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 ones close relatives (kin group) with his
consistency in hardship and restriction of foods consumption, and then holding successful
fest so as to enlarge the circle of people willing to work for him
Working hard & restriction of foods 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 states 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

Leaders of more or less permanently allied

(consist of one community or settlement)

groups of bands and villages called chiefdoms

(consist of several communities or settlement)
jurisdiction

No actual political power merely

With actual political power e.g. ownership of

redistributors or public spokesmen

store of food Micos granary (public treasury)

but unlike tax, the contribution is voluntary

X Coercion

and people can take freely when in need

The status cannot be inherited the

The office is inherited from generation to

headmen have to validate their position by

generation and can only be deposed through

displacing generosity and holding recurrent

defeat in war

feast
stable status (high stability) though, the
The status is less stable

chief may need to gain success from wars to

validate their position in long run

Their living standard is not elevated above

They live better than the commoners and hold

commoners. (Life may be even harder in an

a relatively higher position as well e.g.

attempt to displace generosity)

referring to the case of the Trobriand Islanders

(p.206), shell ornaments can only be worn by

They give away food to others. Can only eat the chiefs (but not the commoners) as the
inferior one.
insignia of high rank

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
leaders (kings or governments) 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 peoples 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 Harriss 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 states 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