Why there are Contradictions and Conflicts in Society?

Why there are Contradictions and Conflicts in Society?

The theories of conflict explain a broad range of social phenomena such as revolutions, wars, poverty, private wealth, national wealth, and violence. The arguments describe many significant advancements in human history, such as capitalism, civil rights, and democracy attempts to control people instead of focusing on ensuring social order. The theories revolve around social inequality concept in the distribution of resources and deals with conflicts that arise among different social classes. Different types of disputes in society have explanations in the conflict theories. Some theorists such as Karl Marx believe that societal conflict drives social development and change.

The Application of Conflict Theory in Social Issues

The pattern of conflict theory occurs when one social class has more power than the other. The level with lesser empowerment usually want a share of resources that are abundantly available to the different level, and therefore the resulting to social conflict. The education system is a real-life application of conflict theory. Tracking systems found in the education system have their class stratification. Advanced gifted students, who usually are from families with both financial and time resources that contribute to their success in education, gain educational skills that enable them to go for higher education and prepare for future careers. The students who struggle and perform averagely do not receive similar opportunities in their schools, which usually concentrate on learning trades and remedial. In cases where these students manage to go for higher learning, they have to borrow student loans as they are economically disadvantaged. The conflict has resulted in national debates on the cost of higher education and cancelling of the student debts.

Conflict Theory by Karl Marx

Karl Marx notes that society is always in a perpetual conflict because of the limited resources that the community wants. He argues that power and domination rather than conformity and consensus maintain social order. According to conflict theory, the rich and powerful want to remain in such states by oppressing the powerless and weak. Generally, this theory notes that people in social work to improve their benefits. His philosophy focused on the conflict that exists between the bourgeoisie (wealthy) and the proletariat (poor). With the increase in capitalism, Karl argued that the rich, who are the minority in the society, use their influence to suppress the poor, who are the majority.

The argument bases itself on a similar image of theory-based conflict models of society. The people who agree with the theory believe in pyramid arrangement where the wealthy set conditions to the poor because of significant control on power and resources by the rich.  Uneven distribution of support in the society remains relevant because of ideological coercion where the wealthy force the poor to accept the current economic conditions. The bourgeoisie set up a set of traditions, societal structures, and laws that support their dominance as well as preventing the poor from being in the same rank as them. Karl Marx believed that the poor and the working class expose themselves to unsatisfactory conditions, a collective consciousness that proved social inequality and resulted in revolt. The conflict cycle would repeat itself in cases where there was the subsequent adjustment of the conditions to tackle the concerns of the poor.

Assumptions of Karl Marx Theory.

There are four fundamental assumptions in this theory; Revolution, competition, war, and structural inequality.

Competition– Karl believes that it is a constant factor and overwhelming in every relationship and human interaction. It comes as a result of the limited resources, such as material resources including money, commodities, and property. Apart from the material resources, groups and individuals also compete for intangible resources such as social status, power, dominance, leisure activities, and many other factors. Instead of assuming cooperation as the default, competition is the default.

Revolution– Regardless of conflict occurring between the two social classes, the result of societal conflict is the revolution. The power dynamic changes among groups and individuals do not happen because of adaptation but due to effect of disagreement between groups. In this case, the changes are in large scale and abrupt, rather than evolutionary and slow.

Structural Inequality– There is a primary assumption that both social structures and human interactions experience power inequalities. In such a way, some people have more reward and power than others and benefit from the social fabric and work hard to ensure they maintain, enhance and retain their control.

War– War is a cleanser and unifier of societies and is caused by the increase in conflict among groups and individuals in the community. In the war context, the nation is united in some ways, but conflict still exists among different societies. Besides, war results in ending the organization in a wholesale way.

Conflict Theory of Georg Simmel

He noted that conflict stabilizes and integrates a society. The level of conflict changes depending on the solidarity degree, emotional involvement, and the limited and clarity of the goals. Simmel also noted that individuals work to ensure the creation of a high degree of solidarity, centralizing of power, and reduction of dissent. Conflict resolution can reduce hostility and tension and create ways for future societal agreements.

George Simmel’s work concentrates on the economy. He decoded how the modernity aspects shape the way people of understanding, recognizing, and reacting towards other people and generally towards the world. He noted that the interactions and connections exposed the nature of economic and modern life. The most prominent theory by Simmel ‘blasé attitude’ surrounds modern urban life. Simmel notes that current life expansion, the busy lifestyles, and the related cities have resulted in social encounters increase that would have been previously experienced before modernity. The point of Simmel is that the increase in interactions reduces the meaning and usefulness of the social exchanges. Economic and human relationships before the introduction of modern life were social interaction. People acquired goods and services they needed or wanted by trading or exchanging gifts, which then created relations and ties between individuals and groups in society.

The introduction of the use of money led to the distortion of these kinds of exchanges, soulless and detached relations. Here, Simmel argues that money has no value, because today, money exists in the form of online banking which are only figures in a computer. According to him, the amount of money is in its different golden weights, which has now diminished. The only remaining value of cash is found in other objects and intensifies the culture of materialism. Therefore, money is an illusionary solution to the obstacles of modernity, and the most accessible lifestyle is the white materialism.

Comparison of the two Conflict Theories

The primary difference between Georg Simmel and Karl Marx’s theories of conflict is on how each approaches society. Georg Simmel studies how civilized individuals behave. He focused on communal relations among the poor. For him, the community consists of human relationships and interactions among groups and individuals, and conflict theorists should study the forms and patterns of these interactions rather than focusing on universal laws. However, Karl Marx sees society as a whole and knows the rift of whole classes in the community.

Both theories analyze the dynamics of society. Also, in Karl Marx and Simmel’s views associate conflict with modern life; however, there are contradictory opinions on the subject. Simmel’s study focusses on the abstract of the types of social reality from social practices. At the same time, Marx’s work had more concern about the renovation of the organization and structuring of social life by adaptation of social practices progress. Marx assumed that conflict was due to the inequality and division among the social classes. He believed that battle occurred between the working class and capitalists when the working class became tired of lop-sided allocation of resources and wealth. The maturity level of the conflict increases when there is an attempt of the working class to join the capitalism system.

Besides, Marx thought that there would be conflict from the argument of neglectful alienation. Finally, he specified that the intensity and amount of violence would result from antagonism from the submission of the working class. Similarly, Simmel noted the same but failed to explore causes of conflict, and he instead fixated on the outcome of the dispute. The gap between Marx’s theory and Simmel’s theory is that Simmel assumed that the working class undertaking the approach of violence to solve the societal inequality was not vital. Marx considered conflict and violence as the only primary solution.

Both Simmel and Marx’s theories of conflict, focusing on modernization have been influential in people view modern life and sociology. Marx works on a lesser microscopic level than Simmel, although they are both affected by modernization. Karl Marx focusses on the bigger image of the society as a whole rather than an individual while Simmel concentrates on blasé attitude and individualism. They both give an insight into the way life is pre-modernity and enables people to know the changes that occur after the implementation of capitalism, and show people how they can quickly lose touch with themselves. However, Karl Marx is the most radical and well known sociologist to date, as his concentration on the working class versus the capitalists is significant in the understanding of the creation of capital and capitalist society.

Strengths of Conflict Theory

Conflict theory has several roles in its societal macro view. The abstract of various society portions into different groups makes it easier to analyze interactions and relations between the groups. Conflict theory denotes that social classes or groups compete to obtain critical resources in society. Therefore, the knowledge of the roles of social conflict in the aspect of conflict theory is a crucial process to facilitate positive social change. The community operates in a way that every individual or group in it can make the perfect use of the resources available.

Criticism of Conflict Theory

Undoubtedly, conflict theory receives criticism as it concentrates on the social stability neglect and change. Although some critics note that the society is dynamic and keeps on changing constantly, they argue that there is a small change which is not revolutionary. Modern capitalism, however, avoids communism revolution and instead have elaborated instituted social service programs. Often, conflict theorists only concentrate on social change. Yet, they have come up with a theory to explains social stability. Based on the perspective of conflict, power and reward inequality develop into all social structures. For instance, the rich always want to maintain the benefits they receive from the social fabric and are still against measures that improve the standards of living of the poor such as improved infrastructure, public funding, and other policies.

Conclusion

Conclusively, there is sociological importance of conflict as it modifies and produces organizations, unifications and communities of interest. On the other hand, it is paradoxical to think that the aspect of conflict without considering its accompaniments and consequences is not a form of socialization. If every man’s reaction is a form of socialization, then conflict is a form of socialization, as it is the most intense reaction. It is not possible to restrict the classification of battle as a single element. The dissociating factors cause of conflict, envy, hatred, desire and want. However, if conflict breaks out from these impulses, it is a real and transparent way of removing the dualism and arriving at some unity. The conflict resolves the tension between the contradictions. Dissolution and repudiation of social relations are contrary, but conflict is the only decisive factor to contradict with them.

Work Cited