A Year of Decision
1923 stands for a time in which conflicts were not abstract. But existential.
States were unstable. Currencies collapsed. Borders were redrawn. Societies were under extreme pressure.
Conflicts determined order — or disintegration.
The events of that year make one thing clear: conflicts are not resolved through models. But through decisions under uncertainty.
In international negotiations, in the stabilisation of state systems, and in the handling of internal tensions: it was not procedures that created stability. But:
1923 does not only illustrate this at the level of states.
Economic systems were also on the brink of collapse. Hyperinflation, production breakdowns, and social tensions led to severe conflicts between employers and employees.
At the centre were questions that remain relevant today:
The answer was not consensus. But intervention.
With state-organised arbitration, structures emerged that did not merely mediate, but decided. Conflicts were not “resolved.” They were regulated in a binding way to preserve the ability to act.
1923 does not show how conflicts are ideally resolved. But what becomes necessary when systems reach their limits:
Conflicts today still unfold along:
The central question remains: how does a system remain capable of acting when mutual understanding can no longer be assumed?
Our work begins exactly here. Not with idealised solutions. But with real situations.
Where:
1923 is not a historical reference. It is a reminder.
Conflicts cannot be avoided. But they must be shaped.
Zeuner — Attitude and Tradition →