Sources of "Just Behavior": Collectivist vs. Legal Justice Systems

1. Collective "Right" Behavior: Justice Based on Social Norms and Training

In collectivist societies, "just behavior" is often defined by social norms rather than objective legal principles. People are trained from a young age to conform to the group's idea of what is "right", typically based on subjective assessments of loyalty, moral conduct, and group interests. This form of justice is exercised in sports teams, associations, and historically in tribal systems.

Key characteristics of collective justice:

In these systems, justice is not impartial. Instead, it serves to reinforce group cohesion and maintain the social fabric. This type of justice often depends on emotional assessments of trustworthiness, loyalty, and belonging.

For example:

• In a sports team, a player’s commitment to the team’s values may matter more than their technical performance.
• In tribal societies, justice is often interest-based, where the well-being of the group takes priority over the individual’s rights.

Justice in these systems is deeply relational: right and wrong depend on context, intentions, and loyalty rather than on objective laws.

2. Liberal Democratic Justice: Impartial and Rule-Based

In liberal democratic states, justice is based on the rule of law, with an emphasis on impartiality, fairness, and objectivity. The legal system is designed to treat all individuals equally, regardless of social status, personal relationships, or intentions. The concept of blind justice ensures that laws govern actions, not subjective judgments.

Key characteristics of legal justice:

In legal justice, intention matters only in specific contexts (e.g., determining criminal liability), but it is still interpreted within the framework of the law. The goal is fairness, with justice administered impartially by an independent judiciary.

This stands in contrast to collective justice, where loyalty and social harmony may override objective fairness.

3. Comparison: Collective vs. Legal Justice

4. Psychological Mechanisms: Training in Collective Behavior

In collective systems, just behavior is taught and reinforced through social training, which starts from a young age:

• In sports teams: Players learn that loyalty and teamwork are more important than individual achievement.
• In workplaces: Employees learn that fitting into the organizational culture matters more than challenging authority.
• In religious or community groups: Members learn that following the group’s moral code ensures acceptance and belonging.

In contrast, legal systems in liberal democracies emphasize individual autonomy and responsibility. People are taught that breaking the law has consequences, regardless of social standing or intentions.

5. Historical Context: From Tribal Justice to Rule of Law in Sweden

Sweden’s historical justice system evolved from tribal justice — based on local customs, loyalty, and subjective assessments — to a modern legal system governed by impartial laws. However, remnants of collective justice norms still persist in Swedish society.

Historical Phases of Justice in Sweden:

Despite the transition to legal justice, cultural norms of collective loyalty and fear of exclusion continue to shape Swedish behavior, particularly in informal social settings.

6. Why This Matters: The Persistent Tension Between Norms and Law

The tension between collective justice and legal justice remains highly relevant in modern democracies, including Sweden.

• In collective systems, individuals fear losing trust and social belonging, which drives conformity and compliance.
• In legal systems, individuals fear legal penalties, but they are protected from social exclusion by individual rights and freedoms.

The challenge for modern societies is balancing social cohesion with individual rights, ensuring that justice remains impartial and objective, even in the face of cultural pressures for conformity.

Would you like me to refine this further or add examples from modern Swedish society?