Infographic: Intractable Conflicts Aren't Just Us vs. Them

It is impossible to effectively address a conflict
if you don't understand what is going on.
It's never a simple us-vs.-them story!

Click image to enlarge.

The above image is free to copy and use for non-commercial activities according to the Creative Commons License CC BY-NC-ND 4.0, which asks that you do not alter it or remove the attribution information.

There is a tendency in difficult conflicts to over-simplify the situation into a simple "us-versus-them" story. We assume that our side are the "good guys"--that everything we believe is right and everything we want is just. Likewise, we think that everything (or many things) that the other side believes

This post is part of the
Constructive Conflict
MOOS Seminar's
exploration of the tough challenges posed by the
Constructive Conflict Initiative.

are wrong, and the things they want are unjust or not deserved. In addition, if they are preventing us from having "our way," then we often frame them as "the enemy" and treat them as such--being disrespectful, hurtful, and/or threatening towards them. The result, however, is that they begin to see and treat us as their enemy and they too begin treating us as such. That begins an escalation spiral that can get dangerous surprisingly fast.

But conflicts are almost never a simple good-guy versus bad guy situation. Almost always both sides have some legitimacy to their beliefs and desires; both sides have done some things right and some things wrong. There may be reasons for people to advocate what they do--beyond being stupid or evil--even though you may not understand those reasons. So it is important to look at the complexity each conflict. Why does each side want or advocate what it does? Is there any validity to the other point of view? Can you figure out a way to "live and let live," thereby avoiding a conflict

Granted, the balance of right and wrong isn't always equal. Sometimes one side is, actually, mostly wrong, or mostly at fault. But it seldom is because they are evil. More often, they are mislead, poorly educated, gullible, and/or vulnerable. For example, some people in the United States refuse to vaccinate their children, believing that vaccinations cause autism. The science on this issue is very clear. The study that showed that the MMR vaccine caused autism was deeply flawed. It does not. And lack of vaccinations is harming many, many children--including some who have been vaccinated. So in terms of the conflict between the State and the "anti-vaxers," one side is much more "wrong" than the other. But few of these parents are evil--they are simply distrustful of government, doctors, and pharmaceutical companies. Instead of treating anti-vaccination parents with contempt, which just increases their distrust of the other side, better to treat them with respect and understanding, and after gaining some trust, try to get them to change their mind.

More about this topic can be found in the following related posts.

See the Complexity It's not Just "Us versus Them" -- Parties, issues, dynamics, power, and relationships are among the conflict elements one must clearly understand.
Limit "Us-vs-Them" Language, Thinking, and Action --This video explains why and how to think of and treat "the other" as a partner, not as an adversary.
Frontiers Seminar 3: Introduction to Complexity and "Systems Thinking" -- Theoretical Antecedents - This is the first of two Frontiers Seminars focused on complexity. This one reviews other people's ideas that have developed complexity theory as it applies to conflict.
Frontiers Seminar 4: Moving Toward a Complexity-Oriented Paradigm - This second Frontiers Seminar develops the Burgess's thinking regarding complexity theory and intractable conflict.
All Infographics - A set of very short statements that try to emphasize key conflict resolution principles, which, if followed, would make a lot of intractable conflicts much better.