When you reach THIS level in a fight, everything escalates!

ChroniquesDuVasteMonde: Mr. Glasl, you are a scientist and consultant since? 48 years of conflict and say that all - whether between two states or under? Colleagues - run after? A similar pattern.
Friedrich GlaslIn every conflict - whether private, professional, national or global - there are moments when the situation changes dramatically. Suddenly there seem to be new rules. Things that were previously forbidden are now allowed. As if one opponent said to the other: So far, I've held back, but if you cross that line, we'll meet again on another level. This change of rules happens unspoken, simply by doing.



Can you give an example?
Most of the time you argue about only one or two things at first. That is still quite normal. In the Ukraine conflict, it was all about the association agreement with the EU in the beginning. But then suddenly more and more topics are added. I call this the controversy avalanche: it's as if the issues were infecting each other. That's what makes the opponents aggressive at some point. And now the rules are changing: Both are now using the mechanism of simplification. If the other one is not accessible to my good arguments, then I paint everything black and white. He is obviously too stupid, because you have to help out, right? But that's how you make the other one pretty small. That's a big mistake.

According to her oft-cited model, there are nine escalation levels of conflict. Which level is the one described above?
That was only number two. Right off we go from level three. I call that "actions instead of words". The opponents now no longer believe that one can still reach the other with words. They also think that it can make matters worse by talking. It has been argued many times already. So now they are doing what they themselves are convinced of and present the opposite side with accomplished facts. The man suddenly allows his son the expensive sneakers, the woman spontaneously drives the children over the weekend without telling him. As a rule, counterparties are no longer able to resolve conflicts from level three onwards. At level four, they then draw in more and more friends and acquaintances into the dispute, because they need allies. One disassembles each other in the circle of acquaintances, pointing out the weaknesses and mistakes of the other.

From which level will it be dangerous ??
At level five and six, we demonize the other visibly. He is reduced to his reprehensible pages. Public insults and insults are now no longer a slip-up, but intentional. As a mediator, it is always shocking to see it happen. In a miraculous way, this distorted opinion, which we now have of the other, seems to be confirmed again and again. This is because the perception is already impaired. Psychologists call this mechanism self-fulfilling prophecy. The opponents paradoxically maneuver each other into the extreme roles they are actually fighting each other. The more authoritarian the students find the teacher, the more they unconsciously challenge precisely this behavior.



And it gets worse?
At level six, the threats and extortion attempts begin: if you do not give in, then I'll go - and I'll take the kids with me. At level seven, there are the first, but at this stage still limited lesions. In companies, they now make documents disappear, data is deleted, e-mails are faked to harm others. Often it even comes to blows. Level eight: The enemy has become such a great and hated threat that you want to destroy him, economically, materially, psychologically. At the final stage, level nine, this goal has become so important that you would risk your own downfall. In the movie "The Rose War" this is the last scene when the couple crashes together with the chandelier.

Have you ever experienced a conflict that went up to level nine?
That's the case regularly in wars. But I also know it from some business companies. At that time, I advised a bank that worked with two entrepreneurs: a married couple that has built a business empire with many branches, I do not name any names now. The marriage broke up, now the assets should be unbundled. But no one wanted to make any concessions to the other. And they knew each other for so long that they knew exactly which buttons to push. They were multimillionaires - in the end, both slipped into social assistance.

?Was not that just maybe just two psychopaths?
No, absolutely not. These conflict mechanisms can affect all people. Nobody is immune from it.It is mainly because people tend to justify their own behavior to themselves. They say to each other: I have a good reason to be angry at the other. They feel compelled to act and think, the other acts - they themselves only react.?



And then it's just not about the thing ??
That is never the issue in escalated conflicts. Even if it looks a long time in the beginning, as if one actually argues in the office only about the joint project or in a marriage over the establishment of the new house. The real question is: how do I deal with the differences between people and their opinions? If I think I've leased the truth, and I can not endure it, if the other sees something different - then it quickly conflicts. Conflicts always arise from the inability of at least one party to see differences as enrichment. Am I being scratched by the other values ​​and points of view in my self-esteem? It's all about this. The lower the self-confidence, the more I fight for my way - such people define themselves by denying everything else.



How to prevent conflicts?
While representing one's interests, without devaluing and attacking others. Stay factual. In a quarrel you never beat the man, so to speak, but only the ball. And when the other attacks you, you draw a line. You can draw boundaries without beating back, saying: Stop, not with me, that's going too far for me now. And while I make it clear to myself: this is not about winning the argument, but to get respect. The other one has to realize that he can not do that with me.

Rejecting is always wrong?
At least it is always a sign of weakness. Especially when I react without thinking about it. Then the other one can manipulate me. And if he just has to press this one button, and then the whole defense program runs away - then I'm in his hands. Because then I lost my self-control. And the loss of self-control is the beginning of the escalation.



But what do you do when you are already in the middle of the escalation?
First and foremost, you have to realize that you yourself are also a culprit. I once coached a surgeon who was marginalized in his hospital. And he always believed he had done nothing at all. Nothing. At some point he admitted: Well, I already said something there, I probably provoked a little bit there as well. You always have to ask yourself, am I unconsciously trigging something in the other?



And what do I do specifically in such conflict situations?
That depends on the level of conflict you are currently facing. In the beginning, it's important not to just swallow everything. Do things that provoke others. Then you can start to talk about it. This is always better than silence. And when you finally talk to your partner again, talk about what drives you into anger. Explain yourself. Say: I have only wanted that and that, but I acknowledge that it will do this and that to you. But then I have to stand by the fact that I wanted to set the other a limit. But do not complain, then you get the impression of a lie. It is not easy to have such conversations. But dare. The ancient Greeks already knew that the fear of battle is always greater than the fear in battle.

But after a certain degree of mistrust one does not believe one another anymore. What should such talks then bring?
The demonization of the other indeed starts very early. At the beginning, you still swing back and forth, from level six, the other has become very angry and black. The partners then have to remember the lightheartedness of this person who is their enemy today. Have not you also had a good time together? What was adorable about this human being - and is it perhaps still? And both have to make themselves clear: the other one is just as involved, is just as torn between love and hate, between affection and contempt, as one is himself. First of all, you have to see the light figure again. Then you can edit the individual conflicts.

Friedrich Glasl, 76, was born in Vienna. The conflict researcher studied psychology and political science, did his PhD on international conflict prevention and habilitated with a focus on conflict research. Glasl lives in Salzburg and works for the company Trigon-Entwicklungsberatung, which he co-founded.



You wish you more mindfulness in everyday life? With us you will find even more articles on the subject. -> Mindfulness

Trump escalates trade war with Europe and China (March 2024).



Conflict, skirmish, self-confidence, Ukraine, EU