Click here for PDF format of this essay
THE ART OF NEGOTIATION AND COMPROMISE
arguments for and against secrecy during negotiations
A Study in Thought
sa059
by
Marius Heuff
Chapter 1
Content
A violent confrontation represents a mechanism for dissolving tensions.
The results of an all-out struggle for survival.
The instinct of territoriality.
Inter-dependence, and the lingering needs for a territory.
The bonds of human inter-dependence have grown beyond national boundaries.
The territorial instincts of political leaders.
When we lose the ability to negotiate and compromise.
Dying as soldiers on the battlefield, or as civilians in vulnerable cities, is
a high price to pay for saving the prestige of our nation.
When we are caught by a deadly instinct.
Rationalising our attitudes of hostility and acts of belligerence.
The cloak of "self-defense".
What makes us so sure, that we are not to blame?
We pay a high price for the comforting feeling of "being absolutely
right".
1 We tend to think, that a
belligerent confrontation, an act of hostility, or, an outright war between
ethnic groupings or entire nations, is the essence of the problem for which we
have to find a solution, but, in essence, the clash of arms is the solution
for, or the "dissolution" of, the tensions and frustrations that have
been building-up. Indeed, throughout the realm of living nature, we see, that
the competitive struggle, or the predatory kill, is a solution to the build-up
of tensions that have been generated as a result of diverging drives and
objectives.
2 Often, the struggle is very un-even, such as the confrontation between predator and prey, but, competitive pressures and tensions between similar organisms are, usually, more evenly matched. Here, a number of similar or essentially identical organisms search for a possibility to exist in the same territory, or the same "ecological niche", and, they resolve their competitive tensions by a struggle. The winner lives and reproduces, while the loser flees or dies, and removes himself and his potential off-spring from the scene.
3 If the loser flees, he has to
renew the competitive struggle somewhere else, or, he has to fight harsher
ecological conditions in an area that has not been populated, as yet, by the
members of his species. If he is successful and gains in strength, he may come
back and challenge, once more, his original competitors.
4 The vigorous and mature members
of a species are, often, firmly in the grip of their instincts and drives,
especially, when they are subjected to severe competitive pressures. As a
result, they tend to disperse themselves over as large a territory as possible,
while claiming an area of space, or territory, to sustain their basic needs. Competitive
dispersion, as well as the behaviour of "territoriality", are based,
therefore, on the same existential needs and mechanisms, but, we associate the
concepts of competitive dispersion, primarily, with uni-cellular organisms,
because this concept indicates a rather passive process, while we reserve the
concept of territoriality for the more complex living organisms, that show an
active and purposeful behaviour of claiming and defending a certain territory.
5 Territoriality is a complex
pattern of behaviour, centered around the instinctive drive to claim and defend
a certain territory. Natural selection has sharpened such a behaviour-pattern
in a large variety of animals, because it obviously helps them to survive as
individuals, and, it allows them to perpetuate the species by becoming
successful parents. These animals will have a territory that can sustain their
basic needs and energy requirements, while animals that are unable to claim a
territory, have to lead a precarious existence at the periphery of someone
else's territory, or, they are driven-off into harsher territories that yield
less, but, are also less densely populated.
6 The extent of a territory is
not defined, exclusively, by a particular geographical area, because such an
area often consists of a variety of "ecological niches", where
different species' live side by side, with over-lapping territories. This is
possible, if their existential requirements do not compete. For example, the
territories of birds, mammals, reptiles and insects may overlap to a
considerable extent, and their ecological inter-relationships may become quite
complex. Look at a marsh or a swamp, where a large variety of species' live
closely together.
7 Man has just as strong an
instinct of territoriality as most other mammals, but, because man has also
inherited the "anlage" to develop social inter-dependencies, the
territories of individual human beings tend to fuse into the territory of a
small group. The predominant feature of man's territorial behaviour is the
tendency to defend a communal territory. The group may represent a family on a
homestead, or a tribe, but, regardless of the size of the grouping, the
required area is more or less defined. In our modern times, the group is likely
to be the size of a nation, with the boundaries of a sovereign state. In each
example, it is clear, how strong our instinctive drives are to defend the
integrity of what we consider to be "our territory".
8 Within a social grouping, there
is still a fairly strong tendency to stake or claim a certain territory as our
"personal property", in particular, in societies, where the personal
ownership of land is allowed, or, even encouraged. Yet, if we look closely at
the division of communal property into personally owned land, we note, that the
members rely rarely upon these personal territories for all their needs.
Certainly, those, who farm or supply a large portion of their food requirements
from working a piece of land, develop a measure of
"self-sufficiency", but, nearly always, people have to engage in a
trade, or an exchange of goods and services, in order to get the necessary
tools, energy-supplies, building-materials or supplementary food-stuffs, which
they can not produce themselves.
9 Indeed, the human being has a
strong tendency to become dependent upon such inter-dependencies or exchanges,
because man has learned that it is nearly impossible, and certainly
inefficient, to try to produce, from scratch, all the necessary tools,
materials, energy-supplies and food requirements.
10 There is another important
consideration, here, because the processes of exchange, or trade, between
individuals and groups of people provide, not only, tools and other materials,
but, also, an increased level of knowledge and technical expertise, which is
dependent upon extensive contacts between groups of people.
11 The exchange of goods, services
and information makes it possible to live much closer together. With modern
tools and technology, and, without the need to be completely self-sufficient,
we can afford to be satisfied with a much smaller territory. This territory
shrinks in urban and suburban existence to a small appartment, where we seek a
few moments of quiet and privacy, after a period of intensive contact with
other people, but, even, in a modern, rural setting, we see, that people do not
need any more land than they can cultivate or work themselves.
12 Modern technology relies upon
sophisticated machinery and petro-chemical fuels to till the earth, move it,
cut-down the trees and alter a land-scape, quickly. Man's ability to alter the
territory and ecological relationships is considerable, and, while the
objective is to make it more inhabitable for the species of mankind, the
long-term effects are, often, detrimental and contrary to this objective. The
point we want to emphasise, here, is the fact, that, without tools and the
knowledge, how to use and maintain these tools, we could not use the land and
its resources so intensively, and, we would need a much larger territory to sustain
ourselves.
13 This conclusion becomes clear,
when we compare the modern rural life-style with the life-style of trapping and
hunting, where people use only a fraction of the available resources to satisfy
their existential needs. The area required is large and the utilisation of the
resources is shallow compared to modern life. In contrast, we would be unable
to sustain ourselves without technology in a small territory, nor, could we
survive in the barren and colder areas of the globe, without knowledge,
communications, transportation and a variety of sophisticated technical aids
and energy-sources.
14 The mechanisms of
inter-dependence and exchange, followed by technology and mechanisation, have
freed us from back-breaking labour and made it possible to live in crowded
conditions on a small territory. Certainly, we realise, now, how vulnerable
crowded conditions are to social turmoil and chaos, and, we know, how dependent
we are upon an outside supply of food and energy to sustain ourselves. We may,
then, begin to dream of a place in the woods, where we can grow our own
vegetables and have a few animals to supply our needs, but, if we are
realistic, we realise, that we are still dependent upon the outside world to
give us our tools and knowledge, as well as many of the supplementary foods,
energy and building-materials.
15 As a small community, we have a
much better chance to be independent and self-sufficient, compared to living
alone, or, as a single, pioneering family-unit. The bonds of inter-dependence
have grown, however, well beyond the boundaries of sovereign nations, and, this
makes our nationalistic sentiments and patriotic pride rather hollow,
rethorical and archaic.
16 However, national leaders still
have a tendency to whip-up nationalistic sentiments and patriotic fervor,
whenever they feel, or imagine, that "their territory" is endangered,
or, when they fear that their authority is being challenged. It is remarkable,
how easily our national leaders are persuaded to think, that they "own"
the communal territories over which they have assumed a measure of leadership
and responsibility. It is remarkable, how many nations, including large,
prosperous and sophisticated societies, still do not have satisfactory
mechanisms to elect representative leaderships. Too many leaderships still grab
hold of the top positions in society by a juggling act of intrigue and
intimidation, temporary and shifting alliances, as well as a measure of brute,
military force.
17 We can state, without hesitation, that, by far, the largest category of armed conflict and acts of violence is made-up by disputes over territory. In particular, when we look at the behaviour of large groupings, we see, that the instinctive drives and emotional sentiments of territoriality play a dominant role in the growth of a conflict-situation and the preparations for war.
18 It never ceases to amaze me, how
quickly apparently intelligent people are sliding into a belligerent stance,
where they pledge, in all sincerity and fervor, the blood of their countrymen
in an all-out fight against an aggressor who has not even lifted a finger
against them. Our leaders become too easily puppets in the grip of their
instincts, where they revert to this dangerous and pathetic game of belligerent
posturing. They do not know, that they pay a high price for their belligerent
rethoric, because they lose the ability to negotiate and compromise, and, they
put themselves into a corner from where it is difficult to escape without a
violent clash, or a severe loss of prestige. Then, the leaders will have to
send their peoples into the battle-fields to slaughter each other, while they
watch, safely, from their shelters, until they can toast each other after the
war in a spirit of admiration for the valiant courage with which their soldiers
have killed each other.
19 To die on the battlefields is a
high price to pay for saving the honour and prestige of our belligerent
leaders. Yet, time and again, people are whipped into a belligerent frenzy by
their leaders, and, they seem to go willingly to the battle-fields. Many people
do not seem to mind, that their leaders stay behind, when they have to go to
the front-lines. It feels so good to shout "death to the enemy", and,
it is so satisfying to lash-out at your evil opponent, because each side is
absolutely convinced, that it fights for the honour of God and country.
20 The instinct of territoriality
has probably killed more people than any other, single cause. I doubt, whether
famine, poverty and diseases have, together, been responsible for as many death
as the instincts of territoriality, because most of the poverty, diseases and
famines we see in the world, are related, in one way or another, to wars
between nations and communities, or, the displacement of the frightened and the
weak by a triumphant and expansionist society, claiming, of course, the best
territories for itself.
21 The territorial instinct has
secured life and success, comfort and territory for the winners of a
competitive struggle in each and every species of life, but, at the same time,
an unbridled territorial instinct may lead to unbelievable upheavals and
atrocities, and, it may, eventually, lead to a fatal and suicidal conflagration
of the species of mankind because of its ability to make suicidal weaponry of
mass-destruction.
22 Perhaps, we can still learn to
control the drive to settle conflicts with violence, if we can learn to
recognise what drives us to the "glory of war". We may be able to learn,
how to negotiate a true pact of peaceful co-existence with each other, without
getting suspicious, restless and frustrated, but we will have to learn a great
deal more about our own psychological constitution, as well as the many
mechanisms that take place within and between human beings.
23 We have inherited a strong and
well-developed instinct of territoriality, and, it is remarkable, how strong
this instinct shines through in our collective behaviour. This collective
behaviour has, fortunately, also a well-developed trend towards cooperation and
inter-dependence, and, we have discussed, how our individual territories seem
to "fuse" into a communal territory, which is then
"appropriated" or considered to be the private property of the
leadership of this community.
24 Unfortunately, we do not seem to
have inherited a significant tendency to cooperate at the level of the much
larger social entity. As relatively small, tightly-knit communities, we show,
once again, a much more primitive form of behaviour whenever we clash, because
we are, then, strongly territorial in our outlook, as well as outright
suspicious and hostile towards any group competing with us.
25 Man has learned to communicate
on a conceptual level with the help of "language", consisting of
arbitrary vocal sounds or symbols, and, this ability to talk, to communicate,
and to reason, is, invariably, placed at the service of our existential
requirements. We have learned to clothe our territorial instincts in a
respectable dress of "national interests", and, we have all become
very good at defending, with rethoric and arguments, those attitudes and
actions, which our instinctive drives have prompted us to. We give ourselves an
air of rationality and "legality", and, we can always find the most
convincing reasons and arguments for calling our actions a "restraint
behaviour of self-defense".
26 It is amazing, how a war can
break-out and armies can penetrate deep into each other's territories as the
result of such acts of "restraint and measured self-defense". It is
amazing, how each side is always completely within its legal rights and reacts
only to the unwarranted provocations of the other!
27 When will we learn to stop
deceiving ourselves, and, when will we learn to see ourselves as we are; in the
grip of a naked instinct of hostility and aggression, even, if we consider
ourselves to be only reluctant defenders of a "just cause". When will
we learn to drop the absolute qualifications of right and wrong, of good and
evil, and, when will we consider, in a more emotionally neutral frame of mind,
the mechanisms and forces that are playing with our mind, while threatening to
destroy our existence? When will we learn to control our emotions and examine,
in a truly broad perspective, the long history of causes and their effects, of
provocations and escalations, which have been fueling the instincts of
belligerent confrontation in a vicious cycle of mutual enforcement?
28 Certainly, we know, that we can
learn to see reality this way. Can we not mediate as an outsider in a dispute,
and, are we not able to see, how each side is to blame for the developments
that led to a situation of conflict? If we can see, as an outsider, that the
fighting parties always share the blame for their hostilities, be it to varying
degrees, what, then, makes us so sure, that we are not to blame at all, and,
that the other side bears all the responsibilities for the conflict, whenever
we become embroiled in a conflict ourselves? Is it not naive to think, that our
conflict is any different from any other conflict? Would our conflict not look
to an impartial outsider exactly the same as a fight between outsiders looks to
us?
29 Of course, there are peaceful
solutions to any situation of competitive strife, and, there is no need,
whatsoever, to fight wars. There is no need for soldiers to die in battle, nor,
is there any reason, why our leaders should make biased and incendiary
speeches. It certainly is possible to live in harmony and peace, but, we have
to be willing to learn about ourselves, our instincts and emotions. We have to
understand our belligerent nature, as well as our ability to be kind and
generous. We have to know, what makes us tick, and, what price we have to pay
for the comforting feeling of being "absolutely right".
.......
Chapter 2
Content
The functions of territorial behaviour.
The concept of an ecological balance.
Why the tensions of competitive strife continue to rise.
The lingering ferocity of our territorial instincts.
A slowly enlarging social unit.
Dividing necessary tasks and chores between a group of people.
The rise of the ability to recall memory-traces with representative symbols.
The "herd".
Herd-formation is not suitable for animals that require a sophisticated hunt in
order to feed themselves.
The slow and arduous growth of a viable social entity.
Many complex developments are taking place simultaneously.
Mechanisms of social integration in small groupings.
Cultural and technical innovations are necessary for a successful, overall,
large-scale social leadership.
1 When an animal has claimed its
territory and staked-out the boundaries, its instincts will make it drive-off
or resist a challenger. The challenger will be a member of his own species,
with similar territorial requirements. If there is plenty of territory
available, the problem is easily solved, because an animal, looking for a
territory, and, able to choose between one that has already been claimed and
one that is free, will choose the path of least resistance and leave the
claimed territory alone. Sooner or later, the members of a species outnumber
the territories that can be claimed with relative ease, and, some of them will
not be able to find a suitable place to live.
2 If the challenger is unable to
dislodge someone, he has to scrape a precarious existence at the periphery of
someone else's territory, or, he will drift into a more difficult environment.
After a period of successful growth, a species will experience the fact, that
its territory or "ecological niche" has been filled to capacity, and,
that it can not support more members. If the species is unable to
"break-through" into new territories, the population of the species
will "stabilise". The number of deaths and births will be roughly the
same, and, we see a balance emerge between those forces within the species that
push towards growth and procreation, and those, which are hostile to the
species. Such limiting factors, or hostile forces, are, e.g. a limited
territory or a saturated ecological niche, the predatory pressures from other
species', or, environmental and climatological changes that endanger the
existing ecological niche.
3 Many life-forms serve as a
food-supply for another species, and, they become, therefore, a part of the
territorial supply or ecological niche of its predator. This, in a nutshell,
represents the balance of nature, and, nearly all species' reach a stable and
sustainable population, which remains nearly constant, as long as no drastic
changes take place in the constellation of factors determining this niche or
ecological balance.
4 In many ways, the same
mechanisms apply to the human species as well, and, if we look at the time when
the nomadic tribes of early man were roaming over most of the habitable part of
the globe, we can appreciate the fact, that, a steady increase in the number of
human beings and tribal groupings sustained the tendency of competitive
dispersion and fueled the drive to explore the more hostile climatic zones of
the earth.
5 These tribes must have been
self-sufficient, before the rise of more sophisticated contacts between larger
social groupings, but, as we have discussed, self-sufficiency also meant the
need for a relatively large territorial expanse, since the level of territorial
utilisation without agriculture, animal domestication and sophisticated tools,
was quite low, indeed.
6 It seems justified, therefore,
to consider the emergence of the more populous societies, (such as the first
cities and the spurt of cultural developments that made these large population
densities possible), as a result of largely subconscious mechanisms, trying to
solve the rising tensions associated with high levels of competitive strife
between nomadic groupings. The habitable, and, certainly, the best areas, had all
been taken. To challenge an established grouping and displace it from its
territory, became increasingly arduous and costly, as the intensity and
ferocity of the competitive battle were mounting all the time.
7 Mankind experienced a severe
population crisis at the beginning of what we call the period of recorded
history and the onset of the Great Civilisations. Many of the larger animals
had been hunted to extinction or near-extinction. The quality and sustaining
power of many territories was rapidly declining, at least, for a nomadic way of
life. Strife between tribal groupings became more ferocious all the time. The
sophistication of tools and weapons made a significant evolutionary leap, and,
survival shifted from the ability to kill a large animal, to the ability to
defeat another tribe and take its territory.
8 Perhaps, we are justified to
see the lingering ferocity of our territorial instincts as a legacy of this
recent past, where, during the final shaping of our genetic make-up, the accent
of survival laid, heavily, upon the quality of an alert intelligence, a rapid
communication between the members of a tribe, as well as a ferocious, fearless
aggressiveness towards a competing grouping.
9 Perhaps, you would like to ask, how large such a tribe or a nomadic grouping had become, as we try to visualise, in our minds, the details of this somewhat speculative, prehistoric past; before the onset of permanent settlements and the rise of the first cities. A precise answer is not easy to obtain, but, it seems logical to assume, that the size of the human groupings that formed a viable, social unit, became gradually larger as the competitive pressures were mounting.
10 As we have discussed before, it
is certain, that the process of human differentiation, (the development of the
specific human qualities that set us apart as a distinctive, conceptualising
animal), took place within a social context. This means, that the processes of
symbolic representation and the manipulation of conscious awarenesses took
place after the onset of social integration, and, we may consider, therefore,
the tendency or the instinct to seek enhanced viability in the formation of a
social grouping, as part of our biological heritage.
11 On previous occasions, we have
elaborated upon the development of symbolic awarenesses. These are conscious
mental images we can name, and, we can arouse or evoke such conscious
awarenesses or mental images in each other by using symbols, gesticulations,
mimicry or vocal signals that are recognised by the other members of the group
to which we belong.
12 It is difficult to imagine the
development of conscious, symbolically representable images in a species where
the adult members live a solitary life. Even the isolated family-unit seems too
small to allow for the development of symbolic representations between its
members. It is, therefore, likely that the social unit of the pre-human animal
had already evolved to a fairly large size of, perhaps, one or two dozen
animals. It is also likely, that a fairly sophisticated pattern of
task-differentiations between the members had already developed, such as the
division between the young and strong males going out to hunt, and, the
females, their children, as well as an occasional "old" individual,
staying behind and carrying-out "household chores", including the
gathering of local fruits, berries and other edibles. We have argued, before,
that the event of the "home coming", after a separation of a few
hours, or, perhaps, even, a day or more, may have been one of the strongest
incentives to try to communicate to each other the happenings that took place
during this period of separation.
13 We can imagine the beginning of
a process of mimicry, gesticulations and vocalisation, representing the
experiences of one group, while the other group listens and watches
attentively. If a "recognition" takes place, the audience may
join-in, and, some of the members may then proceed to "tell their
story", while now the other group watches. In this way, it is possible to
visualise the emergence of a process of symbolic representation, because the
frequent occurrence of similar experiences makes it possible to act-out and
recognise happenings more quickly, without elaborate reproductions of the
portrayed or communicated events. As a result, the mimicry and gesticulations
become "stylised", or streamlined, and the process of communication
is speeded-up considerably.
14 We have good reasons to believe,
that this process of mimicry, gesticulation and vocalisation was sufficient to
explain the emergence of what we call "conscious awareness", because
the ability to evoke or recall a memory-trace with the help of such a symbolic
representation, (without the actual or analogous circumstances that caused the
memory imprint in the first place), lies at the core of the difference between
animal and human awarenesses.
15 We will not discuss or elaborate
these ideas any further, because we have done so before. We have not discussed in
any detail, however, the concept, that this increase in the size of the social
unit comes-about as a slow, evolutionary process. An enlarging social unit
requires remarkable changes in the ability of the members to communicate or
relate to each other. The larger the social grouping, the more "social
events" are taking place simultaneously, and, the more complex the
communications have to become, in order to maintain the unity of such a large
or enlarging social grouping and prevent the process of "social
splitting".
16 Actually, we can see two
distinct trends evolve whenever a large number of individuals are beginning to
live together. The most primitive, but, one of the most rapid ways to get a
large body of animals grouped-together, is to develop a "herd". A
herd is, in essence, a rather undifferentiated and amorphous grouping of
numerous smaller units with kinship relationships. Perhaps, a group of a dozen
animals or so, constitutes the basic unit, but, these units have intuitively
experienced the existential advantages of roaming the plains together. Because
of the abundant supply of grasses and other edibles, the mechanisms of
competitive dispersion are rather dormant. By synchronising their movements,
animals in a herd become much less vulnerable to their predators, because, now,
the attack of a predator upon the herd will alert the entire herd, and, all the
animals will adopt defensive or evasive behaviour-patterns. If the herd would
be split-up into a large number of individually grazing groupings, the alarm
signal would be limited to the small group that has been attacked.
17 Of course, there are
disadvantages as well to herding. Such a dense population-concentration would
be impossible for carnivorous hunters, because they have to stalk and catch
their prey in a complicated and demanding performance. However, if the food is
plentiful, and, if it only requires a lowering of the head to tear-off the
leafs and get a meal together, the grouping together of many smaller units into
a herd is a successful mechanism to enchance viability.
18 Species' that rely upon a
sophisticated hunt, can not form a herd, but, they can still explore the
advantages of grouping-together into larger units. However, these groupings
have to evolve along different principles of operation than the aggregate of
the herd. Here, the grouping together has to be centered around the purpose of
carrying-out a complex task. This requires the "cooperation" of a
number of individuals, and, we see, therefore, that this type of social enlargement
is a far slower process compared to the formation of a herd, because it
involves a gradual enlargement of the basic, viable social unit. This
enlargement of the social unit requires an increase in the mechanisms of
task-differentiation, more sophisticated communications, as well as an
extention of the lines of authority, in order to make it possible to organise
and integrate the activities of a fairly large number of individuals.
19 Here again, you may want to
argue, that it is difficult to visualise the emergence of qualities such as
"active organisation and integration", as well as other sophisticated
leadership functions, especially, since we do not see, as yet, a complex and
sophisticated system of symbolic representation, or a widespread ability to
manipulate and understand such symbols.
20 Indeed, we see a good argument,
here, for the concept that complex developments took place simultaneously and
inter-dependently, whenever the pressures of survival and the continuous need
to enlarge the range of exploitable food-resources, led to a trend of permanent
cooperation. Such cooperation is needed, every time a large and powerful animal
is hunted, and, at the same time, we see, that the difference between success
and failure in attempting such a daring exploit, meant, the difference between
abundance and starvation. The hunt of a large animal required the ability to
coordinate actions with specific and detailed communications, but, if
successful, it would be a powerful stimulus for a relatively large grouping to
stay together.
21 This type of cooperation and
communication may, initially, have been in the form of following a good,
clever, intelligent and courageous example of leadership. Indeed, existential
requirements sharpened the qualities of good natural leadership into the
genetic code of our human ancestors, as we have discussed on many occasions.
Successful behaviour of the small group of pre-human animals was, therefore,
characterised by the ability to cooperate, at least, temporarily, and, it was
also characterised by clear, understandable, exemplary behaviour-patterns.
Successful cooperative behaviour included the ability to share the kill
peacefully with the other members of the group.
22 As an integral feature in this process of recurrent cooperation between a fairly large number of individuals, and, perhaps, several distinct groupings, we see the importance of the ability to communicate with gesticulations and sign language. The ability to understand, and be guided by, these tentative communication signals, may easily have spelled the difference between life and death.
23 Slowly, the periods of
cooperation between small groupings became more frequent and lasted longer,
until they formed a more or less permanent bond of cooperation, and, we may
visualise, how territorially nearly equal and independent groupings fused,
eventually, into a larger unit, which still displayed the same hierarchical
relationships that play such an important role in the smaller units. Some
members started to assume leadership reponsibilities for the entire group,
while leaders with lesser qualities faded, slowly, into a more submissive role.
24 As we have discussed before, the
extention of leadership functions over an enlarging number of people imposes a
rapidly increasing stress on the energies, intelligence and alertness of the
leader, because the number of potential challengers increases, and the number
of events the leader has to know, escalates dramatically. The leader has to
know each member of the enlarged group intimately; at least, he has to know the
members in an intuitive, subconscious manner, and, we have discussed the
reasons, why it is likely, that, without cultural and technological aids, the
limiting factor for the growth of a social grouping becomes, quickly, the size
of a social grouping that can be overseen, known or "governed",
successfully, by a single, natural leader.
26 We do not know, what the maximum
size was of a group that could exist in a condition of health and flexibility
under a single, natural leader. It seems fair to conclude, however, that the
limitations of the capabilities of natural leadership provided the main
stimulus for the evolution of the many cultural and technological developments
that took place at the beginning of recorded history. These cultural and
technical innovations made it possible to extent the powers and abilities of
leadership over the enlarging social environment.
27 However, it is likely, that,
even, before the onset of recorded history, an acceleration of cultural
innovations had already begun, because the growth of the successful social unit
depended upon cultural and technical innovations, enhancing the
"governability" of the larger social groupings, making it possible
for the leaders to guide them successfully.
.......
Chapter 3
Content
Behavioural refinement; enlarging the number of factors to be taken into
account.
Behavioural flexibility; a review.
The close, evolutionary relatives of mankind.
A smooth transition from being an animal to being human.
Are we still animals?
A strong sexual drive.
A portrait of "early man".
A look at the genetically encoded instructions for parental care.
The essential vulnerability of behaviourally flexible youngsters.
Yielding to an emotionally satisfying behaviour of care and protection.
The cultural break-through is made possible by an increased reliance on the
ability to learn.
Cultural and genetic codes.
Pseudo-ethical behaviour-patterns; the draw-backs of a rigid, genetic encoding.
Ethical behaviour for the human being requires, necessarily, a strong element
of "voluntary choice".
1 Before we discuss, in more
detail, the refinements of leadership, as well as the enlargement of the sphere
of influence and power a leadership can obtain with the help of cultural and
technological innovations, we should have a good look at the behavioural
differentiations that have to take place in the members of an enlarging social
unit. An increased versatility and differentiation of behavioural reactions was
necessary, before the larger social unit could enjoy a measure of success, but,
behavioural refinement and social enlargement had to proceed simultaneously and
were intricately inter-woven with each other. After all, they represented two
aspects of the same event; the evolution of the human society.
2 We note, here, a mechanism of
mutual feed-back, because existential pressures upon the survival of the
members of a species provided a continuous stimulus towards social integration,
but, social integration could not progress to any extent, unless the individual
members were able to adopt more cooperative attitudes and tolerant behavioural
responses.
3 The basic differentiation of
the behavioural response is the distinction between a movement away from a
harmful stimulus, and a movement towards one that is "pleasant" or
favourable. This primary differentiation of the response is visible in the most
primitive and earliest uni-cellular life-forms, and, before we reach the stage
where evolution explored the existence possibilities of a "learned"
or modified response on the basis of "personal" or individualised
experiences, a gigantic diversity in the behavioural repertoir had already
evolved.
4 The variety of motoric
responses became incredibly large, especially, when we consider the spectrum of
multi-celluar animal life, after the successful invasion of "dry
land" . At the same time, the range of sensory perceptions became also
larger, but, each species was still rather precisely programmed so far as its
range of perceptions was concerned. This was due to its precise anatomic and
physiological parameters, as well as the limits imposed on its range of
responses.
5 In other words; each animal
species was built and programmed to receive a specific range of stimuli, and,
its responses were rather stereo-typed, in spite of the fact, that these
responses allowed for a great deal of motoric variability. For example, insects
inherited a fixed stimulus-response pattern, or, rather, a limited number of
precisely delineated behavioural programs. Just like a crystal-tuned receiver,
an insect could, and, still can, switch its responsiveness, as well as its
range of perceptions from one mode to the next, but, there are only a limited
number of steps that can be taken.
6 Even in those animals which we
classify as stereo-typed and "fixed" in their response-patterns, we
see, when looking at a very small scale indeed, that the motoric responses
depend upon a continuous feed-back of sensory data; e.g. the flight of an insect
that is able to avoid numerous obstacles, depends on the accurate sensing of
its environment and the ability to adapt its motoric responses accordingly.
7 However, during the evolution
of the behaviourally flexible animals a most remarkable shift in emphasis took
place. Behaviour-patterns became much less precisely determined by genetic
instructions, because they were only "given in outline" by the
genetic code. The precise adaptation of the behavioural response of the
individual came to depend upon the "decisions", or judgements, of a
living member of the species. This meant, that, behavioural adaptations started
to rely, increasingly, upon a range of experiences from the past. These
experiences must have been registered and classified by the central nervous
system of the organism, in one way or another.
8 As we have discussed many times
before, the human species is a direct descendent of this evolutionary line of
behavioural flexibility, which culminated in a small sub-grouping of the
mammals; the primates. Let us accept, for the time being, that the human being
is, indeed, one surviving branch of this group of primates. This group used to
be much larger and consisted of many more living species' than it does today.
Our only close, living relatives, are the chimpanzee, the orang-oetang and the
gorilla, but, it is likely, that, during the emergence of man, many closely
related species' were also on the evolutionary road towards conscious awareness
and the ability to conceptualise.
9 The existential pressures upon
the primates were severe, and, many closely related species' became extinct.
Eventually, the human species triumphed and became the undisputed master-hunter
of the plains. Some of the primates managed to survive, because they retreated
further and further away from man, and escaped, to a large extent, the
ferocious hunting and killing instincts of "Homo Sapiens".
10 Early man inherited, not only, a
highly sophisticed anatomical and physiological constitution, but, also, a
basic repertoir of behaviour-patterns, such as those of parental care,
small-scale social behaviour, as well as a tendency to explore and roam around
whenever its territory became depleted of edibles and prey. Man roamed at the
edge of the plains and the forests in small groupings, just as the surviving
anthropoids still forage in small groupings deeper into the jungles, away from
the human habitat.
11 Let us trace, carefully and
slowly, a picture of the changes and refinements that took place in the
behaviour of the human being, so that we may develop a "feel" for the
smooth transitions that took place from being an animal to becoming a human
being. Some people will argue, that we are still animals, and, that it does not
require a spectacular leap in the powers of our imagination to visualise such a
transition, but, most people, today, as well as in the past, felt so
overwhelmed by their ability to think, speak, love and kill each other, that
they considered themselves to be more akin to the deities of their beliefs,
rather than to the beasts of the plains.
12 We remind ourselves, that man
had lost contact with the other anthropoids species' a long time ago. Probably,
the last relatives disappeared already from the same ecological niche at or
around the time that Homo Sapiens began to think and speak, and, as we
mentioned, the surviving anthropoid species' learned, quickly, in that dim and
distant past, that they were no match for the ferocious members of early
mankind.
13 In contrast to the basic,
positive or negative response of the uni-cellular organisms, proto-man was a
complex animal, with a variety of instinctive behaviour-patterns. He could be
highly aggressive when hunting or confronted with an enemy, or, he could be
relaxed, tender and careful, when playing with his offspring, playmates, or
members of the opposite sex.
14 We should not romanticise, here,
and, we should acknowledge, that the sexual drive was, and still is, a strong
instinct that took its course when aroused. From our current physiological and
psychological make-up, we can safely conclude, that proto-man was easily
aroused sexually. After a successful hunt, his belly full and feeling secure,
he would either sleep or engage in sexual contact.
15 This strong sexual urge was,
probably, the result of an evolutionary spurt that preceded the differentiation
of the human species. Man's evolutionary ancestors were small, vulnerable
mammals with a precarious existence. A high mortality-rate required a high
birth-rate, and, as an heir to the legacy of behavioural flexibility, their
offspring were extremely vulnerable creatures and required a prolonged period
of care.
16 It is, therefore, reasonable to
sketch the proto-human being as a furtive, fugitive, ever-alert and intelligent
creature, always sheltering its vulnerable family, making quickly use of
opportunities to gather some edibles, or to hunt a small animal. Fear must have
been, at that time, an even more predominant feature than ferocious aggression,
and, when relaxed or sheltered, it must have tried to forget its fears for a
moment in the pleasures of sex.
17 The pre-human ancestor would
save his life as often by intelligent fore-sight and clever opportunism, as by
the surprise attack with an unexpectedly effective blow from a stick or a stone.
Weapon and tool handling was made possible by a pair of grasping hands, which
were a legacy of an earlier period of evolution within the great tropical
forests that covered much of the earth.
18 Survival depended, therefore,
upon insight and judgement. It depended on the ability to know when to hunt,
and when to hide; when to look for food, and, when to look for safety, but we
should emphasise, that this act of "knowing" was, of course, entirely
sub-conscious or intuitive. It was entirely below the level of conceptual
awareness, because these animals had not entered, as yet, upon the road towards
voluntary memory-recall and the manipulation of representative symbols.
19 We should have a good look at
the genetic instructions for parental care, because the survival of the species
depended upon the ability of the parental generations to guide their vulnerable
offspring through the treacherous periods of infancy, childhood and
adolescence. In addition, the attitudes or drives of parental care became a rich
treasure for behaviour-patterns that still shape, to a large extent, the
behavioural characteristics of human beings today.
20 When nature began to experiment
with the existence possibilities of behavioural flexibility, it had to abandon,
at least, to some extent, the route of instructing, precisely, an adequate
behavioural response via the mechanisms of genetic encoding. These instructions
were replaced with an overall "outline", or, a range of behavioural
responses, where the "finer details", so to speak, had to be
synthesised by the organism itself. These details would depend upon the
incoming sense impressions and the circumstances of the moment, as well as upon
past experiences of the individual or the parents.
21 This means, that a behaviourally
flexible organism has to be "programmed" during its life; at least,
during the early part of its life, when going through the phases of infancy,
childhood and adolescence, such an animal has to acquire a large number of
useful behavioural responses, and, the absence of precise genetic instructions
for appropriate behavioural responses leaves the offspring of behaviourally
flexible species', indeed, extra-ordinarily vulnerable. The only way to
compensate for this vulnerability, is to load upon the parental generations,
not only, the task of careful protection and conscientious feeding, but, also,
the function of becoming a source of "input" and sense impressions
for these youngsters. The stimuli from the parents function, then, as a source
for learning, and, this source of stimuli "programs" the behavioural
responses of the younger generations.
22 Such a shift from genetic
instructions to "cultural" or environmental and parental instructions
has the advantage, that the younger generations can be given an appropriate
parental example, leading to a behaviour that is finely tuned to local
circumstances and conditions. This makes a quick and rapid fine-tuning of
behaviour possible, but, it also has severe draw-backs. If, for one reason or
another, the parental example is defective and less suited to the prevailing
circumstances, the younger generations are inappropriately programmed, and
viability suffers.
23 Certainly, a faulty and
deficient example of parental behaviour can be corrected, at least, to some extent,
whenever a few of the most intelligent and adaptable members of the new
generations survive and learn "on their own", from the feed-back of
their environment. However, the toll in casualties is high, as most of the
offspring is too vulnerable and too confused to synthesise an appropriate
behavioural response from scratch.
24 These generalised concepts apply
to the earliest, natural experiments with the opportunities and possibilities
of behavioural flexibility, long before we see the human species emerge, but,
the reader will recognise, how appropriate and applicable these generalised
principles still are, even today, when we look at the problems of guiding,
instructing and protecting the younger generations, especially, if they grow-up
in a confused and chaotic society. The point we want to emphasise, here, is the
inevitable trade-off between the benefits of a more rapid adaptation to
fluctuating circumstances, and, the dangers of confusion and helplessness due
to a defective parental example or a decaying cultural code.
25 The more a species has come to
rely upon the possibilities of behavioural flexibility, or "learning"
by example and instruction, the more vulnerable its younger generations are to
cultural decay, and, most people will be able to agree, that the human species
has traveled this hazardous route of behavioural flexibility and cultural decay
further than any other species.
26 We have often traced the
characteristics of the vulnerable human infant, and, we will not do so again.
Every reader is familiar with the total helplessness and incredible
vulnerability of the newly born infant. Let us look, this time, a little more
closely at the features of parental behaviour.
27 Since the parents are, of
course, members of a behaviourally flexible species, the genetic instructions
for appropriate parental behaviour can not be very precise. Nevertheless,
nature has sharpened a fairly strong instinct of parental care for its
offspring in the members of mankind. The behaviour-patterns of care and
protection, as well as nursing or nourishing the infant, are strongly
instinctive, and, these behaviour-patterns are evoked by the crying and
whimpering, or, even, the mere presence of an infant. Because these
behaviour-patterns are instinctive, we see, not only, that they are quite
stereo-typed throughout the human species, but, also, that
"giving-in" to such behaviour is emotionally satisfying.
28 It is probably correct to say,
that nature has sharpened into the genetic instructions of the parents, slightly
different patterns for the male and female members of the species. Obviously,
the anatomical and physiological differences in the constitution and role of
the sexes during procreation, are genetically determined, but, there are also
differences in the behaviour of male and female parents. Yet, let us emphasise,
that, in contrast with the precise genetic instructions that determine the
anatomical and physiological features of human existence, the behavioural
differences are less clear-cut and are more likely to overlap.
29 The mother is, primarily,
programmed to feed, cuddle and maintain physical contact with the infant, while
the male parental instinct becomes visible as a heightened drive to protect and
provide for the vulnerable unit of mother and child. Yet, even the male can be
stimulated to a behaviour of tenderness, care or carefulness, in contrast to
his more customary role as protector and provider.
30 Before the faculties of
conceptual awareness arose, the parental example, together with the constancy
and reliability of the behaviour of care and protection, determined, to a large
extent, whether or not the younger generations would become viable members of
the adult population. However, with the development of the "cultural
break-through", the processes of learning and instruction became amplified
to a truly remarkable extent. In the many millions of years that passed between
the onset of conceptual imagery and the establishment of the "first
recorded civilisations", the cultural content of the society grew
steadily, as the groupings showed a consistent tendency to become larger.
31 Let us outline, first, in some
detail, what sort of behaviour-patterns, attitudes and subconscious, emotional
experiences developed prior to the evolution of symbolic representation. We
should also repeat, here, a definition of culture, where we consider
"cultural influences", or the "cultural code" of
instructions, to comprise all the influences that are coming from the parents
or the other members of the group. This definition includes, therefore, all
forms of influence upon the offspring, excercised by parental behaviour, and
the function of "culture", or the presence of a cultural code is,
therefore, not restricted to the human species.
32 While we have defined, on
previous occasions, all influences from the outside, or the environment, upon
the behaviour of animals as "cultural" in nature, (in contrast to the
patterns of behaviour that are a result of genetic instructions), it seems
better to restrict the definition of cultural influences to those of the
"social environment". We leave, then, the influences of the natural
environment as a separate category. Behaviour of an animal becomes, then,
determined by its genetic instructions, (which determine its anatomical and
physiological constitution), as well as its range of instinctive
behaviour-patterns, together with the stimuli or sense impressions that come
from the "environment". If these stimuli arise from the behaviour and
activities of the other members, we talk about the "social
environment", while all other stimuli arising from the living and
non-living world, constitute the "natural environment".
33 From a conceptual and
philosophical point of view, the main importance of the development towards
behavioural flexibility and parental care lies in the fact, that the sharpening
and rewarding of the instincts of care, tenderness, protection and
"responsibility" has added a dimension of refinement to the
behavioural repertoir of socially integrated animals. Originally, the
multi-cellular organism was programmed by a long, evolutionary history to act,
entirely, with its own survival or well-being as the central motivation for its
behaviour. Its instinctive behaviour-patterns ranged from an aggressive
confidence to a defensive fearfulness, but, the entire range was designed to
preserve or maintain its own existence.
34 We have discussed, before, how,
as a "side-line" of the condition of well-being, nature sharpened the
instinct of sexual behaviour. While mating behaviour has no immediate
existential benefits for the individual, (and is often a hazard, a burden, or
an expensive energy-expenditure), the strong sensations of sexual gratification
represent the "lure" with which the animal is enticed to engage in
activities that do not contribute directly to its own security or longevity.
35 In the behaviourally rigid
animals, such as the insects, there is nothing resembling the behaviour of
parental care, and we see nothing like the social inter-actions of the members
of flexible species'. The colonies of insects are organised, rigidly, along the
lines of strict genetic instructions, and, the members of an insect-colony
resemble, therefore, the unit of a multi-cellular organism, where the
individual insects are comparable to the cells of a multi-cellular body.
Certainly, it is remarkable, how a viable cohesion between the members of an
insect-colony has been found, without the fixed spatial relationships of cells
within a multi-cellular organism, but, the rigidity of the behaviour and the
anatomic specialisation of the insects, resembles the cells within a
multi-cellular body, rather than the social animals with their flexible
inter-dependencies.
36 The instincts of parental care
also develop under the pressures of natural selection, and, these instinctive
drives introduce into the behavioural repertoir of the flexible animal, for the
first time in evolutionary history, a behaviour-pattern that is geared towards
taking the well-being and needs of another individual into consideration.
37 You may argue, that, many
insects behave in such a way, that, they too, serve the existential needs of
someone else, or the colony as a whole, rather than their own existential
needs. Certainly, this is true, but, the crux of the matter lies in the fact,
that such a "pseudo-ethical" or "supra-individual"
behaviour has been rigidly programmed by genetic intructions, just as the cells
of our own body are rigidly instructed to behave in such a way, that their
actions benefit the society of cells as a whole.
38 In the behaviourally flexible animals, the genetic coding can only "instruct" its members to develop a strongly "instinctive" tendency towards displaying the behaviour of care, tenderness and protectiveness, and, the parents are encouraged, and "rewarded", by a strong sense of satisfaction, when giving-in to such behaviour. However, the instincts of parental care do not remain a short burst of activity, to be forgotten as soon as the urge has been spent, as is the case with the sexual drive. The continuous need to give care, protection, guidance and leadership to the younger generations over a period of perhaps fifteen years, or longer, cultivates a remarkable constellation of attitudes. These attitudes are charaterised by the fact, that the well-being of the self is fused with, and sometimes, even, supplanted by, the well-being of another individual; the child, or the unit of mother and child. We have to seek, here, not only, the "anlage" for truly socially integrated behaviour, but, also, this entire complex of attitudes and beliefs, which we have learned to abstract and conceptualise under the term "ethic".
.......
Chapter 4
Content
Why we often revert to a narrow sphere of concern.
The need to place restrictions on the behavioural range of young and adult
members of a socially integrated unit.
Unfolding the "ego-drive".
An ever more prominent "contest of wills".
The disastrous results of a defective "cultural transfer"
Mechanisms of social integration in the early, pre-human societies.
A "failure to separate" when the growth to maturity has been
completed.
A secondary fusion of related groupings.
Stimuli for cultural and technical innovations.
The "administration of justice".
The three basic mechanisms of settling a dispute; all-out combat, yielding or
fleeing, and, a differentiation into somewhat different ecological niches.
Varying manifestations of dependence and inter-dependence.
Solutions, found and applied by the mechanisms of natural selection.
Social integration is a solution based on differentiation and inter-dependence;
the "third" method.
A conscious contract of "essential equality".
Alliances, and the art of diplomacy.
Forming an alliance against a common enemy is a useful rehearsal for the much
more difficult task of negotiating a compromise with an adversary.
The "blind" search for social possibilities of existence.
When an alliance becomes, gradually, less "voluntary".
Cultural developments and refinements in the art of forming alliances.
1 We have seen, how the instincts
of parental care lead to attitudes of concern for the well-being of someone
else, but, it is clear, that this sphere of concern is still quite narrow and
limited to "immediate kin". The behavioural orientation of the
growing youngster is also primarily egocentric, and, it requires careful
guidance and good examples from the parents in order to nurture a
"socially acceptable" form of behaviour. This behaviour can mature,
later, into responsible parenthood, whenever the time has come to take part in
this essential link between successive generations.
2 When observing parental
behaviour of the socially integrated species', it becomes quite clear, that the
attitudes of care, concern and protection also include the setting of limits,
or tolerances, upon the behaviour of the young. No species will let its
offspring behave without restrictions, because the random search for
behavioural possibilities by youngsters would quickly lead to dangerous or
socially impossible situations.
3 The success of behavioural
flexibility is based on the fact, that the parental example will be imitated by
the youngsters, and, that the parents, as well as other members of the social
unit, will not tolerate too large a deviation from "the norm".
4 The ego-drive of the growing generation gets stronger and more differentiated as it grows older, while, at the same time, the need increases to channel these youthful energies into socially acceptable patterns. The newly born infant shows its ego-drive only in a cry, if it is uncomfortable, hungry or dissatisfied for one reason or another, and, all parents with a measure of common-sense know, that, even, as a baby, the human being tends to become ever more demanding, if it is always picked-up, fed or cuddled at the slightest whimper.
5 In nature, there is a limit to
the patience and attention of the parents, and, in a normal family, parents,
too, have other duties and problems to tend to. They are, therefore, prevented
from lavishing an anxious, neurotic and unstable excess of concern and
attention upon their child or infant.
6 When the child becomes an
adolescent, an ever more prominent "contest of wills" takes place. In
most intances, these tensions are channeled into useful activities, where the
adolescents can "burn-off" their excess energies, as they slowly
learn to appreciate the wisdom and soundness of their parents' attitudes. If
the parental example and guidance is defective and confused, and, if the social
environment of the growing child is also unstable and confused, it is logical,
that the processes of "cultural transfer" become defective as well.
The younger generations are then poorly brought-up, and, these defects may
accumulate, within a few short generations, to the point, that the viability of
a social environment is seriously jeopardised.
7 However, let us go back to the
pre-human family, where the contacts between parents, siblings and other
members are not complicated by conceptual communications, structures of beliefs,
or verbal arguments. We see, that the will of the parents remains dominant.
While the youngsters are allowed to play and frolick, there are definite
limitations to what they are allowed to do, and, the adolescents have to accept
the authority of their parents and the leaders of the group, or, they are
driven-off.
8 When the leader gets older, he
may be successfully challenged by a younger contender for the position of
leadership and authority. Careful observations seem to indicate, that the
hierarchical positioning of the members of a small social grouping is, not
only, necessary to make the group coherent and create an opportunity for
efficient leadership, but, we may consider the hierarchical positioning within
a family-grouping to be a fore-runner of the hierarchical ordening taking place
within a somewhat larger social unit of related individuals.
9 In a species without any form
of social contact or integration, the special relationships between the
youngsters and their parents cease, as soon as the youngsters reach a stage
where they can feed themselves. Certainly, they may remain together as a
hierarchically ordened sub-unit within a herd or a flock, based on the
mechanisms of dominance, but, there is no specific relationship between parents
and off-spring. In the socially integrated, flexible animals, there is a
tendency for this "break-away" to be delayed, and, the members retain
a relationship that recognises the ties of kinship, even, after they reach
adulthood and have started to form a family themselves.
10 This "failure to
separate" may be one mechanism to explain, or visualise, the territorial
fusion of adult members, as well as the emergence of a hierarchical order,
functioning as a substitute for the attitudes of "strict territoriality".
On other occasions, we have postulated that a secondary fusion of territorially
behaving animals may occur as a result of environmental pressures, and, it
seems logical to see, here, a fluid balance, or, a shifting equilibrium between
labile and opposite force-fields. If the territories are rich and plentiful,
and, if there is relatively little effort required to establish an independent
family-unit in a neighbouring territory, then, this will happen, and, we will
see a rapid expansion of the population under such fortunate circumstances.
However, if the environmental conditions are deteriorating, and, if it becomes
much more difficult and hazardous to establish a new social unit, then, the
tendency for adult members to remain "fused" within a hierarchical
relationship is much stronger, and, we may well see a "secondary
fusion" of related groupings living in the neighbourhood.
11 However, such a larger grouping
will show, inevitably, more tensions between the members, as well as an
increased tendency towards acts of strife and attitudes of hostility. These
trends have to be suppressed, and, it is clear, that the pressures,
responsibilities and demands upon the leadership rise steeply, whenever there
is a growth in the size of the social unit. These conditions promote or
necessitate cultural and technological innovations, which increase the powers
of the leadership to control a large unit, and enhance the possibility to make
use of naturally available resources.
12 Every time a social unit reaches
a crisis-point, where the surrounding territories become insufficient to
sustain the members of the group, we see a strong trend towards cultural and
technological innovation. For example, there may be innovations in the way the
essential housekeeping chores of the group are being carried-out, leading to
more "free time" and a greater ease of existence. Innovations may
also take the form of an improved organisation of other communal chores, or an
improved ability to cope psychologically with stress.
13 Methods to suppress mutual hostilities and settle disputes may be improved, lowering the level of internal tensions and strife. Here, we see the importance of a coherent and inspiring belief structure, an improved "administration of justice" by a wise, efficient and benevolent leadership, or, a new technology; a new tool, or, a more effective weapon.
14 All these innovations improve
the technical, intellectual or psychological mastery over the many problems and
challenges a social unit has to face. Cultural and technological innovations
are inter-twined and influence each other, often, to such an extent that they
become a nearly inseparable complex of causes and effects.
15 It seems fair to state, as a
generalised principle, that the human society evolved its numerous innovations
because of a variety of needs and challenges, and, each and every evolutionary
step was an intuitive or subconscious attempt to find a solution for one
challenge or another. We have no reason to doubt, that the epochal developments
of symbolic representations, conscious awarenesses, and verbalisable belief
structures, were also the result of challenges and pressures, which
brought-about an evolutionary spurt of adaptative mechanisms, including the
rise of conscious awarenesses.
16 It is time to zero-in on our
professed goal to discuss the art of negotiation and compromise, and, we hope,
that this background sketch will help us to understand the possibilities, as
well as the limitations, of the process of compromise and negotiation. The first
feature we should discuss is the specifically human endeavour to try to settle
a dispute with negotiation and compromise, because we imply, here, a process of
dialogue. It is an attempt to streamline view-points and interpretations of
reality, and, it is clear, that no animal settles a dispute in this manner.
17 In nature, there are three basic
mechanisms to settle a conflict of interests, or a confrontation based on
competitive strife. The first, is all-out combat, where the winner takes all
and the loser is killed, or eaten, and, the loser is, thereby, permanently
removed from the scene. The second method is the flight, or the submission of
the loser to the winner, and the third manner in which a conflict of interest
can be subdued, is the differentiation of competitors into slightly different
ecological niches.
18 This third method is related to
the second, because, as we discussed before, the hierarchical ordening marks
the beginning of a process of task-differentiations. Task-differentiation has
the advantage of defusing tensions, and, it may lead to a state of
inter-dependence in a position of essential equality, whenever these mechanisms
take place within a large social entity. If the dependency is nearly equal, we
talk about a form of "symbiosis", but, if it is weighted heavily in
favour of one party, we are dealing with a state of parasitism.
19 However, we should add, here,
that these mechanisms are, in essence, evolutionary solutions, rather than the
deliberate or conscious solution of a conflict of interest between indviduals,
because it takes too long for the mechanisms of differentiation and subsequent
inter-dependence to work as a solution to a specific situation of conflict.
Yet, man is duplicating, unknowingly, in his conscious attempts to solve the
problems of tension and strife, some of the evolutionary solutions to the same
type of chronic competitive pressures. In an academic environment, we may see
an example of this solution of differentiation, because, people, who start out
as competitors of each other, may wind-up in specialised but inter-dependent
and complementary functions.
20 The human being makes use of all
possible solutions to a conflict-situation, and, it is clear, that the most
primitive solution of all-out combat seems to appeal, most strongly, to our
instincts, because we revert to it, time and again. We have discussed the idea,
that, the final period of genetic evolution of the human species took place in
this ferocious period of intense competitive strife, prior to the establishment
of the first great civilisations. The solution to chronic over-crowding of the
nomadic societies, together with the steadily dwindling supply of the large
animals, which had become an essential food-supply for these enlarging nomadic
tribes, was found in the merger of social groupings into much larger social
entities, but, the heritage of an all-out fight, as well as the elimination of
the loser, had already been engraved by the mechanisms of natural selection
into the biological heritage of mankind.
21 From now on, man was always
faced with this curious dilemma; would he seek survival by killing his
opponent, or, by trying to cooperate with him? Man, as a single individual, had
a strong tendency to cooperate rather than fight, because this evolutionary
step had been taken many hundreds of millions of years ago, but, the
integration of small nomadic groupings into a much larger social unit of
cooperation, only took place about twenty thousand years ago. This is the
reason, why we still see the tendency to settle a conflict between groupings by
all-out warfare, while the competitive tensions within a socially integrated
grouping are solved by the mechanisms of hierarchical positioning,
task-differentiation and cooperation.
22 In the larger and more complex
societies, hierarchical ordening or positioning of the members became
increasingly difficult, and, it was eventually replaced by a conscious contract
of essential equality. The maintenance of such a contract of essential equality
was accomplished by the formulation of a widely acceptable set of rules and
guidelines, and, the enforcement of these rules ensured a "situation of
justice". As we have discussed, this "contract" was not a fully
spelled-out and conscious agreement, but, rather, a tacit or implied
understanding, that all members should behave according to the
"laws", customs, mores or beliefs of their social environment.
23 However, let us go back to the
time when the population pressures were rising, and the larger social units were
being formed. Territories and food-supplies became scarcer, and, the intensity
of competitive strife and the ferocity of all-out warfare were rising too. The
cost in suffering, loss of life and psychological stress was staggering, and,
this meant, that the pressures were mounting to seek new adaptations and better
ways to solve inter-tribal disputes and rivalries. It is logical, that a
tendency developed to seek a temporary alliance between neighbouring groupings,
whenever they were subjected to a common threat, or, whenever they perceived a
common bond of interest.
24 Such an alliance may arise quite
naturally between tribes or groupings which had already some sort of peaceful
contact, and, it seems reasonable to postulate, that ties of kinship would form
a natural basis for such contacts. It slowly dawned on fiercely independent and
suspicious tribal leaderships, that a common enemy could be defeated, if it
would be possible to form an alliance, to set grievances and disputes aside, at
least, for a while, and, to organise a common battle-plan, which would give the
alliance an edge of advantage.
25 It is ironic, that, many of the
skills and techniques necessary to negotiate a settlement and come to a common
understanding, or a mutually acceptable compromise, were learned and refined,
not, in the pursuit of peace, but in the hope of winning a victory over a
common enemy.
26 A successful alliance between
essentially independent social units requires, even now, after so many
generations of intense contacts and a long search for a more peaceful way of
life, a great deal of skill and patience. Leaders of rival groupings have to
learn, intuitively, about each other's strengths and weaknesses, as well as
psychological characteristics and peculiarities, as they approach each other
tentatively and with a great deal of hesitation.
27 The art of diplomacy developed,
slowly, and the suspicions and doubts of the leader, whose alliance or
allegiance was being sought, were carefully placated with gifts and promises.
Of course, many tribes existed in unequal relationships with each other,
because some of them were dominated by a more powerful neighbour, or, they were
in debt or owed allegiance for one reason or another. The history of previous
relationships and belligerent contacts would determine, to a large extent, with
whom it would be possible to form an alliance, and, who would have to be
avoided or placated.
28 In addition to the soothing of
suspicious feelings, as well as the careful, if intuitive, psychological
assessment of partners, we see, also, the other side of the diplomatic coin,
where it became possible to remind a leader about previous events, his
dependence or vulnerability in one area or another. Here, we see the subtle,
and, often, not so subtle art of "arm-twisting", or diplomatic
pressure-tactics.
29 In spite of the essentially
hostile and divisive aims of forming alliances and blocks of power, (a
diplomatic aim and an explicit foreign-policy of many contemporary nations), we
can appreciate the remarkable benefits resulting from the need to seek friends
and form bonds of shared interests. It seems logical to visualise these same
mechanisms to have made the slow evolution possible of a small grouping of ten
or twenty individuals into a tribal unit of, perhaps, a few hundred or a few
thousand people.
30 We saw in the speculative
imagery of the protoplasmic primordium, how molecules were forming,
breaking-apart and re-forming their electron-bonds with neighbouring molecules,
always searching for new and more viable possibilities of existence. In the
same manner, we visualise the human social units to form bonds, break and
re-form them in a continuous search for opportunities to overcome their
adversaries and adversities.
31 Slowly, the more viable social
existence possibilities were found in a series of cultural and technocratic
innovations. We see the emergence of the ability to form alliances, to settle
internal disputes, to find a mutually acceptable compromise, as well as the
ability to pursue the ideals of essential equality and equal treatment under
the laws of a specific social environment. Slowly, the conscious awareness of a
sense of justice arose. The sense of justice is closely linked to a
subconscious or tacit contract of mutually acceptable behaviour, and it is
based on the recognition of a "deserved position" within the social
unit.
32 Slowly, the size of a viable
social unit became larger, in spite of the fact, that there was always the
danger that these tacit contracts and implied agreements would be broken. The
sense of justice would, then, be wounded, resentment and mistrust would rear
their head, and, the focus of hostility switched, once again, from the outsider
to an individual or group within society.
33 Because of the vulnerability of
the cultural code, the viability of a social unit is a tentative affair, always
in danger of losing its essential appeal or awareness of the need for its
existence. Often, the sub-groupings had been persuaded, in the past, to
participate in an alliance that gradually and imperceptibly became less
voluntary and less beneficial.
34 In particular, when the process
of "dispersion", the breaking-up of a larger social unit and its
diffusion into many smaller, more or less independently existing units became
impossible because of the scarcity of territories and the rising
competitiveness between neighbouring groups, the possibility of exploitation
and abuse by a small, dominant segment led to severe tensions of injustice and
resentment within the larger social groupings.
35 Wise, intuitively sensitive and
psychologically intelligent leaderships could, often, defuse such a trend
towards injustice and minority domination, but, until our contemporary times,
we see the problems of haphazard accession to leadership; of unreasoned and
unreasonable differences and disparities between the privileged and the masses,
the elite and the poor, and, there are many problems associated with the
haphazard grouping-together of ethnic units into political entities that were
forged by the sword of a conqueror.
36 With the advent of the larger
civilisations and their many cultural and technological innovations, it became
less customary to kill those, who had been defeated in a war, because the
conqueror learned to handle and dominate a large group of prisoners or slaves.
A variety of methods were used to impose allegiance upon a defeated society.
Hostages were taken from prominent families. Severe penalties were imposed for
a rebellion against the new authorities. Many people were driven-off or
deported to less desirable areas. A heavy tribute or taxation was imposed on
the defeated communities. But, there were also more humane and wiser techniques
of dominance and benevolent leadership, such as the technique of allowing a
limited self-rule, the tolerance of existing cultural manifestations and
religious practices, as well as the imposition of a moderate level of taxation.
37 The art of making alliances and
securing loyal followers flowered, as larger groupings were brought together
under a single political leadership, culminating, eventually, in the birth of a
number of remarkable empires, which often flourished economically, artistically
as well as militarily. It is interesting to note these developments, and, it is
important to study the conditions that made such large groupings viable, just
as it is so important to understand, why the solution of all-out combat lost
its meaning, as soon as it led to the likelyhood of mutual destruction.
.......
Chapter 5
Content
The increasing devastation of acts of warfare.
People are likely to scrutinise, in the future, more intensely the reasons for
a situation of conflict.
The fragile faculty of rational attitudes and evaluations.
Memories and awarenesses fade quickly.
A library of documentaries.
Understanding the basic needs of people.
When a "compromise" is only a freeze in the status-quo.
A review of the mechanisms of an alliance.
The importance of honesty and openness.
A genuine effort to shoulder one's share of burdens and responsibilities.
The weakness of a "tough stance".
The art of mediation.
When there is a secret expectation to profit from a situation of conflict.
The imposition of a binding settlement.
World-opinion; a federation of considered attitudes and fair decisions.
Opening-up the road for a satisfying judicial settlement of international
disputes.
A look at the art of international negotiation and mediation.
1 The reason why all-out combat
is becoming a less desirable solution to tensions and conflicts of interest, is
related to the enormous devastation caused by modern warfare. This leaves less
"spoils", or usable resources and revenues from the conquered
territories, and, it causes an unacceptable burden of casualties and
devastation for the conqueror himself. However, there are other factors that
make all-out conflict an obsolete method for settling disputes. Increased
contacts between people, as well as a widening sphere of awarenesses, have led
to a much more sophisticated and inquisitive attitude towards the reasons for a
situation of conflict. More and more people are becoming aware of the fact,
that both sides contributed to an escalation in hostilities, and, that both
sides are going to lose, if the solution is, again, sought in a violent confrontation.
2 In other words; a more rational
attitude and a less instinctive approach to the problems of conflict by either
side in a dispute, will make it less likely, that all-out warfare on a large
scale is going to be tolerated by informed world-opinion. The extent of our
knowledge about each other, as well as the recognition of our essential
similarities, is enlarging all the time. Political leaders can not easily
indulge, anymore, in acts of hostility towards each other, but, by and large,
we, the people, still fall-short of an active concern for each other's
well-being, and, we are still reluctant to help each other overcome our
problems.
3 Certainly, we have learned to
extend a helping hand to our own people, and, we may be moved, occasionally, by
a well-publicised tragedy of gigantic proportions that is taking place in a
far-away country, but, our concerns easily lose contact with a distant and
far-away event, as we concentrate on the pressing problems at home.
4 However, the mood of reasoned compromise
and a rational approach to competitive problems is a fragile flower, and,
first-hand knowledge of disastrous consequences caused by all-out warfare,
fades quickly. It is very difficult, if not impossible, to transfer these
memories and experiences to the younger generations, born and brought-up after
peace has returned, and after the most serious effects of the war have been
erased.
5 This lack of a permanent
awareness of the devastating consequences of warfare is, perhaps, the main
reason, why, after a few short generations, the people are again willing to
sacrifice on the altar of war, and, to spill their blood in profuse quantities,
regardless, how severely previous generations have suffered from the same
attitudes and behavioural trends.
6 Perhaps, we can overcome this
difficulty in the future, as we build-up a vivid, but accurate and honest
library of documentary films, chronicling the atrocities and barbaric
consequences of all-out warfare. Perhaps, we can, then, transmit vivid
memory-images from one generation to the next, motivating them to avoid the
deep-seated lure of belligerent and hostile behaviour. Perhaps, we can, then,
educate them to become sensitive and wise human beings, who are willing to
put-in a genuine and conscientious effort to understand the mechanisms and
events that lead to war.
7 Part of the problem is the
fact, that the younger generations do not have any first-hand knowledge about
the horrors of warfare, but, an equally important cause for the recurrence of
warfare, is the lack of understanding and insight into the basic mechanisms and
requirements of human existence.
8 We need to teach our younger
generations a coherent picture of the way the human being functions; what
motivates him; what drives and instincts come to the fore under various
conditions, and, what possibilities there are to come to a mutually acceptable
solution of the tensions of competitive strife and conflict of interest.
9 Certainly, before we can teach the
younger generations, all over the world, such a coherent picture of human
behaviour and its many motivations, we have to work hard to develop an imagery
we can all agree with. If we understand the basic needs of people, individually
as well as collectively, and, if we can agree about the conditions of justice
and equality we need to exist in a condition of well-being, we would already
have made significant progress along this road.
10 We will have to understand,
that, our attempts to negotiate a solution or compromise in a situation of
conflict are doomed to failure, unless we can agree upon, at least, some form
of common conceptual ground. If there are no common principles of conduct, or,
generally agreed-upon principles for a common reality perception, then, there
can be no dialogue and no understanding. Any "compromise" will, then,
only constitute a freeze of the status-quo, reflecting the relative positions
of strength and weakness on both sides, as they happen to exist at a particular
time.
11 We should discuss these ideas in
more detail, but, let us first look at the mechanisms, attitudes and events
that play a role in the formation of an alliance. In many ways, the attitudes
and objectives that motivate people to form an alliance with each other, are
the fore-runners and useful rehearsal mechanisms for the much more difficult
process of negotiating a compromise or settlement between adversaries.
12 In an alliance, the two parties
are able to synchronise their goals and belligerent attitudes towards a common
enemy, and, in the process of synchronising their objectives and actions, they
come to a more or less specific agreement about the tasks that have to be
carried-out, as well as the manner in which the spoils of victory will be
divided. Such an agreement forms a bond of understanding, but, it is never
assured, that both parties interpret the agreement in the same manner. The more
precise and explicitly an agreement of alliance has been spelled-out, the less
likely differences in interpretation will lead to feelings of resentment and
tear the alliance apart.
13 There is always a tendency to
interpret an agreement in an egocentic manner. To avoid the problems that arise
from a variable interpretation of an agreement, it is useful for the partners
to base themselves upon a set of common concepts; a common language, as well as
an agreed-upon set of rules, laws or religious beliefs. The usefulness and
durability of an agreement of alliance can be enhanced, if the terms of the
agreement are extensively discussed and debated beforehand, and, if an
impartial outsider can mediate any disagreement about the interpretation of the
contract or alliance.
14 Concluding an agreement between
two more or less independent and equally powerful parties is, of course, a
voluntary affair, in spite of the fact, that there may be many factors of
common interests to compel the partners to come to an agreement, and form an
alliance. However, with a contract of cooperation, or agreement of alliance, we
see, not only, the inevitable tendency to interpret the meaning and
consequences in the most favourable light for the well-being of one's own side,
but, it becomes also possible to carry-out acts of deception or treachery; to
break a promise, whenever the opportunistic advantages outweigh the burdens of
honouring an agreement or commitment.
15 We see, then, how important it
is to be honest and open, and, to adhere, conscientiously, to the terms of an
agreement. Otherwise, no alliance or agreement will survive. There is a remarkable
parallel, here, with the emotions, motivations and mechanisms of cooperation
and disagreement that come to the fore, whenever a group of youngsters decides
to play a game. It is clear, that, each participant has to adhere, honestly and
scrupulously, to a set of rules in order to make the game possible and
meaningful. At the same time, we see, that, any agreement or contract to
cooperate for a particular goal or objective, sows the seeds for a conflict or
episode of discord, with ruffled feelings, disappointments or outright
hostilities.
16 The techniques of forming an alliance and concluding a contract or agreement may lead to an increased degree of viability and unity for those who have mastered these cultural innovations. These skills also lead to a better grip over existing circumstances and conditions, but, at the same time, a Pandora's box of troubles and causes for conflict has been opened.
17 Yet, the conclusion of a
contractual agreement, as well as the onset of a period of cooperation and
lowered suspicions, may also accentuate positive attitudes and promote feelings
of friendship and mutual respect. If one makes a genuine effort to shoulder
one's share; if there is an atmosphere of trust and good-will; if there is a
willingness to do, voluntarily, a little more than agreed-to, and, if there is
a spontaneous tendency to help each other when needed, the bonds of friendship
and mutual respect grow stronger, but, there always remains the possibility of
a sudden misunderstanding, as well as a resurgence of the feelings of suspicion
and hostility.
18 Before we are discussing, here,
the art of negotiation and compromise between hostile factions, let us
summarise, once more, the essential features, as well as the existential
mechanisms, that take place in a voluntary alliance. The synchronisation of
goal-patterns is relatively easy, because it is based upon the shared threat
from a common enemy, and, there are, frequently, already extensive contacts and
shared cultural regulators between the partners of an alliance. Even so, the
partners have to make some sacrifices, and, they have to agree to some
compromises, because there are always divergences in goals and interests,
regardless, how much agreement there is about the overall objectives of an alliance.
19 The driving force behind the
formation of an alliance is the awareness of anticipated benefits that will
arise from this alliance, and, here, we see, why it is so much easier to form
an alliance between partners against an outsider, compared to the negotiations
and compromises needed to defuse a situation of hostility between adversaries;
with the task of transforming the feelings of hatred and suspicion into a
workable contract of cooperation and trust.
20 In every attempt to mediate
between warring factions, the emphasis falls on the arrangement of a
"cease fire"; a cessation of acts of hostility or violence, as well
as on a cooling-off period, where emotions and instinctive patterns of
behaviour get a chance to come to rest. Mediation-attempts have to prevent a
rise in tensions through belligerent posturing and bellicose commitments,
because belligerent leaders are, invariably, manoeuvering themselves into a
position from where they can not withdraw without losing face or prestige.
21 Acts of warfare are always
preceded by a series of mutual accusations, as well as the assumption of an
ever more inflexible and "tough" stance or commitment, which
depletes, rapidly, all room for negotiation and compromise. The role of the
mediator is, primarily, to facilitate an understanding by the adversaries of
each other's needs and aspirations. Such a dialogue is not possible by direct
contact because of the tensions and suspicions, as well as the biased and rigid
opinions that prevail on either side. Belligerents are unable and unwilling to
listen to each other. A dialogue between belligerents becomes a shouting match,
impeding progress towards mutual understanding.
22 The mediator tries to explain
the positions of the adversaries towards each other, without evoking the anger
of the "listening" party. If the positions taken by the belligerent
parties are inflexible, and, if there is no basic agreement that it is
preferable to settle the dispute peacefully, then, war is inevitable. It will
take place, run its course, and take its toll.
23 If there is no stronger outside
party who can or wants to intervene, the bloodshed will have to continue, until
the parties are exhausted, or, until one of them has been decisively defeated.
If the belligerents want to fight and are not willing to negotiate, we should
let them learn their lessons, once again, from scratch, but, it is a tragedy to
see, how the intolerant and ignorant attitudes of the people and their leaders
are responsible for the slaughter of thousands of citizens on the
battle-fields.
24 The people themselves will have
to learn to call a halt to the belligerent attitudes of their leaders, and,
they will have to replace belligerent leaders with people, who are willing to
sit-down and listen, and, who are willing negotiate an end to the mechanisms of
violent conflict. If the people let themselves be swept-up by their leaders,
they will have no choice but to take-up arms and repeat the follies of their
forefathers, once again.
25 Even, if strong outside
pressures induce the belligerent parties to call a halt to their hostilities,
and, to negotiate a peaceful solution, there has to be a set of common
principles and commonly agreed-upon codes of conduct, or a commonly shared
source of authority, before the dialogue can become meaningful. There must be a
genuine conviction, that a negotiated settlement is preferable to war. If
either side secretly thinks that it may profit, if the war continues or
breaks-out in full force, then, there is no incentive to negotiate seriously.
Such a party will not make genuine concessions, and, it will only pay
lip-service to the process of negotiation, while it holds-on to hard-won
privileges and positions of advantage, which, it knows, can not be taken-away
by force.
26 The process of negotiation
becomes, then, meaningless, because the parties are waiting for an opportune
moment to resume armed conflict. If there is no genuine effort to compromise,
or, to acknowledge the rights and aspirations of the adversary, a negotiated settlement
will reflect, only, the power relationships between the adversaries. Such a
settlement or treaty does not satisfy the sense of justice, and, it is
essentially unacceptable to the weaker party, emotionally, as well as
intellectually, even, if this party acquiesces in the status-quo, because it
has no choice. The treaty becomes only a "freeze", and, the battle
will resume, as soon a the weaker party has gained in strength and thinks, that
it has a chance to take what it considers to be its legitimate right.
27 Obviously, this is not a useful
solution, even, if it requires a great deal of patience, sensitivity and
persistence on the part of intermediators to find sufficient common ground
between the warring parties to begin a dialogue and arrange a halt to the
fighting. In order to be effective and meaningful, negotiations have to be
based, either, on a set of commonly accepted ground-rules from which a
compromise position can be argued, or, in the absence of such commonly accepted
rules of conduct, a stronger, impartial force will have to impose, after
careful study and scrutiny, a binding solution upon the belligerents.
28 Within a socially integrated
environment, the imposition of a binding solution has replaced, by and large,
armed conflicts between the members. The common ground-rules are, then, the
laws and mores of society. An impartial and stronger force will carefully
scrutinise the origins of a dispute, the events that have taken place, as well
as the arguments both sides are bringing to the fore. Eventually, in due
course, a judicial settlement is imposed on the belligerents.
29 The same mechanisms should take
place in international disputes, but, the problem, here, is, of course, that
there is no stronger, impartial, judicial force to impose a settlement,
whenever a voluntary agreement and compromise proves to be out of reach. In
particular, if the belligerents are strong and large nations, there is no
authority that can intervene and impose a settlement, and, there is a growing
danger that such a confrontation between major powers may get "out of
hand", and, that it may cause unimaginable, and, perhaps, irreparable
damage to the terrestial eco-systems and its many species' of life.
30 It is tempting to advocate the
solution of one, strong, world-empire, which would be able to impose its
benevolent(?) standards of human rights and essential equality for all on the
rest of the world, but, we know, now, that, even, the best of intentions and
the most humane leaderships will always provoke resentment and suspicion,
somewhere, because we still lack this common framework of understanding that
would enable us to communicate on a world-wide scale, and create truly
acceptable conditions of global justice and harmony for every individual and
social grouping.
31 At the present time, our best
intentions are all too easily interpreted as simplistic and elitist solutions
that impose arbitrary standards and debatable values, because we can not agree
amongst ourselves what these values and standards should be. Besides, the
process of trying to impose a world-empire will be so costly, so devastating,
and so contrary to the avowed objectives of such an empire, that it seems best
to reject this option as a dangerous illusion.
32 Historical records show, that,
even the most advanced civilisations and empires, comprising the entire
"known world" at the time of their existence, inevitably declined and
fell prey to corruption, abuse of power and internal strife. We are better of
searching for other solutions, such as the gradual strengthening of a
"world opinion", or a " global consensus", within the
nations and regions of the earth.
33 Let us try to discuss, in an
open dialogue, how we should organise our societies; how we can ensure the
election of truly representative leaderships; how we can educate the peoples of
the world to make wise decisions, and help themselves obtain a reasonable
standard of living.
34 Let us discuss the concepts of
justice and essential equality; of freedom and responsibility; of "the
good life" and the "quality of life". Let us discuss what it
means to live under conditions of justice and equality. If we would have an
effective body of world opinion, with supervising and scrutinising
capabilities, it should be possible to formulate a set of globally acceptable
guidelines for leadership functions and individual human rights. Then, most
governments would be elected according to the wishes of the people, and, most
people would live under conditions that are fair and just under the circumstances.
35 This would minimise, not only,
the disputes and tensions that erupt, time and again, within and between
societies, but, it would, also, give us a global standard of lawful behaviour
and ethical conduct by which we could judge a dispute. We could, then, make
wise and sound suggestions, how a process of negotiation and compromise could
lead to a restoration of the conditions of justice and peace, without the need
to have powerful armies impose a settlement. Yet, it may be necessary to expand
the role of "peace keeping" units, in order to let tempers cool-down
as a preliminary measure to facilitate the processes of negotiation and
compromise.
36 On previous occasions, we have
discussed, in more detail, what we consider to be the conditions of global
justice and essential equality, and, we have reviewed what sort of a globally
acceptable interpretation of human existence has now come into view. We have
discussed, in detail, what is necessary to create and maintain the practical
realities of justice and essential equality, as well as freedom from corruption
and bureaucratic inertia. Here, we want to come back upon the mechanisms of
negotiation and compromise, as well as the conditions necessary to cool a
conflict situation, or to halt a violent confrontation.
37 So far, we have outlined, in
general terms, the possibilities and difficulties associated with efforts to
mediate a dispute, and bring-about a negotiated settlement, and, we have compared
the process of negotiating a settlement in a conflict-situation with the
mechanisms involved in forming an alliance.
38 In the final part of this essay, we should have a look at the international negotiations, dealings and transactions that go-on in the world, today, and, we should discuss the many aspects that are associated with these largely secret activities. We should consider the secrecy and intrigues behind the activities of espionnage and counter-espionnage, or, "intelligence" and "counter-intelligence", as we like to call these activities, whenever our side is doing the spying. Let us examine the entire question of secrecy and security behind which our leaders and governments like to hide their wheelings and dealings from public scrutiny.
39 Finally, we should look at the
concepts of secrecy and "privacy" for individual people in our
complex, contemporary societies. We will become aware of the fact, that, major
changes have to take place in our attitudes and opinions, before we can even begin
to fulfill the conditions of justice and equality on a global scale. We will
become aware, how erroneous the arguments are that support the practice of
secrecy in all kinds of negotiations and dealings. We will see, that secrecy is
a hinderance, rather than a help, for reaching just, lasting and mutually
satisfactory compromises and settlements.
.......
Chapter 6
Content
The weapon of secrecy represents a tool for aggression and deceit.
The psychology of secrecy and ostentatious display.
The thought processes of a multi-individual leadership.
The ideal of complete openness in thoughts, plans and actions.
Secrecy and existential interests.
Hypocritical attitudes about spying.
A practical need for some secrecy; at least, for the time being.
A proper schooling for the tasks of public office.
The Parliamentary debate.
The roads of war are so much easier to travel than the roads of peace.
Free-enterprise and the mechanisms of competitive strife.
In an atmosphere of competitiveness and mistrust, secrecy is a weapon that is
used by all sides.
The inevitable rise of existential anxieties in a competitive society.
1 Secrecy is a weapon. It is a
tool of aggression and deceit, but never an instrument of peace. Secrecy is
used aggressively, whenever we try to outwit our adversaries with a surprise
attack, or, defensively, when we try to outmanoeuver and deceive them by hiding
our weaknesses. In a conflict-situation, it is logical, that each side tries to
confuse the reality perception of the other side, because this hampers the
design of an appropriate defense or a clever initiative.
2 Even our tendency to be
secretive in everyday life has an air of hostility, suspicion and aggression.
We do not want our neighbours to know our problems and troubles, because we
feel vulnerable, embarrassed or ashamed, and, we do not want to become a center
of gossip, or target for sympathy. We do not want our neighbours to know, how
much we earn, what our assets are, or, how we make a living; whether or not we
have debts, and, how much we owe to whom.
3 We do not want anyone to know
these facts, because we do not want to face embarrassing questions or a close
scrutiny. We do not want other people to form a judgement, whether or not we
deserve, what we own; whether or not we obtained our assets honestly and our
financial behaviour is above board.
4 We may want to impress our
neighbours with a display of affluence, such as lavish spending powers, or an
abundance of assets, but, we do not want them to know, exactly, how we got
those assets, or, why we are able to spend so freely. We do not want questions;
just admiration and submission.
5 This is, of course, in essence, a form of aggression, where we jockey for a place in the hierarchy of our social environment. In short, we do everything we can to hide our weaknesses and short-comings, our troubles and our family-squabbles, and, we try to make as good and as strong an impression as we can, while shielding ourselves from questions and scrutiny.
6 It is clear, therefore, that we
always use secrecy as a weapon in a situation of conflict or potential
conflict, and, perhaps, the only exception in this string of aggressive,
defensive and confrontational attitudes towards other people, is the incidence,
where we throw a surprise-party for one of our friends. Yet, even, here, the
good-natured intentions of our desire to surprise someone we care for, is mixed
with a certain delight in seeing someone else vulnerable and emotionally moved
by our actions.
7 If we function as the leader of
our nation, or, as a representative of our community, the weapon of secrecy is
used even more ferociously. This weapon is then used, not only, to try to get
the best deal in complex negotiations with an adversary, but, it is also used
to protect ourselves from close scrutiny by those, who may be inclined to
challenge our position of influence and prominence. The weapon of secrecy has a
dual purpose, here; to secure a position of advantage for the group we lead or
represent when dealing with an external competitor, and, to protect ourselves
from internal rivals.
8 However, there is another
reason for secrecy in the leadership functions of a society. Leaders, and their
representatives, require frequent consultations, when negotiating with their competitors
and adversaries, in order to map-out, or design, a behavioural response that is
acceptable to the community as a whole. This form of "internal
communication" is comparable to the mechanisms of thinking by an
individual who is deliberating his next move. Just as we may not want the
people around us to know all the doubts and difficulties we have in making-up
our mind, so is a social leadership reluctant to let the outside world know,
what it is thinking, and, how it is deliberating its options, until a firm
response has been formulated.
9 This is one of the reasons, why
negotiations between complex social units are so much slower than between
individual people, because the negotiating representatives on either side have
to keep checking, constantly, whether or not they are "running ahead"
of the leadership and the community. It is logical, that a measure of
understanding develops between the negotiators from either side, and, this
level of understanding may run ahead of the understanding reached by the
peoples they represent. As a result, a kind of dialogue and a type of
discussion may take place between negotiators who have come to know each other
well, which would leave them vulnerable to criticisms by their own people, if
their contacts and exchanges would be made public.
10 Experienced and seasoned
negotiators develop a unique expertise in their jobs, and, they develop
contacts and avenues of communication that are not available to the less
experienced members of their community, including their own leaders. This
places them in a position of power, which they are likely to exploit to their
own advantage. Existential interests of negotiators and leaders are, therefore,
responsible for the tendency to keep many, if not most, of the substantial discussions
and contacts secret.
11 The discussions between various
levels of government, or, the members of a multi-individual leadership, are
comparable to the activities of judgement, evaluation and deliberation a single
person carries-out, whenever one is faced with a difficult decision that
requires a measure of thought. The bureaucratic and diplomatic structures of a
society can be compared to the central nervous system and the sense organs of a
single individual, and, if we are in a position of conflict, it is logical,
that we do not want our adversaries to know, what we are thinking and planning,
because such an insight in our mental processes would give them a significant
advantage anticipating our responses.
12 The attitude and practice of
secrecy is a weapon, regardless, how we look at it. We also know, that secrecy
heightens the feelings of suspicion between adversaries, because they become
increasingly strangers to each other. Here, we see the curiously contradictory
existential needs to hide from our adversary as much information as we can,
while we try, desperately, to break-through the shield of secrecy of our
adversary. Of course, we know, that our adversary is doing the same thing, and,
he knows, that we are trying to steal his secrets.
13 Therefore, it is inevitable,
that there is a battle of espionnage and counter-espionnage going-on between
nations who are distrustful of each other, and, it never ceases to amaze me,
that people are still so gullible and naive, that they see the espionnage and
counter-espionnage by their own society as "virtuous", calling it
"intelligence" and "counter-intelligence", while the
identical activities of their adversaries are causing howls of protest and
cries of indignation, whenever a spy has had the misfortune of being caught.
Nowhere, do we see a clearer example of double standards in judgement and
feelings, because we tend to revere our own intelligence people as heroes,
while condemning the same intelligence people of the other side, as monsters or
amoral opportunists.
14 No wonder, that the cynical
individual who gets caught in this web and is unable to extricate him- or
herself, has a tendency to play both sides against each other; trying to get as
much financial security as possible, in order to make a dash for freedom; in
secrecy, somewhere, in the world; away from the cat and mouse game of
intelligence and counter-intelligence.
15 Secrecy, espionnage and
counter-espionnage are indispensible activities, as long as it is considered
necessary to arm ourselves against an aggressor, but, we have to acknowledge,
clearly, that these activities are hostile acts towards another nation or group
of people, and, we have to realise, that all spying and acts of
counter-espionnage heighten the tensions of suspicion and mistrust.
16 Secrecy is always a tool of
conflict, but, you may ask, whether or not the secrecy in the discussions
between the members of a leadership, or the cabinet of an administration,
should also be considered a weapon of aggression, or a tool of hostility;
whether or not secrecy is a necessary screen of privacy to make honest
discussions possible. Many of you will argue, that it would paralyse the
processes of decision-making, if the members of a cabinet could not speak their
minds in private. If the entire nation could listen to everything that was
being said, then, no-one would be able to give an honest opinion, because
everyone would have to consider, continuously, what impression one is making on
the electorate.
17 Yes, I agree with you, that,
under the present circumstances, in the contemporary realities of our modern
societies, this secrecy is necessary. We see, here, a parallel with the
situation we described before, where a group of negotiators works together to
find a commonly acceptable solution, and to initiate a program of cooperation
between groups that are, in essence, suspicious and hostile towards each other.
18 The members of a cabinet are,
usually, elected representatives, each representing a certain group of people,
and, these groupings in society are often divided by mutual hostilities and
feelings of suspicion. The elected representative of a group of people, or a
certain geographical region, has to keep in mind the image he or she creates
for his or her voters, regardless, where one speaks. The representative knows,
very well, that, each time he speaks his mind, he will affront some people,
while pleasing, perhaps, a few others.
19 Besides, the elected representative
of a group of people, or, anyone else called into prominence as a
cabinet-minister by an elected leader, has to go through a period of learning.
Every question and every misconception, error or misunderstanding would be
broad-cast nation-wide, and, many people would ask themselves, how such an
ignorant individual got into a position of responsibility. This, by the way, is
a good argument; not for keeping this learning period secret, but, for making
sure, that people, who are asked to serve in a responsible leadership position,
are competent and capable individuals, and, that they have had a chance to
become thoroughly schooled and properly trained, before they are asked to
occupy an important position of leadership.
20 Certainly, many societies have
recognised the importance to have their elected representatives debate the
issues in public, and, we see many desirable features associated with a
Parliamentary debate that is recorded or broad-cast. However, Party strategy,
as well as all sorts of internal deliberations are still secret, and, we are,
even, kept in the dark about the many conversations and consultations that take
place between elected representatives in the corridors and back-rooms of the
Parliament buildings, away from public scrutiny.
21 There is only a beginning of
openness in our social relationships, and, the open Parliamentary debate is
only a meager start. It is sad to see, that this instrument of openness and
public confidence is, so often, blatantly abused as a "stage", where
the representative "actors" play upon the emotions, sentiments and
gullibility of their electorate.
22 In stead of being an instrument
to bring people together in an attitude of greater mutual trust and respect,
the public debate becomes, once again, a weapon and an instrument of
aggression, where political leaders and elected representatives carefully stage
and play-act a series of speeches in order to "impress" the people.
It will take a far greater degree of sophistication, insight and recognition by
the members of the electorate, before they are able recognise what is taking
place, and, before it is possible to continue upon the road towards greater
openness, harmony and trust.
23 The road of war is so much
easier to travel than the road of peace, and, as we have argued before, it does
not take long for people to forget, why they should travel the roads of peace,
and, what it really means to travel the roads of war. So often, people pay only
lip-service to the roads of peace, while, in essence, they are holding-on to
their positions of advantage and privilege, and are looking for an opportunity
to secure their positions even further.
24 Wherever we see competitive
strife, we see the use of weapons, including the weapon of secrecy and
intrigue, and, nowhere do we see this more clearly than in the world of
business. We have discussed, before, this curious anomaly in thought, when the
philosophy of free-enterprise advocated a serious game of competitive strife
within the laws of society, and still expected everyone, including the many
losers, to obediently adhere to the laws and regulations of society, in spite
of the fact, that they have lost their status of essential equality and have
become enslaved to a rich and powerful elite.
25 However, in societies that
adhere, at least, to some extent, to the ideas and ideals of free-enterprise,
there are still a number of competing business-concerns in spite of an
accelerating trend towards mergers. This trend towards mergers is rapidly
reducing the competitive aspects of the world of business-enterprise. It is not
surprising to see, that secrecy rules supreme in the competitive world of
business strategy, financial assets, relationships with governments and related
enterprises, as well as in the positions of power and influence held by top
executives.
26 We, ordinary members of society,
do not have any idea, how far this influence reaches; how much power the top
business people have over our politial representatives, and, how strongly we
all have become enslaved to an "economic momentum". This economic
momentum has become an essential life-line that keeps us financially afloat,
including the gigantic commercial enterprises. We have no idea, to what extent
their strident commercials have influenced our way of life, our buying and
spending habits, and, even, our emotions and appetites. Ironically, the glaring
publicity of advertising campaigns hides, in secrecy, a lot of the undesirable
side-effects within our commercialised societies.
27 However, let us not pursue,
here, the "evils" of advertising, because we have done so before. We
want to come back upon the fact, that secrecy is a tool of conflict; in
society, as well as in the world of business. It is a strategic tool to
maintain a competitive edge, and, few ardent free-enterprisers can see anything
wrong with this. I have no objection to comptitiveness on a small scale, where
individuals or small enterprises are motivated to do their best in order to win
praise or a modest livelyhood. Such a competitive drive lies behind the desire
to win a game, and, these competitive efforts can easily be converted into a
gain or an advantage for everyone.
28 In the small, competitive
enterprise, it remains possible for the overall guidelines of society to
maintain the essential conditions of fairness and openness in inter-personal
relationships, as well as a condition of essential equality in living
standards. As soon as the competitive game is over, the players revert to their
usual and widely accepted status-quo, but, if we allow multi-national,
commercial enterprises to become huge dinosaurs, vague in their outline and
inscrutable in their power-structure, then, we have lost control over our
societies without realising it.
29 In an atmosphere of
competitiveness and mistrust, secrecy is a universal weapon, and, we all are
prone to the temptation to make use of the existential advantages that come
with secrecy, or inside information. Is it not logical, that, officials and
bureaucrats, locked into a gigantic, unoverseeable and contradictory structure
of government institutions, are keeping the facts about their productivity,
redundancy, or usefulness, a closely guarded secret? They are not going to tell
the outside world, how to abolish or streamline their jobs. They are not going
to show us, that these jobs are not really necessary, or, how the work-load
could be restructured and done much quicker and more efficiently. Similarly,
unions are not going to cooperate with management to streamline productions
processes or bring-in automation, because a large number of union members would
lose their job.
30 We all are locked into a
competitive position, looking for a steady and significant income in order to
maintain security, freedom and influence. At a time, when our anxieties are
aroused, job opportunities are dwindling, and the security of our positions is
being challenged, we use every weapon at our disposal to maintain or fortify
our position in the social hierarchy, as we look with mistrust and suspicion to
our neighbours. This high level of internal strife, suspicion and mistrust is a
serious weakness of the competitive, free-enterprise society, and, we should
not be surprised to see a fatally high level of hostility and mistrust within a
social environment, where the members use all sorts of weapons, including the
weapon of secrecy, when trying to win, or survive, the rigors of the
competitive battle.
.......
Chapter 7
Content
The right to "privacy".
The needs of individuals, versus the needs of the social environment.
Reflection and re-assessment; a period of psychological meta-morphosis.
The role of private property.
Why should people not be able to know, what kind of a person we really are?
A two-way street of scrutiny.
The presssures of transparence have to be applied evenly.
A matter for careful study.
Progress by careful, incremental steps.
The art of mediation, and the ability to accept compromises; an important
element in the educational curricula of the future.
A clear exposition of opposing points of view.
Mechanisms to slow-down the out-break of armed hostilities.
A large number of simmering disputes are still nearly completely neglected.
The festering sores of injustice.
Preventing a "boiling point" of anger and frustration.
The techniques of mediation and compromise are still in a rudimentary stage.
World Opinion may become an instrument of great prestige.
How to prevent the damages caused by opportunism and egocentric attitudes.
1 After denouncing the practice
of secrecy, you may want to ask me about the concept and role of
"privacy". You may agree, that, in an ideal social environment, there
will be a remarkable degree of openness and mutual trust, but, is there no
need, then, for privacy? What is the function of privacy, and, how are privacy
and secrecy related to each other?
2 In most affluent,
free-enterprise societies, there are a variety of concepts, practical measures,
as well as generally accepted laws that regulate to what extent an individual
has the right to be left alone, to keep his assets and income secret; to keep
the details of his life-style and personal history confidential, including the
records of medical, legal or financial events. There has been a growing
awareness, that the rights and the dignity of an individual have to be
safeguarded against harassment by over-zealous government officials, an
over-bearing commercial enterprise, or, the threats of blackmail from
unscrupulous elements.
3 However, there are many aspects
of the right to privacy that are harmful, or, potentially harmful, to other
people in the social environment, because these safeguards may hamper the
investigation and early detection of criminal activities and anti-social
behaviour-patterns. In many cases, the rights and practices of financial privacy
are used to hide income, to avoid, or minimise, the payment of taxes, or, to
shelter illegally obtained gains.
4 We have to distinguish,
carefully, between the psychological need for a certain "shell" of
privacy in which people can relax and be themselves, and, the right of others
to know, whether or not a member of society is "playing by the
rules". No-one will deny the need for such a shell of privacy. The more
introvert, reflective individual will need more time in such a shelter of
privacy, compared to the extrovert, exuberant youngster, who is well adapted to
his or her social environment.
5 However, each individual will
go through periods of re-assessment and re-evaluation, in particular, when
difficulties and tensions accumulate. We do not want to suggest, that isolation
in a shelter of privacy is the only way, or, even, the best way to adapt to
problems, but, there is, undoubtedly, a need for reflection and re-assessment,
in order to tie an individual over a period of "psychological meta-morphosis".
These people are in a process of psychological change, and, they need the time
to seek new contacts, new areas of interest, and new sources of awareness,
otherwise, such a period of uncertainty and heightened inner as well as
external tensions may lead to a prolonged and essentially fruitless depression.
6 In addition to the
psychological need for a shell of privacy, an individual requires, also, a
variety of personal possessions. Everyone will collect a certain number of
items with which his or her memories are associated in a particularly
meaningful way. Some of these possessions will be small gifts from relatives
and friends. Then, there is a category of possessions assisting an individal in
the perfomance of a sport, an art, a handicraft or some other useful activity.
7 It may not be necessary to
build-up a large, personal library or outstanding collection of sports
attributes, because, as we discussed before, we visualise the societies of the
future to provide good, all-round sport`s facilities, libraries, art
collections and educational institutions in which the interested individual can
search for, and study, whatever captivates one's interests and appeals to one's
abilities. Such activities of self-fulfilment will be encouraged by future societies
as an essential human need and right.
8 As a corollary to the idea,
that the individual needs a shell of privacy to relax, to think, to re-assess,
and to satisfy psychological needs, we certainly agree with a stringent set of
safeguards that have been constitutionally enshrined and protect an individual
from being harassed and exploited. These safeguards will also guarantee and
maintain the essential equality between the members of society, as well as
between the individual citizen and a variety of private organisations,
government bureaucracies, and special-interest groupings.
9 Should such safeguards include
the right to withold financial and other personal information? It would be a
mistake to think that this is indeed the case, and, I am convinced, that the
quality of transparence will be a help rather than a burden for a great
majority of people, including those, who are somewhat introvert by nature.
10 What is wrong with the idea that
people around us have the opportunity to know, what kind of a person we really
are? Why should they not know, what we have done in the past, what we have
accomplished, but, also, what mistakes we have made? What is wrong with the
possibility, that other people could know, if they were interested, what income
we have, what kind of work we do, what responsibilities we carry, how long and
how hard we work, what we own, whether or not we save or spend it all, how our
state of health is, with whom we associate or what our views and ideas are?
11 Certainly, transparence has to
be a two-way street. If other people are able to scrutinise the file of our
personal data and circumstances, so should we be able to scrutinise and learn
about anyone, or, any institution, we are interested in. What is wrong with
such a universal transparence? True, others could immediately know, whether or
not we are engaging in somewhat shady or anti-social activities, and, such a
high degree of transparence will deter us from doing things we should not do,
but, what is wrong with that?
12 The pressures of transparence
apply to us all in the same manner, and, what better method do we have to
ensure, that every citizen is abiding by the rules of society and contributes
to society according to one's abilities and the circumstances of the moment? We
have discussed, before, how a fair share of the burdens of contribution require
a very high level of transparence, but, it is now possible to distribute the
stress-load of belonging to society over us all in an equal and equitable
measure.
13 I believe, that, many of the
current laws and regulations, designed to safeguard the privacy of individual
citizens, are, in essence, against the best interests of ourselves and our
societies, but, I agree, also, that, at the present time, as long as our societies
contain many ignorant and opportunistic, predatorial and criminal elements, we
have to protect the individual from harassment and exploitation.
14 Let us study this matter of
privacy and secrecy, carefully, and, let us look at these aspects in a truly
broad and wide perspective. Let us then formulate, clearly, the long-term,
overall direction into which society has to evolve. Let us distinguish the
temporary stop-gap measures that have to be taken because of prevailing
conditions and circumstances, from the necessary long-term goals and
objectives.
15 If we make such a clear
distinction, we can agree with current attempts to safeguard the rights of the
individual citizen, but, it is naive to formulate only the rights, and, not the
obligations of the members of society. It is necessary to discuss and debate,
thoroughly, the merits and possibilities of a gradual, but simultaneous, move
towards a greater measure of transparence within and between social
environments.
16 The crux of the matter lies in the
concept, that we should make every effort to reduce the barriers of secrecy
that exist between us. It is the only way to create a measure of mutual trust
and facilitate the formation of new bonds of inter-dependence, which are going
to be the prelude to a contract of essential equality and global justice.
17 I know, we have a long way to
go, before we are noticeably on the way towards a more transparent and just
society, and, for many people in the affluent societies, these ideas will sound
foreign and utopian, because people are so used to a state of chronic
competitive strife, that they accept these conditions as "normal".
18 Certainly, any progress towards
these overall, long-term goals of universal transparence has to be obtained
through small, careful, incremental steps, as we try to change the existing
trends into a desirable direction, without risking a total collapse and chaos
by trying to bring-about changes too quickly. This would increase the
incidences of injustice and disparity, rather than reduce them.
19 We should also make a clear
distinction between a temporary, practical solution, and a long-term, overall
goal, whenever we are trying to inaugurate beneficial social changes, and, in
the same careful and thoughtful manner should we approach the difficult and
delicate task of trying to negotiate a compromise settlement between
belligerent factions.
20 We have discussed the need for
patience, intelligence and sensitivity, before a mediator can accomplish his
basic objectives. The essence of the task of the mediator, or negotiator, is
the lucid, calm, emotionally neutral exposition of the attitudes, opinions and
feelings of the adversaries to each other. By reducing emotional fervor and
uncompromising attitudes, it may be possible to make the opponents realise,
gradually, that there is some merit in each other's point of view. As soon as
this awareness starts to emerge, the basis for a compromise is being laid, and,
careful guidance of the combatants should lead to a cessation of hostilities,
as well as the convening of a conference, where the combatants can face each
other directly.
21 We all may be called-upon to
negotiate in a dispute, at one time or another, and, our educational system
should pay a great deal of attention to teaching the basic behavioural
instincts, drives and mechanisms of the human being. Youngsters and adolescents
should get a thorough training in understanding the factors and circumstances
that lead to a conflict-situation, be it between individuals, groups of people,
or, between sovereign nations. It will be one of the most important tasks for a
globally organised program of education, to teach each and every human being
the art of negotiation and compromise, and, it should be possible to wean
people, slowly, from their cultural and religious prejudices, which result, so
often, in an attitude of rigid righteousness and an uncompromising adherence to
an absolute truth.
22 As long as we do not have such a
globally acceptable and operative educational system, (able to teach the basic
mechanisms of human behaviour, as well as the outlines of a natural attitude of
good-will and mutual concern), we will have to rely on the skills and insight,
the patience and intelligence of negotiators. These people know, how to evaluate
and manipulate the psychological dynamics of the combatants, and, they have
learned many tricks and techniques to soothe the over-heated super-egos of the
adversaries, because, they know, that this is the only way the combatants can
gradually return to a state of emotional near-neutrality.
23 A clear exposition of each
other's points of view, as well as an outline of the areas of agreement between
the combatants, such as the common need for security, dignity and terriorial
integrity, may lay the foundation for an attitude of compromise and a
willingness to cooperate, but, often, the aggressive instincts are so much in
command of the personalities involved, that we see only bellicose posturing and
uncompromising attitudes, entangling the combatants, ever more deeply, into
rigid positions from where any retreat appears to be an ignominious defeat.
24 We should, therefore, add to the
art of compromise and negotiation, a series of measures designed to prevent
leaderships and combatants from "talking tough". How can this be
done? Ideally, the peoples of the world should regulate and guide the behaviour
of their elected representatives and political leaders with the twin
instruments of a responsible House of Assembly, or a Parliament of Elected
Representatives, and, a detailed Constitution that will guide the behaviour of
every member in society.
25 Eventually, every nation will
have a democratically elected leadership and Parliament, and, all major
decisions will be taken by the people as a whole. For example, the declaration
of war, or, even, the accusation of wrong-doing, should be subjected to a
popular referendum and should require an overwhelming majority, before it is
officially made or declared. The declaration of a state of war, as well as the
preparations for war, are so important, that they have to be regulated, in
detail, by Constitutional Guidelines, but, eventually, it should be possible to
make such actions unnecessary, and, to make it internationally illegal for any
nation to initiate hostilities against another nation or society.
26 Before definite warnings or
threats are made to an adversary, Parliament and the leadership should debate,
completely openly, all the view-points and aspects of the case. Before a
declaration of war can come into effect, such a ful-fledged debate has to take
place, and, a vote has to be taken to see, whether or not the required popular
majority is available. Only in such circumstances, and, with these types of
safeguards, can a precipitous escalation of charges, counter-charges, insults
and emotions be prevented. Besides, there should also be a consultation with
other nations, as well as with a world-body such as the United Nation, before
any belligerent action can be initiated.
27 There is more to this problem,
than to provide, merely, an emergency mechanism for the prevention of
hostilities. As we all know, wars do not break-out overnight, and, every
conflict has a long history of simmering discontent, resentment and grievances.
There is a long series of events that are interpreted, more and more openly, as
grave injustices or insults by the peoples on both sides of a situation of
conflict.
28 Unfortunately, the number of
simmering disputes is so large, and, the technical difficulties of studying and
defusing them are still so overwhelming, that we do not do anything at all,
until it is too late. We do not even pay attention to these disputes, until
they are ready to break-out into open warfare, and, even, then, we usually try
a "band-aid" approach by soothing the boiling tensions, and by
perpetuating an unjust status-quo.
29 It is obvious to anyone who
cares to think for a moment, that the tensions of injustice and the origins of
a conflict have to be dealt with decisively, and, they have to be given
adequate attention, long before the festering sores become a huge, rotting
wound, which can only be cured by the enormous upheavals of armed conflict or a
violent revolution.
30 We still lack a global agreement about the definition of social justice, and, many people, especially, the powerful and privileged, will consider the conditions of justice to be synonymous with those that preserve and perpetuate their positions of advantage. On the other hand, many oppressed groups can only see the solution of armed conflict and violent revolutions. It does not require a great deal of intelligence to know, that, a hardening of attitudes on both sides makes a violent conflict inevitable.
31 Therefore, if we are serious in
our desire to see a peaceful earth, we have to think, seriously and
consistently, about the gigantic task of bringing-about social justice on a
global scale. We can not come to a truly globally acceptable definition of
social justice, if we try to maintain, somehow, a position of advantage, but,
neither can we expect those groupings, occupying a position of privilege, to
give-up their security voluntarily, without the guarantee, that they will, at
least, be treated fairly and equitably.
32 We need a clear philosophy about
the way we want to exist and inter-relate with each other on a world-wide
scale, and, then, we can start to examine the numerous simmering disputes that
exist between people all over the world. We have to study, document and discuss
each one of these disputes thoroughly, carefully, and in great detail,
allowing, thereby, an exchange of views and a measure of contact, before the
emotions have risen to the boiling-point.
33 It is logical, that there is a
greater willingness to listen to the other side of the argument, if the
instinct to use violent aggression has not been aroused as yet, and, the
technique of comparing a dispute with other conflicts, and tracing the origins
of these disputes deep into their historical roots, will contribute, greatly,
to bringing these disputes into a comprehensive perspective.
34 Besides, a globally acceptable
code of ethics and a standard of living that is shared, at least, potentially,
by everyone, will make it easier to judge a dispute and suggest an acceptable
and reasonable solution to a specific conflict. However, there is no globally
acceptable philosophy, as yet, and, there is not even a widespread awareness
that we need such a standardised view of our own existence.
35 We do not have the technical,
nor the organisational instruments, to study and record each simmering dispute
in detail, and with sure-footed expertise. Neither do we have a majority of
efficient, honest, responsive and popularly elected leaderships that follow
Parliamentary procedures and are accountable to their people. We still have too
many primitive dictatorships, where the intincts of aggression and the power of
a military elite dictate what is happening within society.
36 It is not surprising, that
mediation and compromise are, now, often a futile, fruitless and frustrating
excercise, because the negotiators have little power to put pressure on the
belligerents, and, the activities of mediation and negotiation still reflect,
all too often, a clumsy emphasis on specific national interests. A compromise
is, then, not based on a thorough understanding of the conflict-situation, but,
on arguments of political expediency.
37 Rather than seeking a solution
through the influence and power of outside forces with their political
interests, it would be preferable, if an informed world-opinion could grow into
an effective instrument with great prestige, which no nation, large or small,
could afford to ignore. If a development takes place into this direction, the
art of negotiation and compromise will gradually become a legal or judicial form
of settlement, where, after carefully hearing all arguments, a judgement is
formulated and a settlement is imposed, which will be backed by the force of
world public opinion.
38 Then, mediation will become a powerful tool, not only, to prevent serious conflagrations between hostile groups of people or entire nations, but, it will, also, become an effective way to defuse growing situations of injustice, or the tensions of a conflict of interest, before they begin to harm the attitudes of cooperation and good-will.
39 Where does secrecy fit into this
picture of global justice and integration? There is no place at all for any
form of secrecy in the just world-society of the future, but, as we mentioned, the
practice of secrecy is unavoidable in our contemporary societies. However, if
those in power, as well as those who are negotiating as representatives for
their societies, keep in mind the overall objectives of a just society, as well
as the need for a gradual change towards a condition of increased transparence
within and between nations, then, we do not have to despair, or despise, the
practice of secret negotiations.
40 Nevertheless, we should keep a
watchful eye upon our delegates and leaderships, in order to make sure, that
they negotiate indeed honestly, and to the benefit of the peoples they
represent. It is important, that all parties to a conflict refrain from
opportunistic and egocentric attitudes during the efforts and hard work of
negotiating and compromising an end to a situation of conflict, otherwise, the
tensions of disappointment and the insults to the sense of justice, may send,
once again, the peoples of many nations to their death, either, as soldiers on
the battle-fields, or, as innocent civilian victims who are being bombarded in
their defenseless cities and villages.
.......
Summary
1. A violent confrontation represents a mechanism for dissolving
tensions.
The results of an all-out struggle for survival.
The instinct of territoriality.
Inter-dependence, and the lingering needs for a territory.
The bonds of human inter-dependence have grown beyond national boundaries.
The territorial instincts of political leaders.
When we lose the ability to negotiate and compromise.
Dying as soldiers on the battlefield, or as civilians in vulnerable cities, is
a high price to pay for saving the prestige of our nation.
When we are caught by a deadly instinct.
Rationalising our attitudes of hostility and acts of belligerence.
The cloak of "self-defense".
What makes us so sure, that we are not to blame?
We pay a high price for the comforting feeling of "being absolutely
right".
2. The functions of territorial behaviour.
The concept of an ecological balance.
Why the tensions of competitive strife continue to rise.
The lingering ferocity of our territorial instincts.
A slowly enlarging social unit.
Dividing necessary tasks and chores between a group of people.
The rise of the ability to recall memory-traces with representative symbols.
The "herd".
Herd-formation is not suitable for animals that require a sophisticated hunt in
order to feed themselves.
The slow and arduous growth of a viable social entity.
Many complex developments are taking place simultaneously.
Mechanisms of social integration in small groupings.
Cultural and technical innovations are necessary for a successful, overall,
large-scale social leadership.
3. Behavioural refinement; enlarging the number of factors to be
taken into account.
Behavioural flexibility; a review.
The close, evolutionary relatives of mankind.
A smooth transition from being an animal to being human.
Are we still animals?
A strong sexual drive.
A portrait of "early man".
A look at the genetically encoded instructions for parental care.
The essential vulnerability of behaviourally flexible youngsters.
Yielding to an emotionally satisfying behaviour of care and protection.
The cultural break-through is made possible by an increased reliance on the
ability to learn.
Cultural and genetic codes.
Pseudo-ethical behaviour-patterns; the draw-backs of a rigid, genetic encoding.
Ethical behaviour for the human being requires, necessarily, a strong element
of "voluntary choice".
4. Why we often revert to a narrow sphere of concern.
The need to place restrictions on the behavioural range of young and adult
members of a socially integrated unit.
Unfolding the "ego-drive".
An ever more prominent "contest of wills".
The disastrous results of a defective "cultural transfer"
Mechanisms of social integration in the early, pre-human societies.
A "failure to separate" when the growth to maturity has been
completed.
A secondary fusion of related groupings.
Stimuli for cultural and technical innovations.
The "administration of justice".
The three basic mechanisms of settling a dispute; all-out combat, yielding or
fleeing, and, a differentiation into somewhat different ecological niches.
Varying manifestations of dependence and inter-dependence.
Solutions, found and applied by the mechanisms of natural selection.
Social integration is a solution based on differentiation and inter-dependence;
the "third" method.
A conscious contract of "essential equality".
Alliances, and the art of diplomacy.
Forming an alliance against a common enemy is a useful rehearsal for the much
more difficult task of negotiating a compromise with an adversary.
The "blind" search for social possibilities of existence.
When an alliance becomes, gradually, less "voluntary".
Cultural developments and refinements in the art of forming alliances.
5. The increasing devastation of acts of warfare.
People are likely to scrutinise, in the future, more intensely the reasons for
a situation of conflict.
The fragile faculty of rational attitudes and evaluations.
Memories and awarenesses fade quickly.
A library of documentaries.
Understanding the basic needs of people.
When a "compromise" is only a freeze in the status-quo.
A review of the mechanisms of an alliance.
The importance of honesty and openness.
A genuine effort to shoulder one's share of burdens and responsibilities.
The weakness of a "tough stance".
The art of mediation.
When there is a secret expectation to profit from a situation of conflict.
The imposition of a binding settlement.
World-opinion; a federation of considered attitudes and fair decisions.
Opening-up the road for a satisfying judicial settlement of international
disputes.
A look at the art of international negotiation and mediation.
6. The weapon of secrecy represents a tool for aggression and deceit.
The psychology of secrecy and ostentatious display.
The thought processes of a multi-individual leadership.
The ideal of complete openness in thoughts, plans and actions.
Secrecy and existential interests.
Hypocritical attitudes about spying.
A practical need for some secrecy; at least, for the time being.
A proper schooling for the tasks of public office.
The Parliamentary debate.
The roads of war are so much easier to travel than the roads of peace.
Free-enterprise and the mechanisms of competitive strife.
In an atmosphere of competitiveness and mistrust, secrecy is a weapon that is
used by all sides.
The inevitable rise of existential anxieties in a competitive society.
7. The right to "privacy".
The needs of individuals, versus the needs of the social environment.
Reflection and re-assessment; a period of psychological meta-morphosis.
The role of private property.
Why should people not be able to know, what kind of a person we really are?
A two-way street of scrutiny.
The presssures of transparence have to be applied evenly.
A matter for careful study.
Progress by careful, incremental steps.
The art of mediation, and the ability to accept compromises; an important
element in the educational curricula of the future.
A clear exposition of opposing points of view.
Mechanisms to slow-down the out-break of armed hostilities.
A large number of simmering disputes are still nearly completely neglected.
The festering sores of injustice.
Preventing a "boiling point" of anger and frustration.
The techniques of mediation and compromise are still in a rudimentary stage.
World Opinion may become an instrument of great prestige.
How to prevent the damages caused by opportunism and egocentric attitudes.
.......