Invitation to Learn

There is at present no programme for this group. Below is the programme for the last series which ended in March 2008. If you have an idea for a discussion theme, let me know and we’ll see if we can run it.

Discussing Conflict Resolution

Six monthly discussion meetings from October 2007 to March 2008

In this series we will be considering how conflicts might be resolved, or to put it another way, how we could create a peaceful world. Conflicts arise when one party resists what it sees as injustice. This party feels disempowered in relation to another or other parties and is unwilling to accept the situation. The aggrieved ‘party’ we are speaking about could be an individual, or it could be a group of people who identify with each other in some way or another - Muslims, Tibetans, Palestinians, Jews, Kurds, communists. In this series we will usually be considering the kind of conflict which occurs between groups, often between minority and majority groups, but much the same principles apply to conflicts between individuals, and it will be helpful to draw on personal individual experience when thinking about group conflict.

The series will be facilitated by Dr Francis Clark-Lowes who has a background in sociology, counselling and human rights campaigning. We will meet at 7.30 p.m. at BPEC, 39-41 Surrey Street, Brighton BN1 3PB on the days indicated, and will finish at 9 p.m. Information about meetings which have already taken place will be left in this post until the series ends so that you can have an idea of what has already been discussed. There is no need to have attended previous meetings to benefit from forthcoming ones - in other words the meetings are run on a drop-in basis.

29th Oct 2007 Questions of power and injustice.

What are power and injustice? Why does injustice arise? Is it an accident or, on the contrary, is it intended by the dominant person or group? Is injustice inevitable or avoidable? Can everyone be empowered?

22nd Nov 2007 Violent solutions to conflict: Can they work?

Traditionally the way in which injustice has often been addressed is through violent resistance. Can this be effective? Is there always an effective alternative? Or does violence always beget further violence?

13th Dec 2007 The ‘squabbling kids’ concept of conflict.

Conflicts such as those in Northern Ireland or between the Palestinians and Israel are often discussed as if the problem resembled two squabbling kids, neither of whom is seriously in the wrong. If they just recognised each others’ needs all would be well. Is this a realistic and useful model? Does it even accurately describe what happens between squabbling kids? Or is it simply a convenient model for those who do not wish to stop their support of the dominant group?

17th Jan 2008 Identity conflict: ‘My group is better than yours.’

Groups are usually chauvinistic in some way, that is they think their group is the best. Could it be otherwise? Are some groups really ‘better’ than others? If groups think they are better than others, is world peace conceivable? Or is it possible, as many maintain, for people to feel proud of their own group, and expect others to feel the same way about theirs, without this affecting the possibility of harmony between them?

14th Feb 2008 Economic conflict and class: Private property.

Injustice often arises from unequal distribution of economic resources. Within societies this is usually reinforced by laws, especially those relating to property, which prevent a resolution of this inequality and perpetuate the class structure. A similar situation exists internationally. Could this economic inequality be eliminated? Is communism still the answer? Or socialism? Or is economic inequality a price worth paying for ‘growth and prosperity’?

13th Mar 2008 Can we avoid being judgemental?

Much of the discussion about conflict resolution assumes that we should not judge either side in a conflict. This arises out of the ’squabbling kids’ model of conflict. But is this realistic? Don’t individuals and groups consciously set about exploiting others? If this is so why shouldn’t we judge them? Is it credible that one group will give up its dominant position if it is viewed with as much respect as the people it is oppressing? Or will judgement, through its assault on the pride of the ‘accused’, cause the judged party obstinately to defend itself to the bitter end?