{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.015141955835962145, 'fraction_numerical': 0.005047318611987382, 'mean_word_length': 5.318725099601593, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Political Sociology of Private Armies in Colombia and the United States

This paper provides a comparative sociological analysis of private armies in Colombia and the United States. Private armies in both nations have economic and political underpinnings. An ethic of economic inequality pervaded Colombian life and institutions since colonialism, creating a milieu for private armies to develop. The cocaine industry seized a historic moment in the weakness of the Colombian state, and private armies in their employ helped to manage the risks of cocaine production. Occasionally the armies were used for counterinsurgent purposes. Beyond this, a remarkable diversity of roles played by private armies was noted. In the United States, an ethic of equality provided the social milieu for legitimate private armies to appear. Militias enjoyed social status early on, but later were viewed as antidemocratic and authoritarian. Militia groups since 1865 focused attention upon internal threats first and later external ones. They did not get involved in an illegal business enterprise, and thus overall their social network was less complicated than their Colombian counterparts. Moreover, state power has limited their effectiveness and ability to gain mass appeal in the United States. In the 1990s, armies in both countries underwent change, and their situations became more complex. Diversity of roles played by the Colombian militias is highlighted during this period, while in the United States, militia ideologies were a complex mix of Constitutionalism and Christian Identity.