On the Process of Civilisation in Japan

Theorising political legitimisation: From stasis to processes

“…Similarly, Lemay-Hébert (2009, p. 28) stresses the 'mutually constitutive relationship' between state and society. Such language implies that the state is outside society, but it is more realistic to see the state as a social organisation that gradually formed as a way to control and coordinate various activities within a territory (Elias, 2006(Elias, , 2012a. The primary functions of rulers in early forms of states revolved around protection from external threats.…”

“…For Elias (2012a), reducing class contempt due to increasing interdependence between classes follows an uneven pattern, with initial relative equalisation often precipitating increased resentment before eventual accommodation, however reluctant that may be. For the purposes of our contentions here, the initial phase of relative equalisation often leads to cultural divergence as the cultural norms, codes and values of the rising group are used more explicitly and confidently, which produces a re-articulation and exaggeration of the codes and values of the dominant group, though declining in power relations with the rising groups.…”

“…While Elias (2012a) developed a comprehensive framework connecting the largely unplanned monopolisation of physical violence over wider territory, state formation and the emergence of a more even, emotionally controlled habitus, he placed less emphasis on the role of legitimation practices, though these are not ignored entirely. Elias mainly addresses legitimacy as an intentional practice on the part of rulers to inculcate loyalty to the state (in earlier eras conceived more as a personal possession than a collective entity under the governance of temporary rulers acting on behalf of an entire population).…”

The spectacularization of violence in contemporary US bare-knuckle fighting

“…When comparing the European (Elias 2012(Elias [1939) and US (Mennell 2007) civilizing patterns, it is noticeable that (i) the USA never relied on a centralized court that held a clear central monopoly position as in the European case; (ii) and markets rather than courts affected in a decisive manner the national US habitus (Mennell 2007, 104). The absence of a unified and centralized good society along the American civilizing process resulted in relatively open competition between a variety of centres of power (Wouters 2007, 160) and a weaker monopoly of violence by the state (Wouters 2020, 322, note 17;327-328;Mennell 2007, 154).…”

“…. Combat sports do not only address the monopoly of violence; often they represent a complex intermingling of the twin monopolies of violence and taxation(Elias 2012(Elias [1939). Much of the controversy in combat sports has not only been due to excess of violence but to the relationship of combat sports, gambling and match-fixing governed by organized crime.…”