Николай Григорьев

“Yet even as the possibility that all conflicts might yield to skilled application of technical knowledge assuaged the popular imagination, some scholars and analysts were sounding alarms about the dangers of a culture-free conception of conflict. And we began to push back against the received view that conflicts required only mechanically technical solutions.”
― Kevin Avruch, Context and Pretext in Conflict Resolution: Culture, Identity, Power, and Practice

“By the early 1980s, the view that most any conflict—domestic or international, intergroup or interpersonal—could be reframed and negotiated to a satisfying conclusion if only the right technical skills were brought to bear on it had become part of the popular imagination. Books championing such technical approaches regularly appeared on bestseller lists.”
― Kevin Avruch, Context and Pretext in Conflict Resolution: Culture, Identity, Power, and Practice

“the order of things, whereas structural violence becomes apparent because it stands out like an enormous rock in a creek, impeding the free flow, creating all kinds of eddies and turbulences.5”
― Richard E. Rubenstein, Resolving Structural Conflicts: How Violent Systems Can Be Transformed

“In a static society, personal violence will be registered, whereas structural violence may be seen as about as natural as the air around us. Conversely, in a highly dynamic society, personal violence may be seen as wrong and harmful, but still somehow congruent with”
― Richard E. Rubenstein, Resolving Structural Conflicts: How Violent Systems Can Be Transformed