
foraging societies, and indigenous peoples in general, suffering violence inflicted by a variety
of local, national and international actors (Mander, 2006, pp. 3-10; Sellato and Sercombe,
2007, pp. 30-46; Butovskaya, 2013, pp. 289-92; Tonkinson,2013, pp. 269-76). By violence we
do not only mean direct violence, which causes very real physical pain and suffering, but also
what theorists have termed structural violence: inequalities embedded within political,
economic and social structures and institutions in hierarchical societies which indirectly cause
the suffering of marginalized individuals or social groups (Galtung, 1969, 1990; Farmer, 2005).
Structural violence often hinges upon marginalized groups living in fear of direct violence.
Yet this is not to say all forms of structural violence depend on the use, or even threat, of direct
violence. To fully understand the ways violence is imposed upon foraging societies, it is
imperative to take both direct and structural violence into consideration, particularly the stark
realities behind their interactions.
Hunter-gatherer groups have low-population sizes, low-population densities and lifestyles
associated with particular ranging patterns covering large geographical areas. When resources
DOI 10.1108/JACPR-03-2014-0114 VOL. 6 NO. 4 2014, pp. 203-215, CEmerald Group Publishing Limited, ISSN 1759-6599
j
JOURNAL OF AGGRESSION, CONFLICT AND PEACE RESEARCH
j
PAGE 203
To continue reading
Request your trial