THE AUTHOR FIRST DRAWS A DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE 'HYGIENIC' FUNCTION OF GOVERNMENT (PREVENTION OF ACTS OF VICTIMIZATION) AND THE STRUCTURING FUNCTION OF GOVERNMENT (IMPOSITION OF FORMS OF ORDER). HE THEN RAISES THE QUESTION OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE ACTIVITIES OF THESE SYSTEMS (BOTH AS TO THE EFFORTS TO IMPOSE SOCIAL ORDER THROUGH THE 'STRUCTURING' PROCESS AND THE FAILURE TO FULFILL THE 'HYGIENIC' FUNCTION) AND THE INCREASED INCIDENCE OF VIOLENCE AND OTHER FORMS OF DISORDER. THE CONVENTIONAL EXAMINATIONS OF CAUSES OF VIOLENCE HAVE TENDED TO FOCUS ON SUCH SOCIAL FACTORS AS INCOME DISPARITY, LIVING CONDITIONS, AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR EMPLOYMENT AND UPWARD MOBILITY. WHILE NOT DENYING OR AFFIRMING ANY OF THESE POSSIBLE EXPLANATIONS, THIS ARTICLE SUGGESTS THAT THERE MAY BE SOMETHING INHERENT IN ANY FORM OF IMPOSED ORDER WHICH LEADS TO A SENSE OF FRUSTRATION AMONG PERSONS WHOSE EXPECTATIONS COME INTO CONFLICT WITH THE EXPECTATIONS OF THE SYSTEM AND WHICH, WHEN SUCH DISPARITY IS PERCEIVED BY SUCH PERSONS, AND WHEN THE ALTERNATIVES TO RELIEVING THE DISPARITY FAIL, MAY LEAD SUCH PERSONS TO TAKE UP VIOLENCE IN AN ATTEMPT TO ELIMINATE SUCH DISPARITY. THE AUTHOR CONCLUDES THAT A FORMAL SYSTEM OF LEGAL AND POLITICAL ORDER MAY, BE A DYSFUNCTIONAL INSTITUTION SERVING TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE VERY PHENOMENON OF VIOLENCE WHICH IT IS THEORETICALLY DESIGNED TO CONTROL AND ELIMINATE. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT MODIFIED)