@Darwi:: you have obviously put some effort into trying to phrase your question with 'neutral language'; i acknowledge that effort.
Unfortunately, the english language seems to be rooted in some ugly predispositions; those of us who have violently rejected those predispositions find it necessary at times to reverse-engineer language to translate ideas.
So. If i read your post sorta-correct, your question deals with the resolution of the inevitable conflicts that will arise between autonomous individuals with conflicting interests.
And the response, that i have had to accept thru argument and reflection, is 'they'll have to sort it out as best they can'.
Yeah, that doesn't fit on a flowsheet very well; but any formal rules only provide an opportunity for the more-powerful to leverage that power further. [That's not an opinion: get an anthropologist drunk, wind them up and get out of the road...]
Various cultures have had different customs to temper (but not eliminate) conflicts between individuals; these usually could be summarised as their neighbors politely asking them to 'put up with each other'. At the extreme, we have the feuding families of 'Romeo & Juliet', in reality the two clans made such a nuisance of themselves that the rest of the town threatened to throw them both out at pike-point if they didn't pull their shit together (remember that these two were the most powerful and influential of all the families, yet the rest of their society was prepared to band together and cast them out, imagine americans threatening to cast out both the Republicans* and Democrats*).
This is a good question, and it comes up (in one form or another) again and again. But no simple answer will pass even passing scrutiny; and the only honest answer isn't very satisfying to those seeking some divine 'Truth!'.
Right.
Now a few words on foul language:
'legitimate' - my latin sucks (and shall remain so), but i think this means 'in accordance with the Law'; hence the violent reaction of those (me et al) who reject that as a good thing (without critical scrutiny of why it would be desirable, by us or anyone else).
'governance' - now this could go either of two ways: a) trying to hold shit together, as the fly-weight governor tries to hold the steam engine from destroying itself; b) Those that command those beneath them, by virtue of their violence or threat thereof, also known as 'Arbitrary Authority'; Whether the existence of either of these is desirable is an entirely different discussion.
I welcome your effort to speak in something like common terms; i hope i have made some effort in return.
