Can Social Conflict Be Constructive

In order to fully explore the question can social conflict be constructive? We must first define the necessary terms in order to avoid any incorrect preconceptions concerning their usage. Social Conflict is the "Struggle between segments of society over valued resources" (Macionis & Plummer 08 p117) It occurs as a part of everyday life and not just on a large scale between nations engaging in acts of military aggression or even war as it is often associated with. Some of the main causes and motivations for conflict in society include class, race and gender, all of which will be discussed over the course of this essay. Throughout this paper we will assess both arguments associated with the subject title, the schools of thought that believe conflict does add to and bolster society's advancement, including conflict theory and Marx's views on class conflict, as well as those that think its damaging and harmful to the foundations of society, such as functionalism and consensus theory. Over the course of the essay I will argue that conflict should be perceived as natural and is key to the battle for a fairer society for all. This is in addition to its ability to advance society by replacing outdated or simply wrong schools of thought or scientific "facts" with better researched or more rational ideals.

Conflict theory holds the importance of human interest over the longstanding pursuit of traditional norms or social values. Its supporters draw heavily from the economic writings of Marx and theories concerning power completed by Webber. They sought the theory that "pursuit of interests generated various types of conflict as normal aspects of social life rather than abnormal or dysfunctional occurrences" (Marshall 98 p108) Any held belief that comes up against an opposing train of thought causes conflict as it is likely that both contain points that are contradictory. This occurrence crops up in everyday life and should be seen as such, a normal, naturally occurring ideal, as opposed to being labeld as problem and categorised as such.

Marx believed that all social institutions are built on the foundations of the economy. The capitalist system has a bearing on everything that stands upon it and that system creates competition between people, especially for unskilled jobs, and thus a sense of alienation occurs. Any conflict that occurs is the "proletariat that fight their enemies but the enemies of their enemies . any victory so obtained is a victory for the bourgeoisie" (Ruggiero & Montagna 08 p14) We are kept from our potential by doing mundane, repetitive tasks just to make a living. The irony occurs when its realised that you could be making a product over and over for a lifetime yet never earn a enough money to buy it. He goes on to say the most important strain of conflict within society was conflict between classes, He "saw property ownership, especially property in the means of production, as the basis of class relations" (Payne 06 p29) and that friction occurs between the bourgeoisie, or capitalists, and proletariat due to both camps seeking opposing aims. Capitalists wanted to maximise profit through long hours and low pay whilst the workers wanted the opposite. Conflict therefore is natural. Marx believed that the only way for the proletariat to be able to achieve victory was by gaining class consciousness, this can be defined as "the recognition by workers of their unity as a class in opposition to capitalists and ultimately capitalism itself." (Macionis & Plummer 08 p119) Once this is achieved and capitalism is seen as the root of the problem it can be united against and fought. This want for revolution by Marx can be seen in his and Engels Communist Manifesto where he writes "let the ruling classes tremble at a communist revolution. The proletariats have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win. Working men of all countries unite." (Marx 1848 p45)

Society by nature is conflictual; it is the arena in which conflict takes place. Conflict itself is often thought upon as being primarily associated with violence, war and revolution but it is an everyday occurrence at every level of society. The nonviolent civil rights movement, "The most significant insurgent challenge to arise. was the black protest movement of the 1950's & 1960's . it affected fundamental restructuring of American society" (Freeman & Johnson 99 p325) was hugely conflictual and fought against long standing racist views and laws. Conflict has led to positive change in many aspects of society and life, without it there would be no improvements to the aforementioned categories as the status quo would have always remained and the want for something better crushed. Any theories that have stood and have since been proved wrong would still be accepted as right. Thus no new scientific or technological breakthroughs would have been made. The fight for women's rights is a conflict that still runs true to the present day. "Women do struggle to resists male power and this is evidenced by the considerable gains that women have made in the past 20-30 years" (Payne 06 p68) Without such opposition to the sexist nature of society from Pankhurst and the Suffragette movement, women's rights as we know it today would not exist, their conflict with the patriarchal system made for a better society of which we currently inhabit.

In opposition to the aforementioned positive social conflict views, especially conflict theory, consensus theory is a generally held set of views that have a "broad agreement in public opinion" (Marshall 98 p110) Social norms and values are held in high regard and it is a theory championed by Parsons who claimed that, "Integration is key to function of society" (Marshall 98 p110) As values have been advanced and developed by its supporters it thinks that conflict should be avoided in order to maintain a proper society. Often seen as running parallel or in similar circles as consensus theory, functionalism is a set of ideals that sees our lives as guided by social structure, this gives us shape to form social institutions such as the family. Actions are seen as consequences for society and the individual is not as important as society as a whole, something in line with Durkheim's teachings where he states "To love society is to love something beyond us and something in ourselves" (Marshall 98 p242) Durkheim's teachings were used as foundations by Parsons who thought that societies would simply cease to exist unless they "adapt, achieve their goals, maintain themselves and have members that are willing to be socialised" (Macionis & Plummer 08 p38) Modern society is based more on the individual than community, generally we look after ourselves and take actions that benefit us before the wider community. We don't craft everything we own, rather divide our labour and get others to do it for us. Thus we avoid conflict as we need others to survive. An analogy often used by functionalists for society is the human body, all its extremely intricate parts working together to support others and achieve common goals, if this is upset it can lead to the breakdown of the body's ability to function.

Another school of thought is that elements of both conflict theory and consensus theory can stand side by side and coexist at the same time. This view is held by both Dahrendorf and Coser. Coser argued that cohesion could be achieved by conflict as it is in our nature to interact and thus conflict is only natural to humans. Our sense of rationality leads us not to normally resort to violence; our understanding of consequences prevents this. However this can be transcended by emotion or irrational goals such as fighting in the name of religion or support of a particular football team..

Working on the basis that conflict should be perceived as natural, a part of the fabric of society, I would argue that it is needed in the seeking of equality and rights within said society as seen in numerous instances in the past. The civil rights movement as well as the fight for women's liberty would not have been possible without conflict. The challenging of the status quo and willingness to fight against injustice has led to a much fairer society. Despite the teachings of functionalism I would argue that we are often too quick to categorise conflict as a negative and that consensus theory only exists because it has been put in place by authority, thus a "proper society" only exists as a concept. The want not to upset this balance is absurd as without it the ability to better society, advance people's rights and aid the general benefit of the people would be impossible. This is combined with its ability to push the human race forward in terms of science and technology by replacing outdated or simply wrong theories with ones that are new and progressive. Thus I would conclude that yes, in almost every instance conflict can serve to better the society it's taking place within.

Freeman Jo, Johnson Victoria, 1999, Waves of Protest Social Movements Since the Sixties, Rowman & Littlefield, Maryland Macionis John, Plummer Ken, 2008 Sociology A Global Introduction, Pearson's Education, London Marshall Gordon, 1998, Oxford Dictionary of Sociology, Oxford University Press, Reading Marx Karl, Engels Fredrick, 1848, Manifesto of the Communist Party, London Payne, Geoff, 2006, Social Divisions, Palgrave MacMillian, Basingstoke Ruggiero Vincenzo, Montagna Nicola, 2008, Social Movements: A Reader, Routledge, Oxon