1. Conflict
By: Sukhwinder Singh

2. Concept of Conflict: Lewis Coser (1913-2003):
Conflict is part of relationships and is not necessarily a sign of instability. Conflict serves several functions:
Leads to social change
Can stimulate innovation
During threat, can increase central power

3. Definition: Lewis Coser (1913-2003):
defined conflict as “a struggle over values and claims to scarce status, power and resources in which the aims of the opponents are to neutralize, injure, or eliminate their rivals.”

4. Conflicts between intergroups and intragroups are part of social life
Through that conflict=
boundaries between different groups unity between individual members of that group determines the power

5. Karl Marx ( )
Marxism Characterized conflict by an economic struggle between the haves and have-nots.
Power differences among social classes
Special interest groups fight over scarce resources of society
Interest groups fight to gain advantages over others

6. MARX: SOCIAL CLASSES Two major classes within industrial capitalism:
The bourgeoisie: Owners of the means of production
The proletariat: Workers who exchange their labour for a wages
Secondary class:
The petite bourgeoisie: Independent owners/ producers (e.g., farmers) and small business owners*
Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd.

7. MARX: EXPLOITATION
Exploitation of wage labourers was result of surplus value:
When proceeds from sale of goods produced by wage-labourers far exceed cost of wages, raw materials, etc.
Surplus value then turned into profits for owners (i.e., capitalists)*
Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd

8. MARX: CLASS CONFLICT
Class Conflict: Conflict between major classes within a mode of production is driving force behind social change. Eventually leads to evolution of new mode of production
Envisioned capitalism being replaced with socialist mode of production (i.e., no private property with its attendant exploitation and inequality)*
Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd.

9. MARX: CLASS CONSCIOUSNESS AND REVOLUTION
Theorized workers would develop class-consciousness:
Recognition by members of a class of their shared interest in opposition to members of another class
Would lead to revolutionary upheaval and eventually classes society based on collective ownership of means of production (e.g., communism)*
Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd.

10. Marx (cont’d) Society was a two-class system:
Bourgeoisie (owners of the means of production)
Proletariat (workers)

11. Marx (cont’d)
Class differences have a lot to do with possession of personal property
Believed the exploited would become conscious and unite communism  elimination of class struggle
Main ideas behind communism are stated in the communist manifesto

12. Max Weber ( )
Agreed with Marx (economics played a central role in power distinction).
Believed in Two other factors:
Social prestige (status)
Example: someone could be poor and still hold a lot of power because of social prestige  Mother Theresa
Political influence
Example: Politician who has great power, but does not earn a big salary

13. Max Weber (cont’d)
Weber defined power as “the ability to impose one’s will on another, even when the other objects”.
Authority: legitimate power; used with consent of the ruled
Distribution of power and authority = basis of social conflict
HOWEVER: if subordinates believe in the authority= avoided conflict
If authority is not recognized as a legitimate= conflict

14. Max Weber (cont’d) People with power want to keep it
People without power want to seek it
3 types of authority:
Rational-legal
Traditional
charismatic

15. Modern Conflict Theory
Ideas of Marx, Weber, and Simmel resurfaced in America in the 1950’s through two German Sociologists:
Lewis Coser
Ralph Dahrendorf

16. RESPONSES TO MARX Criticized for predictions not finding support in:
Later capitalist societies, which were characterized by absence of widespread class conflict, growth of the middle class, and relative decline in material inequality in 20th century
Example: Western Europe and North America
Later socialist systems of government, which were characterized by persistent inequality, and new hierarchy that controls political and bureaucratic apparatus
Example: Russia*

17. WEBER ON STRATIFICATION
Focused on determinants of power: Ability to impose one’s wishes on others
Structural basis of power:
Class (power derived from position in economic hierarchy)
Status (power derived from culturally and socially defined position that person occupies in a group)
Party (political power)
Power depends on one’s location in these three structures*
Max Weber was born in Germany half a century later than Marx, in 1864
He had the advantage of seeing the direction in which more mature industrial capitalism was taking European society; he saw more complexity in social stratification system and recognized more classes than Marx
The three bases of power may or may not overlap
Argued that, historically, the economic dimension of stratification tends to become dominant
Unlike Marx, Weber did not think that the development of class consciousness was inevitable, and did not think that class conflict would lead to the ultimate demise of capitalism
Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd.

18. WEBER: SOCIAL CLASS AND LIFE CHANCES
Gave primary emphasis in social stratification to economic underpinnings
Claimed there was larger variety of class positions than found in Marx’s theory
Emphasized life chances:
Opportunities (or lack thereof) for higher standard of living and a better quality of life that are available to members of a given class*
Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd

19. DAVIS AND MOORE: FUNCTIONAL THEORY OF STRATIFICATION
Inequality exists in all societies  Must be necessary
All societies have occupational roles that need to be filled, with some roles requiring more training than others (e.g., the more important roles)
Greater rewards (e.g., money, prestige) necessary to encourage people to undertake extended training and fill these important roles
Social inequality is therefore necessary and inevitable*
Structural-functionalist theory emphasizes consensus and shared values over conflict
Theory arose in reaction to the conflict-oriented and socially radical theories of Marx (and to a lesser extent, Weber)
Theory was published in 1945 and reflected the optimistic view in postwar North America that affluence was increasing, social conflict was decreasing, and a harmonious future for society was dawning
Some jobs (e.g., physician) are more important than others (e.g., farmer)
To motivate people to make the sacrifices necessary to train for important jobs, they must receive more rewards for their work
Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd
Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd.

20. CRITICISMS OF DAVIS AND MOORE
Theory does not account for the following:
Huge income and wealth inequalities
Gender differences in income even if same type of work undertaken
Inherited wealth
Arbitrariness of denoting most important roles (e.g., movie stars, nurses, daycare workers)
Criticized as justification for large inequalities*
Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd

21. LENSKI: TECHNOLOGY AND STRATIFICATION SYSTEMS
Society’s technological base largely determines degree of inequality within it
Owners of means of production need to rely on well-educated managerial and technical workers
Reliance gives rise to workers’ demands for greater portion of the growing wealth in industrial society
Employers give in to demands because they cannot produce wealth without these workers
Envisioned movement towards more equal distribution of wealth*
Lenski’s theory resembled the functionalist theory of stratification – both noted that better-educated and more highly skilled workers are paid more
However, unlike the functionalist approach, Lenski’s theory clearly took power differences into account, emphasizing how the extent of accumulation of wealth by elites, or the degree of material inequality, depends on the power and bargaining ability of middle-level workers
Also, Lenski brought power and conflict back into his explanation of social inequality:
He placed material inequalities resulting from one group’s domination of another at the centre of his model, thus coming closer to the approach taken by Marx and Weber
But he did not carry through with a traditional Marxist analysis built around the relationships of different classes to the means of production
Owners of means of production need rely on well-educated managerial and technical workers because of complexity of society
Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd
Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd.