[afarrell]

> At the core, all social structure is built on the threat of violence

Cripes. Nope.

If this was true, how do you explain backyard cookouts, pool parties, trick-or-treating, or Christmas present exchanges?

How do you explain folk dance festivals, buskers, and non-royal weddings?

How on earth do you explain hugs?

[jkhdigital]

Social interaction which is based on mutual trust (whether from family or sustained direct interpersonal interaction) is not really what we're talking about here. Folk dance festivals do not feed the world. The social structure of modern society is, by and large, about interactions between mutually distrusting strangers and their agents as they negotiate the exchange and distribution of economic resources. Basically everything you own and consume was produced by people you've never seen or interacted with.

[eduction]

You’re talking about capitalism not social structure. The post above that brought up social structure is also a red herring. This is about legal power and the threat of coercion. It would be trivial to implement a law to punish (say) Eric Adams or someone else in or formerly in nyc government for what they did. There are probably some basic mechanical reasons that is not generally done (although I don’t mean to dismiss the idea).

[pas]

the idea is that sanctioning past behavior, which was legal at the time, is super extra bad (ie. no retroactive punishment), because then you can never be sure that the the ruling powers that be won't send law enforcement after you. (of course the brutal truth is that you can never be sure, hence people should realize that there's no opt-out from politics)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_post_facto_law

[RC_ITR]

>It would be trivial to implement a law to punish (say) Eric Adams or someone else in or formerly in nyc government for what they did.

Sure, but what, you're going to send the mayor to Jail (violence) over a political decision he made?

That would not be trivial.

[whoopdedo]

Because every stick needs a carrot.

Positive reinforcement is not antithetical to the threat of violence and can go hand-in-hand. If you're good to me I'll treat you like family. But violate that peace and me and my clan will come down on you with furious anger. That's how people have lived for time immemorial.

[JamesianP]

Even so, violence isn't so much the basis for society itself, just the govt. And either way, it's only how outliers are dealt with. Most of what most people do all day every day is constrained by things like their family and peers' expectations and their commitments. I'd say social structures are primarily based on cultural norms.

[afarrell]

Speaking as the son of someone who runs operations for the a federal district court, every ounce of the “violence” bit is covered by pounds and pounds of cultural norms and a fair bit of ritual as well.

Our aversion to violence is not new. In ancient Rome, it was sacrilegious to bring weapons inside the pomerium.

[RC_ITR]

>If this was true, how do you explain backyard cookouts, pool parties, trick-or-treating, or Christmas present exchanges?

How do you explain why you get to determine the guest list?

[giantg2]

Fostering good will to prevent future violence.