Social Conflict and the Theory of Social Change Author(s): Lewis A. Coser Source: The British Journal of Sociology, Vol. 8, No. 3 (Sep., 1957), pp. 197-207 Published by: Wiley on behalf of The London School of Economics and Political Science Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/586859 . Accessed: 14/11/2013 12:31
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
.
Wiley and The London School of Economics and Political Science are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The British Journal of Sociology.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 128.210.85.113 on Thu, 14 Nov 2013 12:31:44 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions SOCIAL CONFLICTAND THE THEORY OF SOCIAL CHANGE LewisA. Coser r NHIS paperattempts to examinesome of the functionsof social conflict in the processof social change. I shallfirst deal with i somefunctions of conflictwithin social systems, more specifically with its relationto institutionalrigidities, technical progress and pro- ductivity, and will then concernourselves with the relation between social conflictand the changesof social systems. A centralobservation of GeorgeSorel in hisReflections onViolence which has not as yet been accordedsufficient attention by sociologistsmay serve us as a convenientspringboard. Sorel wrote: We are today facedwith a new and unforeseenfact a middleclass which seeks to weakenits own strength.The race of bold captainswho made the greatnessof modernindustry disappears to make way for an ultracivilized aristocracywhich asks to be allowed to live in peace. The threateningdecadence may be avoidedif the proletariathold on with obstinacyto revolutionaryideas. The antagonisticclasses influence each other in a partlyindirect but decisive manner. Everything may be savedif the proletariat,by their use of violence, restore to the middle class somethingof its former energy.l Sorel'sspecific doctrine of classstruggle is not of immediateconcern here.What is importantfor us is the idea that conflict(which Sorel calls violence,using the wordin a veryspecial sense) prevents the ossification of the social systemby exertingpressure for innovationand creativity. ThoughSorel's call to actionwas addressedto the workingclass and its interests,he conceivedit to be of generalimportance for the total social system;to his mind the gradualdisappearance of class conflictmight well lead to the decadenceof Europeanculture. A social system, he felt, was in need of conflictif only to renew its energiesand revitalize its creativeforces. This conceptionseems to be moregenerally applicable than to class strugglealone. Conflictwithin and between groupsin a society can prevent accommodationsand habitual relations from progressively impoverishingcreativity. The clash of valuesand interests,the tension betweenwilat is and what some groupsfeel ought to be, the conflict I 97
This content downloaded from 128.210.85.113 on Thu, 14 Nov 2013 12:31:44 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions LEWIS A. COSER betweenvested interestsand new strata and groupsdemanding their share of power, wealth and status, have been productiveof vitality; note for examplethe contrastbetween the 'frozenworld' of the Middle Ages and the burstof creativitythat accompaniedthe thaw that set in with Renaissancecivilization. This is, in effect, the applicationof John Dewey's theory of con- sciousnessand thoughtas arisingin the wake of obstaclesto the inter- actionof groups.'Conflict is the gadflyof thought.It stirsus to observa- tion and memory.It instigatesto invention.It shocksus out of sheep- like passivity,and sets us at noting and contriving.... Conflictis a sznequa nonof reflectionand ingenuity.'2 Conflictnot only generatesnew norms,new institutions,as I have pointedout elsewhere,3it may be said to be stimulatingdirectly in the economic and technologicalrealm. Economic historiansoften have pointed out that much technologicalimprovement has resultedfrom the conflictactivity of tradeunions through the raisingof wage levels. A risein wagesusually has led to a substitutionof capitalinvestment for labourand hence to an increasein the volumeof investment.Thus the extreme s-
This content downloaded from 128.210.85.113 on Thu, 14 Nov 2013 12:31:44 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions SOCIAL CONFLI CT AND SOCIAL CHANGE groupswho find themselvesin differentlife situations and havedifferent life chancescalls forth the dangerthat Sorelwarns of, namelythat the furtherdevelopment of technologywould be seriouslyimpaired. The emergenceof inventionand of technologicalchange in modern Westernsociety, with its institutionalizationof scienceas an instrument for making and remakingthe world, was made possible with the gradualemergence of a pluralisticand hence conflict-chargedstructure of humanrelations. In the unitaryorder of the medievalguild system, 'no one was permittedto harm othersby methodswhich enabledhim to producemore quicklyand more cheaplythan they. Technicalpro- gress took on the appearanceof disloyalty.The ideal was stable con- ditionsin a stableindustry.'10 In the modernWestern world, just as in the medievalworld, vested interestsexert pressurefor the maintenanceof establishedroutines; yet the modernWestern institutional structure allows room for freedomof conflict.The structureno longerbeing unitary,vested interests find it difficultto resistthe continuousstream of change-producinginventions. Invention,as well as its applicationand utilization,is furtheredthrough the ever-renewedchallenge to vested interests,as well as by the con- flictsbetween the vestedinterests themselves.1l Once old formsof traditionaland unitaryintegration broke down, the clashof conflictinginterests and values, now no longerconstrained by the rigidityof the medievalstructure, pressed for new formsof unification and integration.Thus deliberatecontrol and rationalizedregulation of 'spontaneous'processes was requiredin militaryand political,as well as in economicinstitutions. Bureaucratic forms of organizationwith their emphasison calculable,methodical and disciplinedbehaviour12 arose at roughly the same period in which the unitary medieval structure broke down. But with the rise of bureaucratictypes of organization peculiarnew resistancesto change made their appearance.The need for relianceon predictabilityexercises pressure towards the rejectionof innovationwhich is perceivedas interferencewith routine.Conflicts in- volvinga 'trialthrough battle' are unpredictablein theiroutcome, and thereforeunwelcome to the bureaucracywhich muststrive towards an ever-wideningextension of the areaof predictabilityand calculabilityof results.But social arrangements which have become habitual and totally patternedare subjectto the blight of ritualism.If attentionis focused excIusivelyon the habitualclues, 'peoplemay be unfittedby being fit in an unfit fitness',13so that their habitual training becomes an in- capacity to adjust to new conditions.To quote Dewey again: 'The customaryis taken for granted;it operatessubconsciously. Breach of wont and use is focal; it forms''consciousness''.'14 A group or a system which no longer is challengedis no longer capable of a creativere- sponse.It maysubsist, wedded to the eternalyesterday of precedentand tradition,but it is no longercapable of renewal.15 I99
This content downloaded from 128.210.85.113 on Thu, 14 Nov 2013 12:31:44 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions LEWIS A. COSER 'Only a hitch in the workingof habit occasionsemotion and pro- vokesthought.'16 Conflict within and betweenbureaucratic structures provides means for avoiding the ossiScationand ritualism which threatenstheir form of organization.17Conflict, though apparently dysfunctionalfor highly rationalizedsystems, may actually have im- portantlatent functionalconsequences. By attackingand overcoming the resistanceto innovationand change that seemsto be an 'occupa- tional psychosis'always threateningthe bureaucraticoffice holder, it can help to insurethat the systemdo not stiflein the deadeningroutine of habituationand that in the planning activity itself creativityand inventioncan be applied. We have so far discussedchange within syste-ms,but changes of systemsare of perhapseven more crucialimportance for sociological inquiry.He-re the sociologyof Karl Marx servesus well. WritesMarx in a polemicagainst Proudhon: Feudalproduction also had two antagonisticelements, which were equally designatedby the namesof goodside and badside of feudalism,withollt regard being had to the fact that it is always the evil side which finisheslzy over- comingthe good side. It is the bad side that producesthe movementwhich makes history,by constitutingthe struggle. If at the epoch of the reign of feudalismthe economists,enthusiastic over the virtues of chivalry,the delightfulharmony between rights and duties, the patriarchallife of the towns, the prosperousstate of domestic industry in the country, of the developmentof industryorganized in corporations,guilds and fellowships,in fine of all which constitutesthe beautifulside of feudalism,had proposedto themselvesthe problemof eliminatingall which cast a shadow upon this lovely picture serSdom,privilege, anarchy what would have been the result?All the elements which constitutedthe struggle would have been annihilated, and the development of the bourgeoisiewould have been stifledin the germ. They would have set themselvesthe absurdproblem of eliminatinghistory.l8 Accordingto Marx, conflictleads not only to ever-changingrelations within the existingsocial structure,but the total social systemunder- goes transformationthrough conflict. During the feudal period, the relationsbetween serf and lord (bc- tween burgherand gentry,underwent many changes both in law and in fact. Yet conflictfinally led to a breakdownof all feudal relations and hence to the rise of a new social system governedby different patternsof social relations. It is Marx'scontention that the negative element, the opposition, conditionsthe changewhen conflict between the sub-groupsof a system becomesso sharpenedthat at a certainpoint this systembreaks down. Each socialsystem contains elements of strainand of potentialconflict; if in the analysisof the social structureof a systemthese elementsare ignored,if the adjustmentof patternedrelations is the only focus of 200
This content downloaded from 128.210.85.113 on Thu, 14 Nov 2013 12:31:44 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions SOCIAL CONFLICT AND SOCIAL CHANGE attention, then it is not possible to anticipate basic social change. Exclusiveattention to wont and use, to tlle customaryand habitual bars access to an understandingof possiblelatent elementsof strain which undercertain conditions cventuate in overtconflict and possibly in a basic cllange of the social structure.This attention shoul(l be focused, in Marx's viewy on what evades and resists the patterned normativestructure and on the elementspointing to new and alterna- tive patternsemerging from tlle existingstructure. What is diagnosed as diseasefrom the pointof view of the institutionalizedpattern may, in factysays hIarx,be the firstbirth pang of a new one to come;not wont and use but the breakof wont and use is focal.The 'matters-of-fact'of a 'given state of affairs'whert viewedt in the light of Marxysapproach, becomelimited, transitory;they are regardedas containingthe germs of a processthat leads beyondthem.Is Yet, not all social systemscontain the same degree of conflict and strain. The sources and incidence of conflictingbehaviour in each particularsystem vary aecordingto the type of structure,the patterns of social mobility,of ascribingand acllievingstatus and of allocating scarcepower and wealth,as well as the degreeto whicha speeificform of distributionof power,resources and statusis acceptedby the component actorswithin the differentsub-systems. But if, within any social struc- ture, thereexists an excessof cIaimantsover opportunitiesfor adequate reward,there arisesstrain and conflict. The distinction between changes of systems anc} changes within systemsis, of course,a relativeone. There is alwayssome sort of con- tinuity betweena past and a present,or a presentand a futuresocial system;societies do not d-iethe way biologicalorganisms do, for it is difficultto assignprecise pnts of birth or death to societiesas we do with biologicalorganisms. One may claim that all that can be observed is a changeof the organizationof socialrelations; but fromone perspec- tive such change may be consideredre-establishment of equilibrium while from anotherit may be seen as the formationof a new system. A naturalscientist, describing the functionof earthquakes,recently stated admirablywhat could be consideredthe functionof conflict. 'Thereis nothingabnormal about an earthquake.An unshakeableearth would be a dead earth. A quake is the earth'sway of maintainingits equilibrium,a form of adjustmentthat enables the crust to yield to stressesthat tend to reorganizeand redistributethe materialof which it is composed.... The largerthe shift, the more violent the quake, and the more frequentthe shifts,the morefrequent are the shocks.'20 Whetherthe quakeis violent or not, it has servedto maintainor re- establishthe equilibriumof the earth. Yet the shifts may be small changesof geologicalfotmations, or they may be changesin the struc- tural relationsbetween land and water,for example. At what point the shift is large enough to warrantthe conclusion 20I
This content downloaded from 128.210.85.113 on Thu, 14 Nov 2013 12:31:44 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions LEWIS A. COSER
that a changeof the systemhas takenplace, is hardto determine.Only if one dealswith extremeinstances are ideal types such as feudalism, capitalism,etc. easily applied. A system based on serSdom,for ex- ample, may undergoconsiderable c}lange within vide the effects of the BlackDeath on the socialstructure of medievalsociety; and even an abolitionof serfdommay not necessarilybe said to markthe end of an old and the emergence of a new system, vide nineteenth-century Russia. If 'it is necessaryto distinguishclearly between the processeswithin the systemand processesof changeof the system',as ProfessorParsons has pointedout,2l an attemptshould be made to establisha heuristic criterionfor this distinction.We proposeto talk of a changeof system when all majorstructural relations, its basic institutionsand its pre- vailingvalue systemhave been drasticallyaltered. (In caseswhere such a change takes place abruptly,as, for example, the RussianRevolu- tion, there should be no difficulty.It is well to remember,however, that transformationsof social systems do not always consist in an abrupt and simultaneouschange of all basic institutions.Institutions may change gradually,by mutual adjustment,and it is only over a period of time that the observerwill be able to clairnthat the social systemhas undergonea basictransformation in its structuralrelations.) In concretehistorical reality, no clear-cutdistinctions exist. Changeof systemmay be the result (or the sum total) of previouschanges within the system.This does not howeverdetract from the usefulnessof the theoreticaldistinction. It is preciselyMarx's contention that the changefrom feudalism to a differenttype of social system can be understoodonly through an investigationof the stressesand strainswithin the feudalsystem. Whether given formsof conflictwill lead to changesin the social systemor to breakdownand to formationof a new systemwill dependon the rigidity and resistanceto change, or inverselyon the elasticityof the control mechanismsof the system. It is apparent,however, that the rigidity of the system and the intensityof conflictwithin it are not independentof each other. Rigid systemswhich suppressthe incidenceof conflictexert pressure towards the emergence or radical cleavages and violent forms of conflict. More elastic systems, which allow the open and direct expression of conflict within them and which adjust to the shifting balance of power which these conflictsboth indicate and bring about, are less likely to be menacedby basic and explosivealignments within their midst. In what followsthe distinctionbetween strains, conflicts and disturb- anceswithin a systemwhich lead to a re-establishmentof equilibrium, and conflictswhich lead to the establishmentof new systemsand new types of equilibria,will be examined.22Such an examinationwill be 202
This content downloaded from 128.210.85.113 on Thu, 14 Nov 2013 12:31:44 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions SOCIAL CONFLICT AND SOCIAL CHANGE most profitablybegun by consideringwhat TllorsteinVeblen23 has called 'VestedInterests'.24 Any socialsystem implies an allocationof power, as well as wealth and status positions among individual actors and component sub- groups.As has been pointedout, there is never completeconcordance between what individualsand groupswithin a system considertheir just due and the systemof allocation.Conflict ensues in the effort of various frustratedgroups and individualsto increase their share of gratification.Their demandswill encounterthe resistanceof thosewho previouslyhad establisheda 'vestedinterest' in a given formof distribu- tion of honour,wealth and power. To the vested interests,an attack against their positionnecessarily appearsas an attackupon the social order.25Those who derive priviE legesfrom a given systemof allocationof status,wealth and powerwill perceive an attack upon these prerogativesas an attack against the systemitself. However, mere 'frustration'will not lead to a questioningof the legitimacyof the positionof the vestedinterests, and hence to conflict. Levels of aspirationas well as feelingsof deprivationare relative to institutionalizedexpectations and areestablished through comparison.26 When social systemshave institutionalizedgoals and values to govern the conduct of componentactors, but limit access to these goals for ccrtainmembers of the society, 'departuresfrom institutionalrequire- ments'are to be expected.27Similarly, if certaingroups within a social systemcompare their share in power,wealth and statushonour with that of othergroups and question the legitimacyof this distribution,dis- contentis likely to ensue. If there exist no institutionalizedprovisions for the expressionof such discontents,departures from what is required by the normsof the socialsystem may occur.These may be limltedto 'innovation'or they may consistin the rejectionof the institutionalized goals. Such 'rebellion''involves a genuine transvaluation,where the director vicariousexperience of frustrationleads to full denunciationof previouslyprized values'.28 Thus it will be well to distinguishbetween those departuresfrom the norms of a society which consist in mere 'deviation'and thosewhich involve the formationof distinctivepatterns and new value systems. What factorslead groups and individualsto questionat a certain point the legitimacyof the systemof distributionof rewards,lies largely outside the scope of the presentinquiry. The interveningfactors can be sought in the ideological, technological,economic or any other realm. It is obvious, moreover,that conflict may be a resultjust as muchas a sourceof change.A new invention,the introductionof a new cultural trait throughdiffusion, the developmentof new rnethodsof productionor distribution,etc., will have a differentialimpact within a socialsystem. Some strata will feel it to be detrimentalto theirmaterial 203
This content downloaded from 128.210.85.113 on Thu, 14 Nov 2013 12:31:44 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions LEWIS A. COSER or ideal interests,whil-e others wlll feel their posltion strengthened throughits introduction.Such disturbancesin the equilibriumof the systemlead to conditionsln whichgroups or individualactors no longer do willinglywhat they have to do and do-willingly what they are not supposedto do. Change,no matterwhat its source,breeds strain and conflict. Yet, it may be well to repeatthat mere 'frustration'and the ensuing strainsand tensionsdo not necessarilylead to groupconflict. Individuals unalerstress may relieve their tensionthrough 'acting out' In special safety-valveinstitutions in as far as they are providedfor in the social system;or they may 'act out' in a deviant manner,which may have serious dysfunctionalconsequences for the system, and bring about changein this way. This, however,does not reducethe frustrationfirom which escapehas been soughtsince it does not attacktheir source. If, on the other hand, the strainleads to the emergenceof specific new patternsof behaviourof whole groupsof individualswho pursue 'the optimizationof gratification829by choosingwhat they consider appropriatemeans for the maximizationof rewards,scycial change which reducesthe sourcesof their frustrationmay come about. This may happenin two ways:if the socialsystem is flexibleenough to adjust to conflictsituations we will deal with changewithin the system.If, on the otherhand, the soual systemis not able to readjustitself and alIows the accumulationof conflict,the 'aggressive'groups, imbued with a new systemof values which threatensto split the generalconsensus of the societyand imbued with an ideologywhich 'objectifies' their cIaIms, may becomepowerful enough to overcomethe resistanceof vestedinterests and bring about the breakdownof the sptem and the emergenceof a new distibution of sgial values.30 In his Povertyof Philosopfiy,Marx was led to considerthe conditions underwhich economicclasses constitute themselves: Economic conditionshave first transformedthe mass of the population into workers.The dominationof capital created for this mass a common situationand commonirsterest. This masswas thus alreadya cIassas against capital, but not for itself. It is in the struggle. . . that the mass gathersto- getherand constitutesitself as a classfor itself.The interestswhich it defends become class interests.3l With this remarkabledistinction between class in itselfand classfor itself (which unfortunatelyhe didn't elaborateupon in later writings though it informsall of them-if not the writingsof most latter-day 'marxists'),Marx iIIuminatesa most importantaspect of groupforma- tion: group belongingnessis establishedby an objectiveconflict situa- tion in this case a conflictof interests;32but only by experiencingthis antagonism,that is, by becomingaware of it and by actingit out, does the group (or class) establishits identity. When changesin the equilibriumof a societylead to the formation 2-o4
This content downloaded from 128.210.85.113 on Thu, 14 Nov 2013 12:31:44 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions SOGIAL GONFLICT AND SOGIAL CHANGE of new groupingsor to the strengtheningof existinggroupings that set themselvesthe goal of overcomingresistance of vestedinterests through conflict,changes in structuralrelations, as distinctfrom simple 'mal- adjustment',can be expected. What-Robert Park said aboutthe riseof nationalistand racialmove- mentsis more generallyapplicable: They strike me as natural and wholesome disturbancesof the social routine, the e-Sectof which is to arouse in those involved a lively sen-seof common p-urposeand to give those who feet themselvesoppressed the in- spirationof a commoncause.... The effectof this struggleis to increasethe solidarityand improve the moraleof the 'oppressed'minority.33 It is this sense of commonpurpose arising in and throughconflict that is peculiarto the behaviourof individualswho meet the challenge of new conditionsby a group-formingand value-formingresponse. Strainswhich result in no such formationsof new conflict groupsor strengtheningof old onesmay contribute to bringingabout change,but a type of change that fails to reduce the sourcesof strain since by deSnitiontension-release behaviour does not involve purposiveaction. Conflictthrough group action, on the otherhand, is likelyto resultin a 'deviancy'which may be the prelude of new patternsand reward systemsapt to reducethe sourcesof frustration. If the tensionsthat need outlets are continuallyreproduced within the structure,abreaction through tension-release mechanisms may pre- serve the system but at the riskof ever-renewedfurther accumulation of tension.Such accumulationeventuates easily in the irruptionof de- structiveunrealistic conflict. If feelingsof dissatisEaction,instead of being suppressedor divertedare allowede2ipression against 'vested interests', and in this way to lead to the formationof new groupingswithin the society, the emergenceof genuine transvaluationsis likely to occur. Sumnersaw thisvery well whenhe said:'We want to developsymptoms, we don't want to suppressthem.'34 Whetherthe emergenceof such new groupingsor the strengthening of old ones with the attendantincrease in self-confidenceand self- esteemon the part of the participantswill lead to a changeof or within the systemwill dependon the degreeof cohesionthat the systemitself has attained.A well-integratedsociety will tolerateand even welcome group conflict;only a weakly integratedone must fear it. The great Englishliberal John Morleysaid it very well: If [the men who are most attachedto the reigningorder of things] had a larger faith in the stabilityfor which they professso great an anxiety, they would be more free alike in understandingand temper to deal generously, honestlyand efTectivelywith thosewhom they countimprudent innovators.35
xo5
This content downloaded from 128.210.85.113 on Thu, 14 Nov 2013 12:31:44 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions A. COSER 206 LEWIS NOTES Burke, Permanenceand Sorel, Refectionson Violence, 13 Kenneth 1 George Change,N.Y., New Republic,I 936, p. I 8. ch.2, par. I I. The Public and Its HumanJ>ature and Con- 14John Dewey, 2 John Dewey, Chicago,Gateway Books, I946, duct,N.Y., The Modern Library, I930, Problems, p.300. p.IOO. thesisof Functionsof 15 This is, of course,a central 3 Lewis A. Coser, The monumentalA Study Glencoe, Ill.; London, ArnoldToynbee's SocialConJ[ict, History,O.U.P. Routledgeand Kegan Paul, I956. of and and 16John Dewey, HumanNature 4 Cf. McAlister Coleman, Afen Conduct,op. cit., p. I78. Coal,N.Y., Farrarand Rinehart,I943. Dalton,'Conflicts Labor'sEarnings, 17 See, e.g., Melville 5 Union Wages and StaS and Line Managerial SyracuseUniv. Press, I95I. Bctween Syracuse, Officers',Am. Soc. R., XV ( I 95O), pp. ff Quoted by Will Herberg, 'When 342-5 I . The authorseems to be unaware SocialScientists View Labor', Comment- of this conflict, 590-6. See ofthe positive functions ary,Dec. I95I, XII, 6, pp. indicate the 'inno- Melman, DynamicFactors yethis data clearly alsoSeymour potential' of conflict between inIndustrial Productivity, Oxford, Black- vating effectsof risingwage staSand line. well,I956, on the Marx, ThePoverty of Philosophy, on productivity. 18 Karl levels Chicago,Charles H. Kerr & Co., I9IO, 7 See the criticism of the Mayo approachby Daniel Bcll, 'Adjusting p. I32e of Marx's Jan. I 947, 19For an understanding Mento Machines',Commentary, and its relationto Hegelian pp.79-88; C. Wright Mills, 'The Con- methodology Study of philosophy,see HerbertMarcuse, Reaso tributionof Sociology to the . of the andRevolution, N.Y., O.U.P., 19.+ I IndustrialRelations', Proceedings withJohn Dewey's RelationsResearch Association, Note the similarity Industrial thought:'Where there is change, there I948, pp. I 99-222. plurality,multi- R. K. Merton, 'The isof necessitynumerical 8 See, e.g., and from variety comes opposi- Machinc,The Workersand The E:ngin- plicity, or Structure, tion, strife. Change is alteration, eer', Social Theoryand Social meansdiversity. Di- I Georges "othering"and this Glencoe,Ill., I 949, pp. 3 7-28; and division IndustrialSociety, Glencoc, versity means division, Friedmann, means two sides and their conflict.' Ill., I956. and Reconstructionin Philosophy, N.Y., Mentor 9 For informal organization the able & Dickson, Books,I 95O, p. 97. See also change, see Roethlisberger of the deficienciesof Talcott Alanagementand the Worker,Cambridge, discussion formal Parsons'sociological theories by David I 939, especially pp. 567-8; for The Lockwood,B.7.S., June, I956. organization,see Selig Perlman, 'Science in on general 20 Waldemar Kaernfert, Theoryof theLabor Movement; 2 7, I952. and labour, Review',New LorkTimes, July relationsbetween technology The SocialSystem, and RichardC. Ny- 21 Talcott Parsons, see Elliot D. Smith Tavistock Publications:I95I, man, Bechnolovand Labor, Ncw Haven, London, p. 48I. Yale Univ. Press,I939. much to Prof. Parsons'treat- 10Henri Pirenne, Economicand Social I owe London, mcntof this distinctiondespite a number History of Medieval Buroy)e, with his theory and Kegan Paul, I 949, r) of major disagreements Routledge of social change. I86. is of great Change, 22 The conceptof equilibrium 11See W. F. Ogburn, Social providedit is used, I 923, for the valuein socialscience N.Y.: B. W. Huebsch, as a pointof reference of 'cultural lag' due to 'vested as by Schumpeter, theory permitting measurementof departures interests'. of a stateof equilib- \Veber, 'Bureaucracy', fromit. 'The concept 12 Cf. Max although no such state may ever FromMax Weber,Gerth and Mills, ed., rium, of be realized, is useful and indeed indis- pp. I 96-244. For the pathology and 'Bureau- pcnsablc for purposesof analyses bureaucracy,see R. K. Mcrton, of reference'(Joseph and Personality',Social diagnosis,as a point cratic Structure Schumpeter, BusinessCycle, N.Y., Theoryand SocialStructure, op. cit., pp. A. McGrawHill, I939, p. 69). But certain I 5 I-60.
This content downloaded from 128.210.85.113 on Thu, 14 Nov 2013 12:31:44 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions SOCIAL CONFLICT AND SOCIAL CHANGE 207 types of sociologicalfunctionalism tend 26See RobertK. Mertonand Alice S. to move from this methodologicaluse Kitt, 'Contributionsto the Theory of of the concept to one which has some Reference Group Behaviour'for a de- clearly ideological features. The ideal velopment of the concept of 'relative type of equilibrium in this illegitimate deprivation' (originally suggested by use, becomes a normativeinstead of a Stoufferet al. in TheAmerican Soldier) and methodological concept. Attention is its incorporationinto the frameworkof a focusedon the maintenanceof a system theoryof referencegroups. which is somehow identified with the 27 This whole processis exhaustively ethically desirable(see Merton'sdiscus- discussed by Merton in his paper on sion of this ideologicalmisuse of func- 'Social Structure and Anomie', Social tionalism in Social Theoryand Social Theory,op. cit. Structure,op. cit., pp. 38 i. and II6-I7; 28Ibid.,p. I45. see also my review of Parsons'Essays, 29 T. Parsons,The Social System, Op. Cit., AmericanXournal of SocioZogy,55, March p. 498. I950, pp. 502-4). Such theorizingtends 30 R. K. Merton, Social Theoryand to look at all behaviourcaused by strains Social Structure,op. cit., pp. 42-3 and and conflictas 'deviancy'from the legiti- I I6-I7. mate pattern, therebycreating the per- 31 Karl Marx, ThePoverty of Philosophy, haps unintended impressionthat such op. cit., pp. I 88-9. behaviouris somehow'abnormal' in an 32 This makes it necessary to dis- ethicalsense, and obscuringthe fact that tinguish between realistic and non- some 'deviant'behaviour actually serves realistic conflict: social conflicts that the creationof new patternsrather than arisefrom frustration of specificdemands a simplerejection of the old. and from estimatesof gains of the par- 23 See especiallyThe V-estedInterests and ticipants, and that are directed at the theState oSthe Industrial Arts, N.Y., I9I9. presumed frustrating object, may be 24 Max Lerner ('Vested Interests', calledrealistic conflicts. Non-realistic con- Encyclopaediaof the Social Ssiences, XV, p. flicts, on the other hand, are not occa- 240)gives the followingdefinition: 'When sioned by the rival ends of the antagon- an activityhas been pursuedso long that ists, but by the nced for tension release the individualsconcerned in it have a of one or both of them. Somegroups may prescriptiveclaim to its exerciseand its be formed with the mere purpose of profit, they are considered to have a releasing tension. Such groups 'collec- vestedinterest in it.' tivize' their tensions,so to speak. They 25 Veblen has described this aptly: can, by definition, only be disruptive 'The code of proprieties,conventionali- ratherthan creativesince they are built ties, and usages in vogue at any given on negativerather than positive cathexes. time and among any given people has But groups of this kind will remain moreor lessof the characterof an organic marginal; their actions cannot bring whole;so that any appreciablechange in about social change unless they accom- one point of the scheme involvessome- pany and strengthen realistic conflict thing of a change or readjustmentof groups. In such cases we deal with an other pointsalso, if not a reorganization admixtureof non-realisticand realistic all alongthe line.... Whenan attempted elements mutually reinforcing each refcyrm involves the suppression or other within the same social movements. thoroughgoingremodelling of an institu- Memberswho join for the mere purpose tion of first-rateimportance in the con- of tension releaseare often used for the ventionalscheme, it is immediatelyfelt 'dirty work' by the realistic conflict that a seriousderangement of the entire groups. scheme would result.... Any of these 33 Robert E. Park, 'Personalityand innovationswould, we are told, "shake CulturalConflict', Publtcafior of theXm. the social structureto its base", "reduce SOC. SOC., 25, I93I, pp. 95-I IO. See society to chaos",. . . etc. The aversion p. I07. to changeis in large part an aversionto 34 Wm. G. Sumner, War and OfAer the bother of making the readjustment Essays,p. 24I. which any given changewill necessitate' 35John Morley, On Compromise,Lon- ( Efie Thwryof thc LeisurcClass, N.Y., don, Macmillan& Co., I9I7, p. 263. The ModernLibrary, pp. 20I-3).
This content downloaded from 128.210.85.113 on Thu, 14 Nov 2013 12:31:44 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions