Human history and the development of society has constantly been plagued by war and conflict throughout all ages, even to today where many places in the world continue to be in conflict without pause. From the beginning, people have formed groups in order to unite under a common cause or shared attribute to build a community, however the formation of these groups have led to groups of people that are antagonistic towards others. Never in human history can a period be found where a group of people was not at conflict with another.
Conflict is almost certain to be found if there is something to be gained by one group or another whether it be land, wealth, commodities, power, or when opinions differ over certain matters. During the whole of history, groups of people have been willing to do anything to benefit themselves regardless of the cost it may have on others. Many of the most catastrophic events in human history have been caused by groups of people inflicting horrible wrongdoings on another group of people.
Examples of this include the Crusades, the Atlantic Slave trade, the World Wars with the Holocaust and the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, or the recent genocides in Rwanda and Myanmar. Conflict and violence are so deeply ingrained within human history that it almost appears inescapable and part of our nature or the world we live in. This begs the question: can antagonistic groups or groups with substantially different values come together and build a community? In my opinion it is possible, however unlikely due to barriers in the form of conflicts between morals of antagonistic groups and conflicts between the goals of antagonistic groups.
![](https://paperap.com/wp-content/themes/theme/img-rh/star.svg")
4.7 (235)
“ Amazing writer! I am really satisfied with her work. An excellent price as well. ”
I will explore these two types of conflicts between groups and analyze why I feel it is unlikely antagonistic groups can come together due to them.
To begin, I believe that conflicts between the morals of antagonistic groups are the most irreconcilable differences that are unlikely to be overcome and one of the main reasons why it is difficult for them to build a community. Conflicts between morals are most likely to be found between groups that differ in religion, laws or culture as these three typically define what morals a group will follow and uphold. Often, morals are derived from religion where an ultimate authority, such as God, has decided upon what the standards of morality and ethics are and revealed them to the people. When a group’s moral standards are believed to be given to them by a divine being with ultimate power, they understand that these are the supreme standards that must be followed without question. These standards ultimately determine a groups concept of right, wrong, virtue, and sin with little room for understanding. This is where the opportunity for conflict arises in antagonistic groups, as groups of people who differ in their moral standards can potentially have completely conflicting views of what is right and wrong.
For one group of people what might be considered virtuous could potentially for another be completely sacrilegious or morally unacceptable. In a situation like this, where moral standards differ greatly, feelings of mistrust and dislike for each other grow. In addition, these feelings are exasperated by the fact that each group believes itself to be in the right as their ultimate religious authority has provided them with the sole truth. These differences are extremely difficult to overcome, because the two groups are so different from one another that they disagree in fundamental definitions of good and bad and each believe that their position is the right one. Even in instances where religion is not the ultimate deciding factor, when the morals of a group are opposed to one another, conflict is almost certain to follow. There is almost no way for one group to reconcile with the other when they differ in the most foundational beliefs that define their values and culture. This reduces the chances that groups could maintain a dialogue and attempt to build a relationship necessary to form a community as they disagree on even the most fundamental ideas necessary for cooperation.
In addition, related to the difficulty that groups differing in moral beliefs face, conflicts between the goals and needs of antagonistic groups can create divides and inhibit the building of a community. These conflicts and differences can be said to be conflicts between the interests of groups. These types of conflict most often occur between countries and political entities; however, they can also occur between smaller groups of people within them. Conflicts between the goals of antagonistic groups most often occur due to the limited resources and land on Earth that can be allotted between groups. Each group, acting out of self-interest, attempts to obtain a share of these limited resources they need, regularly seeking to maximize the amount of resources they can acquire.
This is where conflicts of interest arise over natural resources like food, water, land, precious metals, and nonrenewable resources as every group of people needs natural resources. In attempting to maximize the happiness and benefit of one’s own group, conflict arises as each group is trying to do the same. Conflicts of this nature often lead to in-group and out-group biases that only perpetuate the issue. In an us-against-them mindset where the out-group is viewed as being antagonists to the in-group’s interests, a very direct form of conflict, often violent follows from these conflicts. Access to natural resources and wealth can often be the difference between life and death for groups of people which leads to incredibly strong sentiments when one’s life can be on the line. When one group stands to gain something or acquire resources necessary for their life, they will seek it out often regardless of the cost or negative effect it may have on others.
Conflicts between the interests of antagonistic groups over natural resources are the most obvious example, however there are other forms of conflict between interest that can be found. Moreover, conflicts between morals and conflicts between interests are not mutually exclusive from one another as the morals of a group often determines their interests and the manner of achieving their interests. These are conflicts where the morals of a group lead to interests and actions that conflict with another group. For example, the Christian faith believes in proselytization to acquire converts for the faith, however in the Islamic religion they respond very negatively to being proselytized as they believe their religion to be the sole truth. Muslims see the attempt of proselytization as an attack on their religion and will respond negatively towards it, despite the potentially pure intentions the Christians may have. This is a conflict of interest related to morals as the Christian group believes it is in their interest to find converts as their religion calls for it, however the Islamic belief system directly opposes the Christian interests.
This will lead to a conflict between the groups as their interests are completely antithetical to one another due to their religion and subsequent standard of morals. Another example of morality leading to conflict of interest can be found in our reading, A Good Month for Murder, where one group, the police, believe firmly in the laws and have an interest to uphold them, while the other group, people who break the laws, think they have something to gain from doing so. The people who break the laws are doing so because they have an interest in gaining money or some illegal commodity regardless of the moral authority that laws are thought to held, while the police firmly believe in the moral authority of the laws and attempt to uphold them in opposition to the interests of criminals. This leads to a direct conflict between police and criminals as they are completely antithetical to one another in their interests. There is no situation where criminals and the police, two antagonistic groups differing in concepts of morality regarding laws with differing interests, can come together and build a community.
The building of community between antagonistic groups is an arduous task that would require individuals to see beyond differences and conflicts they may have regarding morals and interests in order to come together. This would require people to diminish their sense of egotism and the connection they feel with the in-group by acquiring a sense of tolerance and understanding for others. This is one of the main reasons why I feel it would be incredibly difficult for antagonistic groups to come together. People are inherently egotistical and almost always place themselves and their sentiments above all else. Especially regarding groups that are antagonistic to one another, it is very difficult for most people to understand and feel empathy for a group that opposes them.
When faced with contradicting beliefs most people respond negatively and are unable to accept the differences which eventually leads to conflict. This is not to say that all people act this way, however enough have acted this way and continue to so that there are still groups of people that find themselves at conflict with another. The overcoming of societal and cultural boundaries is not an easy feat to achieve and will continue to be a large inhibitor when building communities even if people are tolerant of one another. A serious change in the mindset of individuals around the world that greatly diminishes egotistical beliefs and places empathy above all else is necessary before we can see antagonistic groups come together and build a community.
Human History and Development Of Society. (2021, Dec 18). Retrieved from https://paperap.com/human-history-and-development-of-society/
