From Structural to Cyberviolence: Tracing the Evolution of Harm in the Age of AI

Brett Allen • February 17, 2025

The Continuum of Violence

Understanding forms of Violence from an anthropological viewpoint has made me more aware of their presence. Recent discussions on China’s emergence as a big player, as well as DeepSeek and Elon’s idiotic offer to buy OpenAI, have made me start to see the emergence of forms of Violence. Maybe it isn’t new, and AI is enabling other forms of Violence to thrive. Without a code of ethical boundaries, it is not surprising to me that Violence and AI have become friends. This article contains some of my initial thoughts and ideas from what I have observed so far.

So, what is Violence? Violence is often perceived as a physical act. Still, scholars such as Johan Galtung have long recognised more pervasive, less visible forms of harm embedded in social structures and cultural practices. With the rise of AI, these classical forms of Violence—structural, political, collective, and symbolic—are evolving in unprecedented ways, giving birth to new concepts like cyberviolence and algorithmic Violence.

This post traces the evolution of these ideas, starting with anthropological and sociological roots, and shows how AI transforms and intensifies the experience of Violence in the digital age. Let’s take a look at recognised forms of violence and AI entanglements.

1. Structural Violence: From Galtung to Algorithmic Inequality

Key Thinkers: Johan Galtung, Paul Farmer, Nancy Scheper-Hughes

What is Structural Violence?

Coined by Johan Galtung in 1969, structural Violence refers to the systematic ways social structures harm individuals by limiting access to resources, rights, and opportunities. Unlike direct physical Violence, structural Violence is embedded in social systems and is often normalised.

Anthropological Perspectives

Paul Farmer’s work in global health reveals how poverty and inequality function as forms of structural Violence. Nancy Scheper-Hughes highlights how state neglect perpetuates suffering in marginalised communities, focusing on how social and political conditions shape mortality and suffering.

AI Entanglement

Today, AI perpetuates structural Violence by embedding biases into predictive algorithms, disproportionately affecting vulnerable groups in healthcare, criminal justice, and welfare systems.

Example: Predictive policing algorithms intensify racial profiling, while welfare AI systems misclassify and deny essential resources to those most in need, reinforcing pre-existing inequalities.

2. Political Violence: From State Power to Digital Repression

Key Thinkers: James C. Scott, Veena Das, Achille Mbembe

What is Political Violence?

Political Violence has traditionally been linked to state control, repression, and conflict. James C. Scott’s concept of “everyday resistance” shows how oppressed groups resist state power in covert ways. Veena Das explores how political Violence reshapes personal and social life in lasting ways.

Necropolitics

Achille Mbembe’s concept of necropolitics—the power to decide who lives and who dies—offers a framework for understanding how political Violence affects entire populations.

AI Entanglement

AI tools are increasingly weaponised for political repression. Authoritarian regimes use surveillance technologies to track and control dissent, while disinformation campaigns destabilise democratic processes.

Example: AI-driven facial recognition and social media monitoring have become tools for political suppression, often operating under the guise of public safety.

3. Collective Violence: From Ritualised Conflict to Online Mobs

Key Thinkers: René Girard, Stanley Tambiah

What is Collective Violence?

Anthropologists have studied collective Violence in contexts ranging from ethnic conflict to social uprisings. René Girard’s scapegoat theory explains how communities unify through the ritualised sacrifice of a victim. Stanley Tambiah highlights the performative aspects of collective Violence, emphasising its symbolic meaning.

AI Entanglement

In digital spaces, AI facilitates collective Violence through coordinated harassment campaigns and disinformation. Unlike physical collective Violence, these attacks often lack a clear scapegoat, spreading rapidly and diffusely.

Example: AI-generated deepfake videos for disinformation campaigns target public figures, journalists, and vulnerable communities.

4. Symbolic Violence: The Hidden Power of AI

Key Thinker: Pierre Bourdieu

What is Symbolic Violence?

Symbolic Violence refers to the subtle, often invisible ways power hierarchies are reproduced and accepted as natural or legitimate. Pierre Bourdieu’s work highlights how cultural practices and language embed power relations, making subordination seem inevitable.

AI Entanglement

AI reinforces symbolic Violence by presenting algorithmic decisions as neutral and objective. These systems often reflect and reproduce existing inequalities, legitimising social hierarchies.

Example: AI-based hiring systems systematically favour candidates who fit dominant cultural norms, marginalising those from diverse backgrounds under the guise of “merit.”

5. Cyberviolence: A New Form or a Continuation?

Cyberviolence represents an emerging form of harm that combines structural, political, collective, and symbolic violence elements. While it appears new, cyberviolence can be seen as an extension of older forms of Violence adapted to digital spaces.

Virtual vs Physical Harm

Unlike traditional Violence, cyberviolence often lacks physical contact. However, its emotional, psychological, and social impacts are real and profound.

Examples:

  • Coordinated harassment campaigns using AI-driven bots
  • AI-powered disinformation that destabilises communities and erodes trust
  • AI-generated deepfake content for blackmail or harassment

6. Towards a Framework for Understanding AI-Driven Violence

Rather than seeing AI-related Violence as entirely separate, it should be conceptualised as part of a continuum that builds on classical forms of Violence while recognising the new complexities introduced by digital technologies.

Visual Framework

A visual representation could place classical forms of Violence on one end and cyberviolence on the other, illustrating how AI amplifies and connects these concepts across the continuum:

  1. Structural Violence → Algorithmic Inequality
  2. Political Violence → Digital Repression
  3. Collective Violence → Coordinated Online Harassment
  4. Symbolic Violence → Algorithmic Legitimization of Hierarchies

Lessons from Anthropology for the Digital Age

Anthropologists have long studied how power and inequality shape human experiences of Violence. By situating AI-related Violence within these frameworks, we may be able to better understand its roots and impacts. Moving forward, a combination of anthropological insight, ethical AI development, and robust policy frameworks may also be necessary to mitigate harm and create more equitable systems.

AI is not just a tool; it’s a cultural force shaping the future of power and Violence. Understanding its role through the lens of anthropology and history is crucial to ensuring it serves the common good.

I would welcome any discussion and other thoughts on the subject.

By Brett Allen March 28, 2026
Learning to See Organisations Differently
By Brett Allen March 19, 2026
A few years ago, I would never have imagined becoming an ethnographer of the train. But geopolitics has a way of rearranging the mundane. As fuel prices surge, a consequence of unnecessary war in the Middle East and trade wars, all decided in distant corridors of power. The ripple effect has forced me to switch from my car to public transport. From driving the lines, tracing my own routes through the road network insulated in steel and glass, I was thrown in with everyone else.  What I found has become curious. A train line is not simply a route through space. It is a line, physical and imagined, entangled with a multitude of lives, intentions, and temporalities. Knotting together and unravelling at each station along the journey. A student boards at one stop, a shift worker departs at the next, and a consultant opens a laptop three stations later. The line gathers and disperses, gathers and disperses. Each node of the collection station, platform, and carriage doors rounds up and orders human packages. People gather, but they do not meet. They are collected. Sorted. Loaded. Pack away. Arriving at the station or stop, bodies pour out in a slow, uniform current, phones in hand, heads bowed. I couldn’t shake the image of workers leaving the machine in Fritz Lang’s Metropolis . The same shuffling gait. The same downcast eyes. But these aren’t labourers broken by industrial discipline. These are knowledge workers, voluntarily tethered. I began to think of the smartphones as umbilical cords. Unnecessary ones at that. These digital entanglements connect each person to hegemonic entities they can barely name or conceive. Big tech, algorithmic processes, AI, data architectures, concepts that don’t enter the mind of the commuter. So who is nourishing whom in this arrangement? The user feels connected, sustained. The platform extracts attention, data, and behavioural surplus. Both parties believe the other is the dependent. And then there were the laptops. People are already working buried in emails, spreadsheets, Slack messages — before they’d arrived at the office. Whatever happened to the Australian ethos of working to live rather than living to work? That sensibility assumed a clean boundary between labour and leisure, between the office and the beach. The smartphone has erased or weakened that line. Work, rest, and distraction occupy the same device, posture, and glazed expressions. You cannot tell from looking whether someone is answering their manager or scrolling memes. The activity is identical. I noticed all of this because I was reading Tim Ingold’s Life of Lines , a physical book, held in two hands, which, of course, is its own technology of insulation. Ingold distinguishes between the wayfarer, who moves attentively through the world, and the transported person, who is essentially a parcel moved from one destination to another. My fellow commuters had gone further. They were being transported through physical space while simultaneously being transported through digital space. Present in neither. Autonomous in neither. The train line, this thing that entangles us all at different points of time and space, had become merely a conduit, its knots of human meeting pulled tight and never opened. The car windscreen has been replaced by the phone screen. The private cabin has been replaced by the digital bubble. The insulation persists. It just changed the substrate. I looked up from my book and saw lines everywhere. The fixed line of the rail corridor. The invisible lines of the wireless signal. The lines of text on every screen. The lines of force run from Washington to fuel pumps to household budgets to train tickets. And the line I was travelling, entangled with a multitude at different points of time and space, knotting and unknotting at every station. We were all following lines. None of us chose quite where they led. Perhaps the most honest thing I can say is this: I am one of the drones, too. I was reading a book about lines while being carried along one, performing a more prestigious version of exactly what everyone else was doing, absent from the shared space, following a thread of my own. The only difference was the moment I looked up. Maybe that’s enough. The ethnographic instinct isn’t immune to the pattern. It’s the willingness to notice you’re in it.
By Brett Allen November 18, 2025
This proposed paper is glance towards future research project and a trend on social media. With the topic of Empathy becoming a hot subject at the moment on social channels such as LinkedIn.
More Posts