Law and Society (Section A) – Tutorial Worksheet 1

1. How do band and village people get along without law enforcement specialists and facilities? (p.1)

Characteristics of band & village societies:

- Small size of band and village societies wrongdoings cannot be anonymous (i.e. victims

can easily take action)

- Absence of marked inequalities in access to technologies and resources less hostility

between people

(i.e. equal access to resources fewer disputes)

- Central importance of domestic groups and kinship rely upon family and kinship support

mutual understanding on reciprocity

- Accumulation of material possession is rigidly limited (since people have to keep moving

places)

- No regular market for stolen things low incentives for stealing (borrow is preferred)

- Religion dimension of divine: punishment after life for wrongdoers

- Moral right/truth is not cared about collective interest of the community is concerned

instead of individual right/ interest

***Society harmony matters more than justice

Methods for people to get along without law enforcement:

1. Song Contest/Duels (Eskimo)

- Actually, neither singing skill /song content is important

- Only supporters (know which one they support before the song duels) – backing from

kinship matter

2. Witchcraft Accusation

- pressure of shaman (who is actually an expert of human relationship)

- Maintaining long term harmony

- just to identify potential trouble makers but not to defend justice

- Some say witchcraft accusation can make the society more harmonious in long run by

changing the behaviour patterns of people

Because to protect oneself from witchcraft accusation, individual have to:

+ act in an amiable and open manners

+ avoid quarrels

+ maintain support from kinship

3. Disputants will be temporarily insulated from the collective response of their respective

kin

*** It is important to mobilize public opinion on one side to the other decisively enough to

prevent the outbreak of large-scale fighting

 2. “Headmanship is likely to be a frustrating and irksome position.” (p.8)

A Headman – an intensifier of production and redistribution

Frustrated Power

Irksome Burden/Responsibility

Being a Headman - gain of reputation as a safeguard to oneself and his family

- In modern times, there are a lot diverse values than reputation (e.g. money, political power)

which are not important in relatively-unproductive small bands/ villages

A headman, though sounding quite nice in title, is actually lack of political power, has no

powers of coercion (can only be used for persuading not effective) and cannot force public

obedience (merely like a public spokesman which is powerless).

To keep his status, he has to be personally respected (setting moral example) – hence being

very generous and somehow self-sacrificing (sacrificing self procession)

To take the lead if he wants something to be done/ To set up moral examples

Work hard to gain support / Intensive production to gain support

Give public speech

Natural tendency to gain power/reputation/prestige

Money is useless/ NO material goods/ Simple life Human relationship is more important

than material goods

If bad reputation possible to be identified to be the witch

Good reputation Safe/ Self-protection/

 For instance, the headman of Brazilian Indian has to be the hardest one to work and own a

very small portion of the redistributed food gained from hunting or fishing; the Mehinacu

“chief” has to be very nice to his people like calling upon them to work hard in garden and

controlling his temper well in public (he can never get angry at his people).

3. “mumis” among the Siuai on Bougainville in the Solomon Island from the point of view of anthropologists. (p.11)

- A “mumi” mean a “big man” – most powerful headman among several headmen

- Such a position is achieved by impressing the one’s close relatives (kin group) with his

consistency in hardship and restriction of food’s consumption, and then holding successful

fest so as to enlarge the circle of people willing to work for him

Working hard & restriction of food’s consumption convince the kin group to support him to

help provide a private lavish feast to recruit more supporters set up a club house

provide an even larger feast (muminai feast)

- Feast competition: The new mumi has to challenge the others by being a host of a feat and

see if the guest mumi can reciprocate with a similar feast in the future

- Still, mumis have no power of coercion to enforce obedience and his living standard is not

elevated above others’ (the consumption of food should even be lessen)

- Mumis had more authority in days when warfare was still practiced – enjoying regional fame

due to success in war activities but having their prerogatives rudimentary

 However, warfare was later suppressed by colonial authorities, and mumis thus became least

authoritative.

A war leader (mumi): provides food and women to warriors and establishes a clubhouse and

needs to compensate the family of dead warriors

But, a war leader of a state: concerns the state’s military affairs and gains public support by

taxation

4. Difference between a “big man” and a “chief” (p.13)

Big Man Chief

(still need to play the role of provider but

display of generosity is occasional)

Leaders of autonomous villages or bands

(consist of one community or settlement)

Leaders of more or less permanently allied

groups of bands and villages called

chiefdoms (consist of several communities

or settlement) jurisdiction

No actual political power – merely

redistributors or public spokesmen

X Coercion

With actual political power e.g. ownership

of store of food – Mico’s granary (public

treasury) but unlike tax, the contribution

is voluntary and people can take freely when

in need

The status cannot be inherited – the

headmen have to validate their position by

displacing generosity and holding recurrent

feast

The status is less stable

The office is inherited from generation to

generation and can only be deposed through

defeat in war

stable status (high stability) though, the

chief may need to gain success from wars to

validate their position in long run

Their living standard is not elevated above

commoners. (Life may be even harder in an

attempt to displace generosity)

They give away food to others. Can only eat

They live better than the commoners and

hold a relatively higher position as well e.g.

referring to the case of the Trobriand

Islanders (p.206), shell ornaments can only

be worn by the chiefs (but not the

commoners) as the insignia of high rank

inferior one.

 

5. “Chiefdom” Vs “State” (p.16, 17)

a) The difference between a “chiefdom” and a “state”:

- People are basically equal Vs inequality arises

- Voluntary contribution to the central store Vs Compulsory tax

- Open access to natural resources (Public Rights) Vs All natural resources subjected to

leader’s (king’s or government’s) ownership (Dispensations)

- Food producers Vs Peasants

- Successful redistributors Vs Kings who have actual political power/authority

Remarks: The transformation of chiefdom to state is

not based upon people’s own will but is due to the material condition (e.g. a particular mode

of production which can result in a harvest surplus)

 * Ecological theory by Brumfiel

b) Conditions favourable to such evolution:

- Population increases

+greater harvest surplus (greater ability for elite to consolidate their power)

+more powerful elite (greater ability to engage in long-distance warfare and more stratified

redistribution of trade wealth and harvest surplus)

+larger territory (increasing population, increasing surplus)

+wider scope of political control (larder investment in production, lower chance of

emigration)

- Intensive agriculture (i.e. the staple is a grain which can be stored up for a longer period of

time, so that the elite can take better control on the food storage as well as the production

system)

- mode of production is fixed (e.g. regular use of water) for food surplus give rise

to management and centralization of power

- Circumscription (i.e. emigrants have to suffer a decline in their standard of living) some

people become subordination to the others for access to non-open natural resources

6. Professor Harris’s view on the nature and role of “thought control” in traditional and modern societies organized in the form of states (p.19-23)

Thought control – bring conformity to majority to obey the government (religions,

infrastructure)

Coercion – can control small number of people (i.e. the minority)

In both traditional and modern societies, the role that “thought control” is playing is almost

the same which is used for maintaining law and order against discontented group (it is

usually preferred by the ruling party over the use of coercion).

Nevertheless, the contexts of “thought control” in different times are slightly different.

In traditional societies, rulers tended to make use of magical religious institutions (e.g.

Ancient Egypt) to make people accept society inequality to make people believe in afterlife as well as the holy background of the rules accept the poor time therefore having no

choice but to obey, and

giant public edifices (e.g. Pyramid – terrify people and glorify the rulers) to the discontent

feel futile to fight against the “invincible” ruling party make people feel powerless

Public spectacles such as victory parade (e.g. Rome) were also used to invite people to

identify with the government elite and to enjoy state’s occasions. Entertainment was used as

political tool for distracting and amusing the citizens.

Legendary Story – designed for the ruler, make people believe that the rulers are not

ordinary, X challenge the rulers (e.g. Chinese emperor)

In modern societies, public spectacles via the application of mass media and entertainment

industry are also used for thought control (e.g. television and radio), preventing alienation

and on-street protest.

Remarks:

Mass media may make people critical against rulers by increasing access to information

but still in use (e.g. North Korea controls the mass media actually so as to control the

release of information)

even if X dictatorship/provided by the government entertainment keeps people out of

the street (e.g. Hong Kong A1 – Love story of celebrities but not public affairs no

trivial)

Advertisement commercial/industrialized society tell you what kind of goods people

should buy/ what kind of lifestyle they should live shape your live (e.g. iPhone)

Mass media is not a single entity people can have choices among different sources to get

different views but still, there are mainstream ideas (as they are controlled by the

majority/elite no voice for minority (e.g. homosexual))

Yet, the ruling party does not rely much on that. Instead, the state-supported universal

education plays a much greater role as political indoctrination. Subjects taught contain

assumptions about culture, politics and economic system of the state in a not-so-objective

way, lacking comparative perspectives (e.g. The US teaches the young to fear or even hate

communism, Japanese textbook is distorted hide the evil past of the country in teaching

history in many parts of Asia)

National education most HK people are against (against the core value of HK

freedom/liberty/free market) / Only tell the good things about the government History X

selectively telling people about the good things thought control) X choice of education

Education climbing up the social ladder accept the value of the elite

(e.g. Obama Harvard Univerity)

Remarks:

Education thought control

Argument such that more-educated people may be more critical and independent in thinking

may not be true because elite will be less sympathetic to the commoners, but more identical

with rich people or even become one of the ruling class

Other relevant points:

Law is enforced by the organized coercion (which can be used by the state)

Political indoctrination – political convenient double standard

(e.g. natural science is general and universal. But for historical/political topics, sins of the

countries are hidden to make people love their countries – promotion of patriotism)

Slight personal view:

Agree – universal education can shape the minds of the young, changing their values and

behaviours to conform to national ideologies e.g. the denial of Nanjing massacre in

Japanese textbooks staple of Japanese Nationalism

7. Concepts of “class” and “power” used to discuss the present-day society of Hong Kong (p.28-29)

“Class” – hierarchy of groups in a society, and must commonly be classified into rulers and

the ruled

“Power” – control over people and nature (resources and technology)

Some people may even decide the allocation of resources

Different degrees of control over resources divide the society into different classes

In Hong Kong: income gap make the society more divided

Class division from economic (income) point of view:

1. rich people

2. Middle-class

3. poor people

Class division from political point of view:

1. Chief Executive (not elected by universal suffrage) (most from business group)

2. Legislative Council – geographical constituency

- functional constituency (professionals/business group have more than one vote)

For people from lower class move up to the higher class on the social ladder

The Key is education

Hong Kong performs better in this aspect because elite universities are public-funded (unlike

U.S., they are privately owned) However, since most elite middle-school are not public-

funded, people from richer family still get higher chance to success.

Notes:

- Essential elements of modern legal system: Law/Statute/

Law-maker

Institutions/Agencies to enforce law

Jurisdical institution

- Law: rich people can always employ good lawers to fight for them

- Poor people: HK free service lower quality service

- The whole legal system in Hong Kong Weak labor law system

Only few years ago Minimum wage

But it still has loophole (Piece rate/ Time rate

As HK wants to maintain an free economic

state Private porpoerty

Q1) size and complexity

Importance of kinship – strong family support

Property/Technology – clear idea of boundary/private property

People are more concern about the collective activities/social harmony/social stability

How could the harmony be preserved? – winning the dispute by gaining more support

HUMAN RELATIONSHIP

Law – resolving dispute in a peaceful way

State – better organized/ X time to show generosity

Stateless – X Progress / X well organized/

Compare X always ‘best’ with ‘worst’

Try ‘worst’ with ‘best’ (e.g. north korea vs small island in pacific ocean)

Put hypothetical element make it persuasive