Elias believes that the process called civilization is especially marked by a reduction in the use of overt physical violence and an increase in the intensity of psychological control. As people become more and more dependent on one another for their own personal welfare through "increasing job specialization," their conduct becomes more disciplined and restrained. Applied to the area of punishment, Elias' civilizing process might imply that there is recourse to less brutal forms of punishment because policymakers perceive an enthusiasm for public "bloodletting" or beatings as the mark of a lower, less-refined order of people. Also, the move away from physically harsh punishments toward more reform measures is implicit recognition that all members of society are dependent on each other, so no person's wishes and needs can be completely disregarded. The civilizing process also might imply that the use of violence has not diminished but has just become more secluded, regulated, and calculable. This latter implication pertains particularly to societies in which citizens are divided into the affiliated and the marginalized. Under such a condition, those who are tied to the established order may respond in a punitive manner to those who are thought to be beyond hope and redemption. It is the future task of penality to assess who is being judged worthy of inclusion and how it is to be achieved. 8 notes and 50 references