1

My understanding of vigilantism is that it constitutes any act motivated by a desire to seek justice outside of the state-enforced judicial system. As such, can one be considered a vigilante if one's personal conception of justice doesn't match up with what the majority generally considers to be justice?

In Edgar Wright's Hot Fuzz, for example, the Neighbourhood Watch Alliance murder those that they feel ruin their village's chances of winning village of the year. They're the villains of the film, but they claim to do what they do "for the greater good", so presumably from their point of view they've been punishing those that break the rules they've established for the town. The rules are bizarre, but they're rules nonetheless, and so, from a warped perspective, punishing those who break them could be considered a kind of justice.

With this in mind, could the Neighbourhood Watch Alliance be considered 'vigilantes', albeit villainous ones?

Edit: I think its worth clarifying - I mean more to ask whether the justice that an individual seeks has to be the one advocated by the state (as in nation-state, rather than US state), or could it be their own personal idea of justice? Does a vigilante have to uphold existing laws, or can they uphold their own?

6
  • 1
    A negative word associated with vigilantes would hardly be an oxymoron or contradiction in terms. In fact, I believe that word is quite negative when used in the mainstream press. Still, when these characters are punishing something for their own gain it comes closer to racketeering than the sense of "justice in their own hands". It isn't quite the right word in my opinion but it could be one of many designations together painting a more specific picture.
    – Tom22
    Commented May 13, 2017 at 20:25
  • Thanks, but I don't think racketeering is quite the right word either - like you say, that's more about personal gain. I don't think I used a great example in the question, so I've tried to clarify myself in an edit.
    – user203511
    Commented May 13, 2017 at 20:47
  • Vigilantes are almost by definition upholding a different version of Justice than the state's. If their version agreed with the state's, the vigilantes could just wait for the state to act. To take an extreme example, lynchings are sometimes described as acts of vigilantism. The problem with your example is that it sounds like the NWA had sort of quasi-governmental powers, and the enforcers' motivation may also have been a more conscious intent to maintain organizational power than what we usually attribute to vigilantes.
    – 1006a
    Commented May 13, 2017 at 21:05
  • 1
    Nice question, because we get relatively few queries about meanings (let alone the scope of a particular word) amidst a huge number of questions about grammar and usage! I hope somebody doesnt get it into their mind to suspend it as off-topic... as already pointed out by the learned members in the earlier comments and answer, the word 'vigilante' seems officially flexible enough to admit the vigilantes' own interpretation of justice and not insist that it correspond with the State's definition; I might add that they must at least act in good faith to be called vigilantes and not thugs! Commented May 13, 2017 at 21:23
  • Note too that the term 'vigilante' can carry positive or negative connotations. Vigilantes who upheld justice (violently) when the State was apathetic are revered as heroes; but groups that felt threatened by (members of) other groups also took up arms to 'ensure justice is done' where the perceived justice was nothing but the protection of the group's self-interest which appeared (to them at the time) a very good justification for extra-legal punitive deeds. Such action has also been termed vigilantism both at the time and later, yet widely condemned as vile bigotry by future generations. Commented May 13, 2017 at 21:40

2 Answers 2

2

vigilante implies going outside the law; the law applies to everyone and isn't a matter of choice or preference. But neighborhood watch groups, which often exist, aren't an example of vigilantism. It's not a question, however, of one's view that the current administration of justice may be inadequate or inappropriate; it's a question of what one does.

MW on vigilante:

Definition of vigilante

a member of a volunteer committee organized to suppress and punish crime summarily (as when the processes of law are viewed as inadequate); broadly : a self-appointed doer of justice

The Meaning and Origin of vigilante

Vigilante entered English in the 19th century, borrowed from the Spanish word of the same spelling which meant “watchman, guard” in that language. The Spanish word can be traced back to the Latin vigilare, meaning “to keep awake.” The earliest use of the word in English was to refer to a member of a vigilance committee, a committee organized to suppress and punish crime summarily, as when the processes of law appear inadequate. The word may often be found in an attributive role, as in the phrases “vigilante justice,” or “vigilante group.” In this slightly broadened sense it carries the suggestion of the enforcement of laws without regard to due process or the general rule of law.

Note, however, that citizens may have the power to make an arrest: Citizen's Arrest

In certain situations, private individuals have the power to make an arrest without a warrant. These types of arrests, known as citizens arrests, occur when ordinary people either detain criminals themselves or direct police officers to detain a criminal.

Fictional heros, superheros, detectives, and commandos may have a vigilante aspect--they may violate the law in order to bring justice. For example:

Batman

Jack Reacher (Lee Child's books)

Pike Logan (Brad Taylor)

Mitch Rabb (Vince Flynn)

0

A vigilante is simply (from Spanish) a night watchman, from vigilant, meaning (per OED),

Wakeful and watchful; keeping steadily on the alert; attentively or closely observant.

Most uses of the term are connected with guarding against the illegal and criminal, but it is difficult always to be clear exactly what that is. Opinions differ as to what is legally proper. I did find this example of vigilant, at least suggesting that the officers of the law were not always beyond a need to be watched.

1845 H. H. Wilson Hist. Brit. India 1805–35 I. vii. 400 It was impossible for him to exercise a vigilant personal supervision over the officers of the police.

1
  • This is misleading. In English, a vigilante is not simply a person who is vigilant.
    – jejorda2
    Commented Jul 27, 2017 at 15:13

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.