Hannah Arendt: Power vs. Violence

The aim of the text is to reflect on the different paradoxical forms in which violence is expressed in a democratic Rule of Law; a Rule of Law that, paradoxically, claims to be defined by the non-violent resolution of conflicts and by the exclusive monopoly of force in the hands of the State (Max Weber). A State that is subject to the principle of legality, balance of powers, organic distribution of functions, control and division of competences in the exercise of power, in order to avoid any form of arbitrariness or abuse. However, it is not only empirical evidence that allows us to question this premise, but, at a theoretical level, various thinkers such as Foucault, Butler, Agamben, among others, have argued how power - unlike violence - circulates in diffuse or exceptional forms that - far from being contained in the principle of state sovereignty and the rule of law - makes use of this normative illusion, making it possible for it to be exercised abusively. It is perhaps in Arendt's work where this tension and questioning between power and violence is most strongly expressed. The aim of this paper is precisely to delve deeper into this opposition in order to attempt a cross-critique between power and violence.