regality forum

Searching through the large literature on conflict and peace studies, I find very little mentioning of psychological mechanisms behind bellicosity, radicalization, and escalation. I think that regality theory and other areas of evolutionary psychology can be useful here. In particular, the following theoretical observarions can be helpful for conflict and peace studies:

• Regality theory explains the deep psychological causes of political and religious radicalization and bellicosity. Radicalization cannot be prevented without addressing the underlying fears and collective dangers.
• Counterterrorism is counterproductive because it increases the regality of the adversary.
• Terrorism is also counterproductive because it increases the regality of their adversary.
• Asymmetric conflicts are often protracted and intractable because the imbalance of negotiating powers makes it impossible to reach a negotiated settlement that is perceived as fair by the weak part. The conflict will flare up again as long as the grievances are not dealt with in a satisfactory way.
• Intervention and mediation by a third party is necessary for offsetting the imbalance of negoting powers in an asymmetric conflict.
• Both parties in a protracted conflict are radicalized because of the regal psychology. This impedes peace negotiations.
• Violent conflict is making both parties less democratic. A well-functioning democracy cannot be established as long as there is violent conflict or the parties feel threatened. Peace and security must come before democracy.
• Violent conflict and regality leads to conservative and authoritarian cultural values such as racism, lack of civil liberties, lack of women’s rights, intolerance of divorce, and of homosexuality, abortion, etc. Such values make a regal group vulnerable to international criticism. A clash of cultural values can exacerbate and maintain a violent conflict.
• The mass media are often inadvertently contributing to regality by exaggerating danger for no other reason than their own economy. Fear sells.
• Conflicting parties are often victims of their own propaganda and groupthink to such a degree that they do not understand the motives of their adversaries. They tend to focus on "evil leaders" rather than issues. Eliminating leaders or rebel groups without addressing the underlying grievances will only exacerbate the conflict and increase the regality. New radical leaders or groups will soon pop up and escalate the conflict.
• Leaders of strong nations can increase their own power by making their society more regal. The theory predicts that leaders can be inclined to deceive their followers by spreading fear and by exaggerating or fabricating danger. It is important for peacemakers to be aware of this phenomenon and expose deceptive fearmongering.

These theories can be illustrated by the example of the Israel/Palestine conflict. This conflict is intractable because of the imbalance of negotiating power. The conflict has lasted since 1947. The continued conflict has regalized both parties and led to extremism on both sides and poor understanding of the motives of the other side. Israel is currently focusing on eliminating Hamas, which is a counterproductive strategy that only exacerbates the grievances of the Palestinians. If Hamas is eliminated, then we will surely see new and even more radical groups emerging instead. There have been other radical groups before Hamas, and there will surely come new radical groups after them as long as the Palestinians are oppressed.

The deceptive strategy of fearmongering is also seen in this conflict. Israel failed to prevent the terror attack of October 7, 2023, even though they knew it was coming. They even increased the casualties by "friendly fire". Few conflict researchers understand this so-called strategy of tension, but strategists in the intelligence organizations probably do.

Conflicts like this cannot be resolved unless a third party facilitates and mediates a peace negotiation and intervenes to guarantee the security of both parties.

Another example is the conflict in Northern Ireland. The asymmetry of negotiating power made it difficult to negotiate a peace settlement that was satisfactory to both parties. Media censorship has exacerbated this asymmetry.

I have presented these theories in a new paper here:
Evolutionary theories of violent conflict, bellicosity and radicalization.