In the Journal entry “Conflicts as Property”, written by Nils Christie in 1977, the author states that the legal system is less concerned with the individual(s) affected by the outcome, and in turn are ultimately focused on the satisfaction of that of both state and the victim. The author believes that highly industrialized societies have resulted in a legal system in which conflicts have been taken from both the defendant and the victim and placed in the hands of “potential thieves” (Christie, Conflict as Property pg.3).1 Conflicts as Property, pertains to Christie’s belief that those involved in handling the conflict as opposed to allowing professionals in law controlling the outcome; as a means to question the criminal legal system. As a result, Christie developed the notion that we should rather abolish institutes, not open them.
Christie believes that individuals should own their conflict as they do their own property by stating that “Conflicts might kill, but too little of them will paralyze” (Christie, Conflict as Property pg.1).2 to further expand; the advancement of society is dependant on conflict. It is the authors notion that modern law is the result of societies standstill, that its implementation has set in stone laws that cannot be neither changed nor challenged as a result. To further his claim, the author provides an example of a Tanzanian couple. In this example, the couple is noted as living together in an overcrowded house where the majority of villagers had lived there as well; however, the couple split. The man in the relationship was noted to have invested a fair sum of money on the woman’s jewelry as well as her apparel, some of the issue was resolved and others were not. Christie mentions five elements associated with the conflict that make up its framework, the significance of these elements in regards to Christie’s beliefs on conflict and how the case was carried out. In this particular case the former couple were both in the center...