Ethnic, religious, political, or national groups can coexist, as they do in Switzerland and in the United States. In Tanzania, in contrast to the rest of Africa, ethnic groups have lived together harmoniously. This is in part because there are a number of groups, and none has been dominant. Also, the different groups live in the periphery of the country with relatively limited contact. In addition, until recently, government policy has actively prohibited ethnic association and organization (Young, 1998).

Inattention to past violence between groups and to the resulting wounds may be a serious problem, as in the case of the former Yugoslavia, where Marshal Tito maintained such a policy. Prohibiting ethnic association creates some danger when the policy is lifted and other circumstances change; the earlier prohibition intensifies the focus on ethnicity. In Tanzania, there has recently been such an increased focus. Probably the best policy is to create structures that protect each group's rights and interests, foster connections, promote shared goals, and provide education about each other.

The conception I advanced offers explanation for why instigating conditions at times do not lead to group violence. Less intense instigating conditions, weaker cultural predisposing characteristics, more positive behavior of leaders, and less use of scapegoating and destructive ideologies – partly perhaps because of the nature of cultural characteristics – all may have a role. Active bystanders seem especially important.