Conflict Resolution, Late Capitalism, and Socialism

Institutional Affiliation

George Mason University Carter School for Peace and Conflict Resolution

Start Date

16-1-2025 3:30 PM

End Date

16-1-2025 5:00 PM

Proposal Type

Panel

Proposal Format

On-campus

Proposal Description

Panel Discussion: Structural Conflict Resolution in the Era of Late Capitalism

1. Title: CONFLICT RESOLUTION, LATE CAPITALISM, AND SOCIALISM

Author: Richard E. Rubenstein (George Mason University). rrubenst@gmu.edu

Abstract:

A question infrequently dealt with in the literature of peace and conflict studies, but one that seems increasingly urgent to explore, is the relationship of late capitalism to apparently intractable conflicts. By extension, this inquiry also raises the issue of the relationship of alternative socioeconomic systems such as socialism to conflict resolution.

The theoretical work dealing with these related questions is not only slim in volume but largely limited to considering the impact of selected types of socioeconomic systems on international conflicts. Examples familiar to readers of the Peace and Conflict Studies Journal are Faruk Ekmekci, “Democratic vs. Capitalist Peace: A Test for the Developing World,” JPCS 21:1 (2014), and Juliet Bennet, “Peace politics and the political spectrum: A co-creative approach to left and right” (presentation at the JPCS Conference, October 2021). The proposed paper offers a more general analysis, rooted in empirical data, of three subtopics:

  • The tendency of late capitalist systems to generate serious intergroup conflicts that are very difficult or impossible to resolve within the accepted institutional and discursive structures of those systems.
  • The possibility, if not substantial probability, that such conflicts could be mitigated or resolved if late capitalist institutions and policies were altered or replaced by social-democratic or socialist institutions, norms, and policies.
  • The practical steps that might be taken to move late capitalist societies toward more effective forms of conflict mitigation and resolution based on significant alteration of existing systems.

Each of these subtopics is discussed in the context of a particular conflict internal to many late capitalist societies – the struggle over policies toward would-be and recently arrived immigrants – and a particular international conflict – the growing antagonism between most late capitalist nations and the People’s Republic of China. In each case the paper explores the systemic sources of the conflict, possible links between conflict mitigation or resolution and systemic change, and practical steps that might be taken to forge those links.

2. Title: CONFLICT RESOLUTION AS A SUPPORT FOR COUNTERPOWER

Author: Michael D. English (University of Colorado Boulder).

Michael.d.english@colorado.edu

Abstract:

The origins of conflict resolution in the post-WWII period might be read as a radical experiment to do politics differently under the specter of nuclear Armageddon. Yet today, most analysts and observers view conflict resolution in relation to neutral third-party techniques of dispute settlement. While many authors recognize a wide range of roles conflict intervenors might play in relation to serving all parties involved in a conflict, less attention is paid to party-specific roles (coaching, allyship, etc.) that assist to advance political goals or to challenge underlying structural conditions. Even less consideration is given to conflict resolution within the paradigm of nonviolent civil resistance, treating the subject as merely a question of technique for managing differences between affinity groups.

The past decade has seen a continuation of struggles for justice and equality, yet conflict resolution has remained largely on the sidelines in struggles that sit at the core of the field’s emergence. This presentation reconsiders the roles conflict resolution might play alongside and within these contemporary movements building on the work of Hardt and Negri on counterpower.

3. Title: CAN WAR EVER BE STOPPED? ANALYZING THE MILITARISTIC SYSTEM

Author: Victor Wallis (Berklee School of Music). zendive@aol.com

Abstract:

With each passing year, the costs of war increase -- not only in terms of the amounts spent on armaments, but also in terms of the irreparable damage arising from war's continuation. The question of how to reverse course is the question of how to transform a social order for whose ruling class waging war has become a necessity for survival. The rest of the population has largely acquiesced, though not without being subjected to a remarkably comprehensive, historically evolved set of institutions, material factors, and cultural forces that maintain the militaristic system. Describing the modus operandi of this complex -- whose military/industrial component is buttressed by ideology and repression – is an essential prerequisite to developing a coherent, possibly effective strategy to eliminate military conflicts.

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS
 
Jan 16th, 3:30 PM Jan 16th, 5:00 PM

Conflict Resolution, Late Capitalism, and Socialism

Panel Discussion: Structural Conflict Resolution in the Era of Late Capitalism

1. Title: CONFLICT RESOLUTION, LATE CAPITALISM, AND SOCIALISM

Author: Richard E. Rubenstein (George Mason University). rrubenst@gmu.edu

Abstract:

A question infrequently dealt with in the literature of peace and conflict studies, but one that seems increasingly urgent to explore, is the relationship of late capitalism to apparently intractable conflicts. By extension, this inquiry also raises the issue of the relationship of alternative socioeconomic systems such as socialism to conflict resolution.

The theoretical work dealing with these related questions is not only slim in volume but largely limited to considering the impact of selected types of socioeconomic systems on international conflicts. Examples familiar to readers of the Peace and Conflict Studies Journal are Faruk Ekmekci, “Democratic vs. Capitalist Peace: A Test for the Developing World,” JPCS 21:1 (2014), and Juliet Bennet, “Peace politics and the political spectrum: A co-creative approach to left and right” (presentation at the JPCS Conference, October 2021). The proposed paper offers a more general analysis, rooted in empirical data, of three subtopics:

  • The tendency of late capitalist systems to generate serious intergroup conflicts that are very difficult or impossible to resolve within the accepted institutional and discursive structures of those systems.
  • The possibility, if not substantial probability, that such conflicts could be mitigated or resolved if late capitalist institutions and policies were altered or replaced by social-democratic or socialist institutions, norms, and policies.
  • The practical steps that might be taken to move late capitalist societies toward more effective forms of conflict mitigation and resolution based on significant alteration of existing systems.

Each of these subtopics is discussed in the context of a particular conflict internal to many late capitalist societies – the struggle over policies toward would-be and recently arrived immigrants – and a particular international conflict – the growing antagonism between most late capitalist nations and the People’s Republic of China. In each case the paper explores the systemic sources of the conflict, possible links between conflict mitigation or resolution and systemic change, and practical steps that might be taken to forge those links.

2. Title: CONFLICT RESOLUTION AS A SUPPORT FOR COUNTERPOWER

Author: Michael D. English (University of Colorado Boulder).

Michael.d.english@colorado.edu

Abstract:

The origins of conflict resolution in the post-WWII period might be read as a radical experiment to do politics differently under the specter of nuclear Armageddon. Yet today, most analysts and observers view conflict resolution in relation to neutral third-party techniques of dispute settlement. While many authors recognize a wide range of roles conflict intervenors might play in relation to serving all parties involved in a conflict, less attention is paid to party-specific roles (coaching, allyship, etc.) that assist to advance political goals or to challenge underlying structural conditions. Even less consideration is given to conflict resolution within the paradigm of nonviolent civil resistance, treating the subject as merely a question of technique for managing differences between affinity groups.

The past decade has seen a continuation of struggles for justice and equality, yet conflict resolution has remained largely on the sidelines in struggles that sit at the core of the field’s emergence. This presentation reconsiders the roles conflict resolution might play alongside and within these contemporary movements building on the work of Hardt and Negri on counterpower.

3. Title: CAN WAR EVER BE STOPPED? ANALYZING THE MILITARISTIC SYSTEM

Author: Victor Wallis (Berklee School of Music). zendive@aol.com

Abstract:

With each passing year, the costs of war increase -- not only in terms of the amounts spent on armaments, but also in terms of the irreparable damage arising from war's continuation. The question of how to reverse course is the question of how to transform a social order for whose ruling class waging war has become a necessity for survival. The rest of the population has largely acquiesced, though not without being subjected to a remarkably comprehensive, historically evolved set of institutions, material factors, and cultural forces that maintain the militaristic system. Describing the modus operandi of this complex -- whose military/industrial component is buttressed by ideology and repression – is an essential prerequisite to developing a coherent, possibly effective strategy to eliminate military conflicts.