Does your explanation favor a cultural, liberal or realist theoretical explanation of contemporary international conflict? Why do certain groups rely on violence rather than peaceful participation in the political arena?

The correct answer is that contention between social gatherings is a definitely repeating unavoidable truth and that the objective of compromise is to keep clashes diverted inside a lot of concurred standards that encourage serene talk of contrasts, banish savagery as a methods for settling questions, and build up rules for the constrained sorts of brutality that are overlooked (e. g., as discipline for infringement of codes of criminal lead).