Can conflict be avoided in human societies ?

Résumé du document

In each society, people have to face struggles and fights as soon as the day begins. They have to scramble just in order to reach and to creep into a subway. Others must cover a long walk just to bring back some water. Everyone has a daily struggle against the time, or against the crowd, or against oneself when, for instance, the alarm clock is ringing for the third time. The struggle can be against another person or a group of human beings or just oneself. These conflicts have different forms and diverse aims but each one is an ordeal. The conflict can be violent but it can also be subtle. A conflict can provoke an economic war, an intellectual confrontation or simply ignorance, it is rarely without any consequences. So, can conflict be avoided in human societies? That is to say, can people live in peace together?

Extraits

[...] Violent conflicts are finally the fact of people who need to be educated. That is normal, we need a mass of words to express our feelings, if we cannot, we have to find another solution. This theory can maybe partly explain the violence which is established in the poorest suburbs where education is sometimes neglected because of their hard situation. The human ignorance provokes also the fear of what is unknown and particularly the fear of what is foreign. Thus, ignorance creates xenophobia, xenophobia creates conflicts between human societies. [...]

[...] In fact, the evolution is possible thanks to the destruction, history is not a repetition and every system was born with the eradication of the former one. Sincerely, I think that is a wrong idea avoiding conflicts. Conflicts allow the evolution of a society, toward more Justice, more Morality and more Right. According to Aristotle, the first human society was leading by a monarchy which became a tyranny, this one has been eradicate by a conflict. The second was leading by an aristocracy which became an oligarchy, this one, too, has been eradicate by a revolution. [...]

[...] So, it can be a dictatorship or just a too present State which would limit the liberties of each citizen. Man, to remain a human being, does not have to suffer a sort of important pressure or constraint. Men want to live in society to find a help, not to be totally bound by law. Indeed, the possibility to clash with others or with the State proves that this society allows and accepts the freedom of speech, people are not frightened. People are not the tools of the State because they change it. [...]

[...] I do not thing so. In fact, if everyone gives up their rights, they lose their human side, so we do not speak anymore about society. This sort of society has been described by the dystopia written by A. Huxley Brave New World, in 1931, and recently by the movie Equilibrium, produced by K. Wimmer in 2002. Rousseau, when he wrote to Montaigne, said something like : The worst law will always be better than the best Lord. The Lord will remain always human, so, according to Aristotle, a good Lord will become a tyrant. [...]

[...] People can keep it in mind and try to move it always closer. At first, people were guided by the religious theory of good. In fact, if during their lives people were nasty, they were likely to go to Hell. A sort of suspicion pushed people to be good people. That was not Big Brother but is watching you”. People were terrified, they really fear the Hell. Today, we can say that this predilection has a very big effect on the mob. [...]