StructuralConflict

MeatballWiki | RecentChanges | Random Page | Indices | Categories

What counts as a structurally-caused conflict is contextual. If two people see only enough resources to feed one, then they are in a structural conflict. If they see a way that both can find enough to eat, and conflict continues, something else is going on.

see SourcesOfConflict

: According to this definition, wouldn't it be clearer to name this a ResourceConflict??

The reason why the name sounds ridiculous is that this is actually not the definition of structural conflict. A structural conflict is when the organizational structure creates the conflict. In terms of online communities, that would something like a GodKing, a hierarchical management structure like dmoz, or a BastardOperatorFromHell?. Structural conflict arises from abuse of authoritative power (i.e. power based on your chair), which is always bogus power unless enforced with some sort of hard measure (HardSecurity, a LegalSolution, etc.). In a perfect SoftSecurity environment, structural conflict is impossible because all power is gained by either physical (as opposed to structural) control of resources (including information) or through earned respect. Remember, authority positions like managers are all in your mind unless they control something you need, like your paycheque. If you don't believe they exist, they don't. This is an aspect of your RightToLeave. Of course, in terms of middle managers who don't control the budget directly, they may transitively control your paycheque by ratting you out to their bosses!

Thank you. I still do not understand. You wrote:

In a perfect SoftSecurity environment, structural conflict is impossible because all power is gained by either physical (as opposed to structural) control of resources (including information) or through earned respect.

So there's physical control of things, and then among the non-physical, respect and structural. So this structural you speak of, it is law and explicit custom? Or does it include implicit custom?

Laws are customs, of course, but they have the advantage of having real force behind them. A contract creates structural roles for the two parties. Alternatively, you can agree that instead of using force, you'll create an structure by custom--this is how laws work. I suppose actually physical control can lead to structural conflict, but only if you subsume ResourceConflict? underneath structural conflict.

All these definitions need are some case studies.

StructuralConflict

Discussion