Posted by Flemming on July 21, 1996 at 15:46:53:
In Reply to: Disputes posted by Tobias on July 21, 1996 at 15:41:40:
: I failed to find inherent human problems like : jealousy, arguments, violations, war. Those are real ! Always happend and will again !
: Among many peaceful tribes there will still be some disputes !
Yes, you're right. I have no argument with that. There will still be jealousy, disagreements, fights, crime, etc, no matter how nicely the overall scheme is working.
My idea is that most conflicts will be local and will be handled by people who are around the scene, maybe members of the same community. If two people have a dispute they can't settle between themselves, an arbitrator or mediator or a group of mediators would be appointed within their community. If the whole community has an interest in the matter, and it is maybe only one person trying to bend the norms, they can collectively decide to impose some kind of sanctions against the person.
If a dispute cannot be sorted out within a small community, or the whole community is split on it, mediators can be called in from a bigger grouping. For example from a cluster of communities, or from a neighbouring community. And it could well be a viable profession for somebody to be a neutral mediator who can be called in to help resolve disputes. The future of the legal profession, I suppose.
If two communities are in conflict with each other, the matter would be addressed by representatives from the cluster of communities they are both part of. In other words, conflict resolution floats to a higher level only when it isn't possible at a lower level. As contrasted with the old system of laws being decided on the highest and most general level first.
If a violent conflict breaks out between different communities or regions, again the first choice would be for neighbouring areas, or bigger federations of areas, to send in neutral mediators. If that fails, representatives from the neighbouring areas will get together and try to decide on ways they would want to respond. They might take sides, or they might impose sanctions against both warring factions. Sanctions would be in the form of witholding cooperation or resource sharing or trade. It could potentially be violent intervention if that is deemed to be appropriate.
An assumption in making all this work is that the majority of people would like things to work in a constructive, peaceful way. If some people are engaged contrary to that, other people who are around will have the power and resources and coherency of mind to take action and remedy it. Power has not been given away to far-away agencies, thereby leaving local groups powerless.
A pervasive principle here is that things are handled specifically and locally rather than generally and globally. Sort of like the inner workings of a family. If a group of people are living in the same house, and somebody's upset at somebody else, or there is a conflict or disagreement, they will normally deal with it. They will talk about, somebody might leave, they might have a fight and then make up, somebody else in the household might intervene. If they can't sort it out, their neighbours or extended family might become involved. There isn't necessarily any law book with general rules that would be helpful, the actual situation and circumstances is what needs to be resolved.
- Flemming