How does violence shape citizens’ preferences for conflict termination? The existing literature has argued that violence either begets sympathy for more violence or drives support for making peace. Focusing on the 2016 Colombian Peace Agreement, this article finds that victimhood dissociation strongly shapes these preferences. With victimhood dissociation, a discrepancy exists between objective and subjective victimization, and the effect of violence on peace attitudes depends on citizens’ subjective interpretations of their personal experiences of violence. Citizens who do not experience violence often see themselves as victims of the conflict and vice versa. Victimhood dissociation is linked to cultural stereotypes of victimhood as portrayed in elite narratives concerning the conflict. In Colombia, political leaders framed victimhood around rurality, business entrepreneurship, kidnapping, extortion, and disappearance. In 2016, this widespread narrative was instrumental for politicians opposing the peace agreement. Citizens who disassociated their personal experiences of violence from their self-understanding as victims were instrumental to the failure of the peace plebiscite.

暴力如何塑造公民对终止冲突的偏好？现有文献认为，暴力要么引起更多暴力的同情，要么会推动建立和平。本文着眼于2016年《哥伦比亚和平协议》，发现受害人解体强烈地影响着这些偏好。由于受害者分离，客观和主观受害之间存在差异，暴力对和平态度的影响取决于公民对其暴力经历的主观解释。没有遭受暴力侵害的公民常常将自己视为冲突的受害者，反之亦然。受害者分离与关于冲突的精英叙事所描绘的受害者的文化刻板印象有关。在哥伦比亚，政治领导人将受害者，农村创业，绑架，勒索和失踪定为框架。在2016年，这一广泛的叙述对反对和平协议的政客是有帮助的。使自己的暴力经历与受害人的自我理解脱节的公民对和平公民投票的失败起到了作用。