Conflict Sociology

1

A Project Work In SOCIOLOGY

‘‘ CCONTRIBUTIONSONTRIBUTIONS OFOF M MARXARX ININ C CONFLICTONFLICT S SOCIOLOGYOCIOLOGY ’’

SSUBMITTEDUBMITTED T TOO : Dr. UTTAM KUMAR PANDA

FFACULTYACULTY : - SOCIOLOGY: - SOCIOLOGY

SSUBMITTEDUBMITTED B BYY : PRANAV KHANDELWAL

SEMESTER 2

ROLL NO. 94

SSUBMITTEDUBMITTED O ONN :

9th APRIL, 2013

HIDAYATULLAH NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

Raipur, Chhattisgarh

Contribution of Karl Marx in conflict sociology ……

2

Table of Contents

Acknowledgements………………………………………………..3

Introduction………………………………………………………..4

Objectives………………………………………………………….5

Methodology……………………………………………………....6

History of Conflict Theory………………………………………...7

Marx and conflict theory…………………………………………..9

Essential Aspects of Marxian Theory of Class Conflict………….12

The Failure of Marxism…………………………………………..14

Major Findings……………………………………………………15

Conclusion………………………………………………………..16

References..………………………………………………………17


3

Acknowledgements

Thanks to the Almighty who gave me the strength to accomplish the project with sheer hard

work and honesty.

I would like to sincerely like to thank my Sociology teacher Dr. Uttam Kumar Panda for

giving me this topic and guiding me throughout the project. Through this project I have

learned a lot about the aforesaid topic and this in turn has helped me grow as a student.

My heartfelt gratitude also goes out to the staff and administration of HNLU for the

infrastructure in the form of our library and IT lab that was a source of great help in the

completion of this project.

PRANAV KHANDELWAL


4

Introduction

A facsimile reproduction from the original manuscript of Das Kapital by influential German

philosopher and economist Karl Marx. This monumental work is the central dogma of

Marxist economics.

The 19th century German philosopher and social commentator who is regarded as the

founder of modern communism. He collaborated with Friedrich Engels in the writing of The

Communist Manifesto (1848) which envisaged the classless society, and then enlarged his

theories in his best known work Das Kapital. In these volumes he explained ‘the labour

theory of value,’ that the worker is more important than the capitalist who exploits his labour.

Karl Marx argued that property is upheld by the state, making property struggles into

political struggles between owners and renters, capitalists and workers, and other groups.

Material conditions determine the ability of any of these groups to organize effectively

politically. These material conditions are also what enable one group to propagate their views

to others in society. Because the owners clearly have an advantage in material wealth, their

views are spread more easily.

For Marx, the conflict clearly arises because all things of value to man result from human

labor. According to Marx, capitalists exploit workers for their labor and do not share the

fruits of these labors equally. This exploitation is what allows the owning classes to dominate

politically and to impose their ideology on the workers of the world.

Not everyone has shared Spencer's vision of societal harmony and stability. Chief among

those who disagreed was the German political philosopher and economist Karl Marx (1818–

1883), who observed society's exploitation of the poor by the rich and powerful. Marx argued

that Spencer's healthy societal “organism” was a falsehood. Rather than interdependence and

stability, Marx claimed that social conflict, especially class conflict, and competition mark all

societies.

The class of capitalists that Marx called the bourgeoisie particularly enraged him. Members

of the bourgeoisie own the means of production and exploit the class of laborers, called the


http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Karl_Marx

5

proletariat, who do not own the means of production. Marx believed that the very natures of

the bourgeoisie and the proletariat inescapably lock the two classes in conflict. But he then

took his ideas of class conflict one step further: He predicted that the laborers are not

selectively “unfit,” but are destined to overthrow the capitalists. Such a class revolution

would establish a “class-free” society in which all people work according to their abilities and

receive according to their needs.

Unlike Spencer, Marx believed that economics, not natural selection, determines the

differences between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. He further claimed that a society's

economic system decides peoples' norms, values, mores, and religious beliefs, as well as the

nature of the society's political, governmental, and educational systems. Also unlike Spencer,

Marx urged people to take an active role in changing society rather than simply trusting it to

evolve positively on its own.

Objectives


6

To throw light on the evolution of conflict theory.

To highlight the contribution of Karl Marx in conflict sociology.

To study different essential aspects of the Marxian Theory of Class conflict

Research Methodology

This research is descriptive and analytical in nature. Secondary and Electronic resources

have been largely used to gather information about the topic.

Books and other references have been primarily helpful in giving this project a firm

structure. Websites, journals and articles have also been referred.

Footnotes have been provided wherever needed to acknowledge the source.

Section-1

History of Conflict Theory


7

The ideas that make up the foundations of conflict theory can be traced back to early

philosophy. Han Fei Tzu (280 - 233 BC) and other ancient Chinese philosophers taught that

men are innately weak and lazy. This assumption leads to the obvious conclusion that the

only way men can be controlled, then, is through punishment. Those who have the power to

punish can control society, as the fear of the power of punishment keeps men in check.1

Polybius, a Greek philosopher (205-125 BC), focused his studies on the Roman Republic. He

believed that people were like herds of animals. Weaknesses lead man to form communities

in which the strongest and bravest person became the leader. He believed societies change

and transition into a monarchy and that monarchies are based on justice and legitimate

authority. Monarchies have an obligation to keep peace in society. However, the same

problems with men will be exhibited in their kings, leading to corrupt and unjust monarchies.

The result: tyrants and tyranny. Tyranny is, however, self-limiting. Once it becomes

unbearable, the elite in society will figure out ways to over throw the monarchy. Society will

be in support of these new leaders because they give more liberty and equality. This cycle

will repeat itself because the new leader will take some of the liberty and sense of equality

away from the people. Polybius believed the only way to stop this cycle is to form a

government that combines the best elements from monarchies, aristocracies, and democracy,

like the Roman government during his time. 2

Many philosophers had similar ideas about conflict and society. They believed that conflict

was a necessary part of society. Conflict, as a sociological theory, was formalized in the 19th

and 20th Centuries, building upon the ideas of people like those mentioned above. Many

sociologists have contributed to the development of conflict theory, including Max

Gluckman, John Rex, Lewis A. Coser, Randall Collins, Ralf Dahrendorf, Ludwig

Gumplovicz, Vilfredo Pareto, and Georg Simmel. However, Karl Marx is often credited as

being the father of conflict theory.

Karl Heinrich Marx (1818 – 1883) was a German philosopher, sociologist, historian,

political economist, political theorist and revolutionary socialist, who developed the socio-

political theory of Marxism. His ideas have since played a significant role in both the

development of social science and also in the socialist political movement. He published

1 Martindale, Don. 2010. The Nature and Types of Sociological Theory. Routledge.

2 Idib


8

various books during his lifetime, with the most notable being The Communist Manifesto

(1848) and Capital (1867–1894), many of which were co-written with his friend, the fellow

German revolutionary socialist Friedrich Engels. Marx’s dedication to social change led him

to focus most of his work on revolutionary class conflicts in industrial societies. Karl Marx

died a poor man but his work and ideas have influenced the modern world.3

Marx saw conflict as primarily resulting from class conflicts within industry and the

economic segment of society. Max Weber (1864-1920) proposed that power, prestige and

property also added to social conflict and that such conflict was found in all aspects of society

(e.g., politics, gender, and religion).

C. Wright Mills (1916-1962) also contributed to modern conflict theory. According to Mills,

one of the results of conflict between people with competing interests and resources is the

creation of a social structure. Social structure refers to the relatively fixed institutions and

norms of society that heavily influence, consciously or not, peoples' everyday behavior (e.g.,

getting your license at a department of motor vehicles reflects the fact that social structure

dictates who gets to grant licenses, how, when, and to whom). However, control over the

social structure is largely in the hands of the elite (wealthy), who generally oppose the

interests of the non-elite.

Section-2

Marx and Conflict Theory

It is important to recognize that Marx viewed the structure of society in relation to its major

classes, and the struggle between them as the engine of change in this structure. His was no

3 Wolff, Jonathan. n.d. “Karl Marx.” http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/marx/


9

equilibrium or consensus theory. Conflict was not deviational within society's structure, nor

were classes functional elements maintaining the system. The structure itself was a derivative

of and ingredient in the struggle of classes. His was a conflict view of modem (nineteenth

century) society.

The key to understanding Marx is his class definition.1 A class is defined by the ownership of

property. Such ownership vests a person with the power to exclude others from the property

and to use it for personal purposes. In relation to property there are three great classes of

society: the bourgeoisie (who own the means of production such as machinery and factory

buildings, and whose source of income is profit), landowners (whose income is rent), and the

proletariat (who own their labor and sell it for a wage).

Class thus is determined by property, not by income or status. These are determined by

distribution and consumption, which itself ultimately reflects the production and power

relations of classes. The social conditions of bourgeoisie production are defined by bourgeois

property. Class is therefore a theoretical and formal relationship among individuals.

The force transforming latent class membership into a struggle of classes is class interest.

Out of similar class situations, individuals come to act similarly. They develop a mutual

dependence, a community, a shared interest interrelated with a common income of profit or

of wages. From this common interest classes are formed, and for Marx, individuals form

classes to the extent that their interests engage them in a struggle with the opposite class.

At first, the interests associated with land ownership and rent are different from those of the

bourgeoisie. But as society matures, capital (i.e., the property of production) and land

ownership merge, as do the interests of landowners and bourgeoisie. Finally the relation of

production, the natural opposition between proletariat and bourgeoisie, determines all other

activities.

As Marx saw the development of class conflict, the struggle between classes was initially

confined to individual factories. Eventually, given the maturing of capitalism, the growing

disparity between life conditions of bourgeoisie and proletariat, and the increasing

homogenization within each class, individual struggles become generalized to coalitions

across factories. Increasingly class conflict is manifested at the societal level. Class


http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/CIP.CHAP5.HTM#1

10

consciousness is increased, common interests and policies are organized, and the use of and

struggle for political power occurs. Classes become political forces.

The distribution of political power is determined by power over production (i.e., capital).

Capital confers political power, which the bourgeois class uses to legitimatize and protect

their property and consequent social relations. Class relations are political, and in the mature

capitalist society, the state's business is that of the bourgeoisie. Moreover, the intellectual

basis of state rule, the ideas justifying the use of state power and its distribution, are those of

the ruling class. The intellectual-social culture is merely a superstructure resting on the

relation of production, on ownership of the means of production.

Finally, the division between classes will widen and the condition of the exploited worker

will deteriorate so badly that social structure collapses: the class struggle is transformed into a

proletarian revolution. The workers' triumph will eliminate the basis of class division in

property through public ownership of the means of production. With the basis of classes thus

wiped away, a classless society will ensue (by definition), and since political power to protect

the bourgeoisie against the workers is unnecessary, political authority and the state will

wither away.

Overall, there are six elements in Marx's view of class conflict.

Classes are authority relationships based on property ownership.

A class defines groupings of individuals with shared life situations, thus interests.

Classes are naturally antagonistic by virtue of their interests.

Imminent within modern society is the growth of two antagonistic classes and their

struggle, which eventually absorbs all social relations.

Political organization and Power is an instrumentality of class struggle, and reigning

ideas are its reflection.

Structural change is a consequence of the class struggle.

Marx's emphasis on class conflict as constituting the dynamics of social change, his

awareness that change was not random but the outcome of a conflict of interests, and his view

of social relations as based on power were contributions of the first magnitude. However,

time and history have invalidated many of his assumptions and predictions. Capitalist

ownership and control of production have been separated. Joint stock companies forming


11

most of the industrial sector are now almost wholly operated by non-capital-owning

managers. Workers have not grown homogeneous but are divided and subdivided into

different skill groups. Class stability has been undercut by the development of a large middle

class and considerable social mobility. Rather than increasing extremes of wealth and

poverty, there has been a social leveling and an increasing emphasis on social justice. And

finally, bourgeois political power has progressively weakened with growth in worker oriented

legislation and of labor-oriented parties, and with a narrowing of the rights and privileges of

capital ownership. Most important, the severest manifestation of conflict between workers

and capitalist--the strike--has been institutionalized through collective bargaining legislation

and the legalization of strikes.

These historical events and trends notwithstanding, the sociological outlines of Marx's

approach have much value. His emphasis on conflict, on classes, on their relations to the

state, and on social change was a powerful perspective that should not be discarded. The

spirit, if not the substance, of his theory is worth developing.

Section-3

Essential Aspects of Marxian Theory of Class Conflict


12

Marx developed his theory of class conflict in his analysis and critique of the capitalist

society. The main ingredients of this theory of conflict have been enlisted by Abraham and

Morgan4, which may be briefly described here

1. The Development of Proletariats: “The capitalist economic system transferred the

masses of people into workers, created for them a common situation and inculcated in them

an awareness of common interest. Through the development of class consciousness, the

economic condition of capitalism united the masses and constituted them into “a class for

itself”…………….5

2. Importance of Property: According to Marx, the most distinguish feature of any society

is its form of property. An individual’s behavior is determined by his relations to property.

Classes are determined on the basis of individual’s relation to the means of production.

“Property divisions are the crucial breaking lines in the class structure”

3. Identification of Economic and Political Power and Authority: From a Marxian

perspective, political power emerges from economic power. The power of the ruling class

therefore stems from its ownership and control on the forces of production. The political and

legal system reflects ruling class interests. In Marx’s words: “the existing relations of

production between individuals must necessarily express themselves also as political and

legal relations.”

4. Polarization of Classes: In the capitalist society there could be only two social classes:

1. The capitalist who own the means of production and distribution, and

2. The working classes who own nothing but their own labour.

5. The Theory of Surplus Value: The workers produce more wealth in the form of food,

manufactured goods and services than is necessary to meet their basic needs. In other words,

they produce “surplus wealth.” But they do not enjoy the use of surplus value they have

created.

6. Pauperization: Exploitation of the workers can only lead to their misery and poverty. But

the same exploitation helps rich to become richer. As Marx said, “the wealth of the

4 Quoted in Gokhale’s “Political Science”, Pg: 423-4245 Abraham and Morgan, pg- 37


13

bourgeoisie is swelled by large profits with corresponding increase in the mass of poverty; of

pressure; of exploitation of the proletariats.”

7. Alienation: The economic exploitation and inhuman working conditions lead to increasing

alienation of man. Alienation results from a lack of sense of control over the social world.

8. Class Solidarity and Antagonism: With the growth of class consciousness among

members of the working class, their class solidarity becomes crystallized. They form

associations in order to make provisions beforehand for occasional revolts. Here and there

contests break out into riots.

9. Revolution: When the class struggle riches its height, a violent revolution breaks out

which destroys the structure of the capitalist society. This revolution is most likely to occur at

the peak of the economic crisis which is a part of the reoccurring booms, and repression

characteristic of capitalism.

10. The Dictatorship of the Proletariats: Marx felt that the revolution would be a bloody

one. This revolution terminates the capitalist society and leads to the social dictatorship of

proletariats. Thus, the inevitable historical process destroys the bourgeoisie. The proletariats,

then establish their social dictatorship.

11. Inauguration of the Communist Society: After attaining the success in the revolution,

the workers in course of time, would create a new socialist society. This new socialist society

would be a classless and casteless society free from exploitation of all sorts. The state which

has no place in such a society will eventually “wither away.” In this society nobody owns

anything but everybody owns everything. Each individual contributes according to his ability

and receives according to his needs.

Section-4

The Failure of Marxism


14

Marxism is dead. This is acknowledged almost everywhere, with the exception of

university campuses and among stodgy Old Leftists and uninformed media pundits. “The

[Marxist] dream is dead,” wrote Samuel Edward Konkin III. “The institutions move on,

decadent zombies, requiring dismemberment and burial. The ‘gravediggers of capitalism’

approach their own internment.”

Marxism failed on many fronts, perhaps on all fronts. Most fundamen- tally, though, its

failure was economic. Marx’s “map of reality” — his class theory — was fatally flawed,

and economics was the measure by which his philosophy could be checked with reality.

The failure of its economics led inevitably to Marxism’s failure to live up to its political

and historical predictions.Wrote SEK3:

“Remember well that Marx outlined history and brooked no significant wandering from

the determined course. Should History not unfold according to the determined pathway

‘scientifically’ obtained, all Marxist theoretical structure crumbles. ...

“Marxism failed to produce a ‘workable model of reality.’ On the other hand, it has won

the hearts and souls of billions in the past century. In order to bury Marx, it is necessary

to deal with his apparent success, not his failures. His strong points must be over- come,

not his weak, if [radical Rothbardians, agorists] hope toreplace his vision as the prime

inspiration of the Left.”

Section-5

Major Findings


15

Major Intellectual Contributions:

1. Elaboration of the conflict model of society, specifically the theory of social change

based upon antagonisms between social classes;

2. The insight that power originates primarily in economic production; and

3. His concern with the social origins of alienation.

4. Marx’s vision was based on an evolutionary point of departure. Society was

comprised of a moving balance of antithetical forces that generate social change by

their tension and struggle.

5. Determine factors behind the differences in people’s wealth, power, and social

status-

What is produced

How it is produced

How it is exchanged

Section-6

Conclusion


16

From the above study it can be concluded that Marx’s vision of life after the socialist

revolution is sketchy. It appears that the division of labor would not be eliminated; only

limited. Man will work in the morning, fish in the afternoon, and read Plato at night.

Industrial forces will be harnessed to provide for human needs rather than profit. It is here

where the state withers away, here where ―from each according to his abilities, to each

according to his needs applies. It could be described as a sort of second coming without

Christ. Clearly, Marx’s hopes, dreams, and values have unduly affected his analysis and his

vision.

Section-7

References


17

BOOKS

Marx, K. (1964b). Early Writings. (T. B. Bottomore, Trans.) New York: McGraw-

Hill.

Marx, K. (1964). Selected Writings in Sociology and Social Philosophy.

Marx, K. (1847/1999). The Poverty of Philosophy. Retrieved March 19, 2008, from

Marx/Engels Internet Archive:

Marx, K. (1845/1999). Theses on Feurback. Retrieved March 19, 2008, from

Marx/Engels Internet Archive:

Giddens, Anthony (1971). Capitalism and Modern Social Theory – An analysis of the

writings of Marx, Durkheim and Weber, Cambridge University Press.

WEBLIOGRAPHY

http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/povertyphilosophy/index.htm(last

visited on 15/03/13)

http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/index.htm (last visited on

15/03/13)


Conflict Sociology

Documents

Transcript of Conflict Sociology