Introduction Conflict theory was first articulated by Karl Marx as a way to explain his perception that society was engaged in a continual struggle or conflict due to a finite supply of resources. As a result, the order of society is determined by the powers that rise to the top to control the resources. The subtext of this theory is that order is established by rule and tyranny rather than by consensus of the whole. This paper will examine the main concepts and principles of Conflict Theory, identify its strengths and weaknesses, discussed fallacies within the theory, and describe how it can be used to address differences in people.

The Theory: Main Concepts and Principles

Though rooted in Marxist ideology, conflict theory emerged in the 1950s as a reaction to structural functionalism (Ritzer, Stepnisky, 2017). Structural functionalism was a theory that proposed to explain the manner in which society functions as a result of various relationships and social institutions working together towards stability and functionality. Conflict theory was promoted by theorists like Ralf Dahrendorf, who juxtaposed conflict theory and structural functionalism to show that society had “two faces” consisting of one part conflict and one part consensus (Ritzer, Stepnisky, 2017, p. 120). Conflict theory focused on the conflicts of interest inherent in the various elements of society, the various classes, and the various institutions and organizations. So while it was rooted in concepts defined by Marx in the previous century, it was ultimately a response to structural functionalism and was even used by Dahrendorf to explain how society should be studied in structurally functionalist terms—i.e., as an organizational process where conflict and consensus were integrated throughout.

The main concepts and principles of conflict theory were laid by the critical theorists of the first half of the 20th century—the Frankfurt School thinkers: Theodore Adorno, Max Horkheimer, Erich Fromm and others. They were Marxists who anticipated the class warfare that Marx had predicted but who were grappling with the fact that the class uprising had not yet occurred. They sought explanations as to what had happened and formulated critical theory, which was a way to break down social conventions and relationships to identify the hidden power struggle underneath. For example, the Frankfurt School identified mass media as a means of control used by the power/ruling class to keep the worker class docile and unconcerned with the conflict inherent in society, as Marx had viewed it (Horkheimer, Adorno, 1944). They viewed the “culture industry” as the cause of conflict suppression and deemed education as a means of re-awakening the worker class to the reality of the conflict and their oppression (Horkheimer, Adorno, 2002).

Conflict theory was thus posited as an extension of this groundwork but at the same time as a reaction to structural functionalism, which denied the existence or meaningfulness of conflict inherent in society. Conflict theory was situated on the principle that all of society is functioning for control and that the owners of the means of production were the ones in control in the present era:...

However, conflict theory was also use to explain why structural functionalism never wholly worked by itself: conflict is present and needs to be understood.
Strengths and Weaknesses

The strengths of conflict theory are that it identifies an inherent, underlying theme of conflict within society that can exist as elements vie for power, control, influence, autonomy, and so on. It highlights the tensions that exist between groups and shows how one group can work to undermine or dominate another group. Rather than focusing on how entities get along and work together, it emphasizes the ways in which entities will oppose one another and seek to dominate one another. The example of unbridled capitalism is one example that can be used to help illustrate conflict theory. In unbridled capitalism, one business might attempt to gain dominance in the market buy undercutting the prices of its competitors until they were priced out of the market. That business could then absorb the entire market share for itself and create a monopoly. This would be an example of conflict theory at the mezzo level. Monopolies still exist today and one can see tactics of this approach in various business models: Amazon, for instance, is a company that is currently undercutting its competitors (especially its bricks and mortar competitors) in order to obtain market share and establish a virtual monopoly on retail. A classic example is that of Standard Oil.

Conflict theory is more aptly applied in a sociological sense, however; it shows how groups are opposed to one another’s own aims and even well-being as they struggle to control the resources that all depend upon, typically on a micro level but certainly at a macro level as well. The U.S.’s foreign policy could best be explained as an example of conflict theory at the macro level, as it emphasizes the American sense of “Manifest Destiny,” which asserts that Americans are destined to spread their empire and thus rule the world by controlling the precious resources upon which a modern economy is predicated (Hirshleifer, 2001; Morris, 2013).

Even at a domestic or micro level, conflict theory can be used to explain interactions between groups or individuals. A laborer in an industry may work, for instance, for very low wages while the company for which he works benefits substantially from his labor. The executives at the top of the company get paid millions while the laborer gets paid far less and even struggles to pay all his bills and support a family. The executives incentivize the worker by offering some form of health insurance, but even this is costly and the worker is further oppressed by the fact that costs are rising in everything—from housing to health care to education to food to transportation. Meanwhile his wages stagnate. The worker begins to resent his employers and the executives who refuse to share the rewards of his labor in a way that is fair to the workers. As a result, a conflict of wills develop: on the…