ABSTRACT
South Asia has witnessed and continues to experience a complex repertoire of political violence. Political violence is typically defined in relation to the state or government. Without a central state monopolizing violence, a critical question that arises concerns how political order is maintained. Because political order rests on the roles of violent entrepreneurs, the latent violence can arguably be considered a form of political violence, suggesting a further layer of complexity to how this concept can be thought of and applied. Violence is thus a key skill, or capability, which can be used 'entrepreneurially'; and as Charles Tilly argues, 'most important political figures have combined entrepreneurship with control of coercive means'. While the connection between intermediation and violence is under-theorized, literature from diverse contexts testifies as to how violent entrepreneurs use such relationships to gain wealth. The chapter explores the approach outlined empirically in South Asia, a region where there is no shortage of violent specialists.
