Functionalism Of The Marx Conflict Theory Sociology Essay

Published: Last Edited:

This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.

According to Emile Durkheim and more recently with Talcott Parsons (Marshall 1994: 190-1) functionalism refers to system which interrelated with connection of several elements and each and every one of it has their own purpose of existence. Each elements play significant roles and responsibility to contribute within the system (Anderson and Taylor, 2005). Society had classified into different classes and status from low to high, but functional of duties difficult to verify significance of individual roles in society. Every character in society is essential roles within the system to circulate and they tend to affects each other. Contributions of every job have their own rewards but normally not all are equally paid. For examples, like stars they earn more than ordinary jobs like nurses but it does not represent the nurses are not play significant roles in society. Although nurses have less power and prestige than the stars, their functional position more vital compare to stars.

Karl Marx is the first developer of conflicts theory used the hypothesis to explain about the development and revolution of industrials, he pointed out that emphasis of materialist among the culture of industries. Example like the 19th century of Europe, labour market was primarily control by groups of capitalists who were wealthy with outsized assets. Capitalists overuse their authority towards workers cause exploitation and rise up conflicts between them. At earlier times labours are treated like slave with getting value that lesser than what they have created in production and have no rights to voice up their inequality. Unfair treatment towards the labour show the gaps of power differences between the classes of society, the richest upper class who own the assets and poorest lower class who sell their labour time to.

1.3 Symbolic Interactionism

Sociologists clarify the interactionism theory explain about communication among people within verbally and symbolic in order to share or approach meaning or messages (LaRossa and Reitzes, 1993). Symbolic interactionism enables human using various symbols to interact with others and impart appropriate meaning and messages with common languages (Mead, 1934). Indirectly, symbols and behaviours that individual present are majorly influence by social norms and believe. Each individual have their own specific perspectives and way to behave hence through interaction some symbols may created and develop. Meaning of symbols which attempt to send to others must be correctly connected to particular meaning and words which related in order to help receiver understand clearly and better or otherwise it will lead to misunderstanding and conflicts between each other.

2.0 Early Conflicts Theories â€" Karl Marx

The earliest conflicts theories derived from Second World War period while the capitalists power over whelmed the labour market. Labours been treated as slaves work within the company and treated unfairly. The values that created by labours are more than what they deserve to received and caused exploitation. The earlier conflict theories emphasized more on inequality treatment of labours in industrials and value perceptions of people at earlier time ago (Swingwood, 1975). Capitalists maximize their authority on labour force to maximize production and profits and minimize time consuming. Labours welfare been ignored and status are classified as lower class which groups that always discriminate by society especially upper class capitalists.

In early industrial sectors, Karl Marx allocates the society to two primary classes: Bourgeoisie, the party who own most of the assets such as monetary capitals, machines or factory and virtually monopolize the economy markets and Proletariat, the workers who sell their efforts and contribute to the industries (McAll, 1992).

Due to scarcity resources of society, owners tend to get advantages from others. Capitalists over practice their authority and caused conflicts between classes, hence labours dissatisfaction arise the changes of social system to solve the exploitation problems (Anderson and Taylor, 2006). Karl Marx believes that if the conflicts situation keeps on remaining, the society will overcome the capitalism issues.

After on at 1930, Max Weber, a German sociologist had developed a bureaucratic form which derived from Marxist capitalism theory. Max Weber emphasized the rules and regulation will certify the legitimate power which is the basis of social conflicts (Wesolowski, 1979). He believes that if the legitimate power does not be identify officially it would bring conflicts upon.

Recent System Thinking on Conflicts Theories

Max Weber bureaucracy system is broadly applied by all organizations now or should say as it had become basis element of organizations. The standardize process with rules and regulations assist management system more efficiently to manage labour force and resources. However, systematic process needs to improve to comply with external factors of organizations. According to the rapidly changing environment nowadays it would be challenge for organization to adapt to the various factors of environment.

System can be determine in three degrees whether it is open system or closed system and group into two vital model, entropy which more refers to closed system which movement towards system run down and negentropy which refers to system which movement forward to advance structure (Bailey, 1990). The sociologist Niklas Luhmann (1927-1988) had develop system theory approach to examine the conflicts occur between system of organizations and the environment (Nollman, 2005). Luhmann explain differentiation of system and environment is one of complicate. Environment used to be more complex than system since there are few factors to be considered and try assembling it to adapt with owns culture system of organizations.

Autopoietic system were develop by Luhmann which explained that it taking system like legal system or bureaucracy system as references among others. The system has four characteristic which can used to explain the system nowadays too. Firstly, autopoietic system generates its elements, for example money in economic market. Without the certification of value by market, money will not be valuable and just a paper. Both related and influence each other in the system. Autopoietic system is self-orientated to lay down boundaries and coordinate their organizations structure. The system usually set own limitations and regulations of managing structure of company.

The system of autopoietic is self-reference within the economic system. As example, economic system created value for money and at the same time it considers the market to determine the price. Furthermore, autopoietic is a closed system which means the system does not directly attach with the environment (Esposito, 1996). Groups of people from lower class like labour might not have the ability to join within the system hence it shows that in economic market only involves who are wealthy and able to invest into the market.

Communications are essentials part to solve conflicts. Within the standardize system it might be efficient but not truly effective. Interactions between people are importance to identify and understand each other. Society and psychic system have mutual element, both rely on communication to get the actual meaning of interaction (Ritzer, 2008). Sometimes, different people might using different way to approach others but meaning are not necessary propose, because meaning derived from particular words that been selected. Media nowadays will exercise different ways of sending messages to consumers, but some meaning might be hazy and hidden lead the consumer to the wrong information. This problem been declare by Luhmann and called it as double contingency.

Double contingency discuss about the trouble of communication between parties and considerations of sending the correct messages. Society form by different cultures, norms and religions hence people all have their own believes and behaviour. Message sending by an individual to others might explain in other ways. As long as receiver understand the meaning which related and connected to particular words the information will be correctly present or else conflicts might occur. Luhmann, the first system theorists had develop sociology approach to solve the difficulties that organization facing. System could be adapt to external factors that might bring negative impacts to company. Both system and environment indirectly are interrelated to each others, with absence of one, it either will be hard to stand by its own.

4.0 Communication as on-going struggle

Within system, communication acts an essential role to deliver appropriate information to the public. But not all information allowed to exposes to the society. Hence, this had cause misunderstanding and conflict rises between communication systems because of forbidden objectives or motif. As a lively examples showed will be conflicts between community, media and government. Therefore, government act as the capitalist within the system and media act as intermediaries to send information to society.

Government are the main authority with supervising the society system hence, they monopolise the whole market. For that reason, government had entirely dominated media’s activities and that is where the struggles occur. Media had limitations of rights to deliver information to society. Their delivery information are red tape by government to avoid conflicts arise with the society. The forbidden information of government rises up conflicts as well even without declaration of media despite of every individual are sensitive to aware of any threaten information that will bring negative effects towards them.

From the above, conflicts of society had verified that communication of recent system theory still consist with on-going struggle.

5.0 Comparison of early conflicts and recent conflicts

Comparing the earlier and modern theories of conflicts, we can view that in early time conflicts theories arise because of inequality and division of labours with different classes of society. Power and capitals which monopolize the economy markets and exploit the labours that classify as lower class and get discriminate. Marx and Weber both consent towards the facts of conflicts arises from profit thinking of the capitalists or who with most authority (Henslin, 2002). However the sociologists have their own explanation towards economic order, Marx classifies that early centuries class of society conflicts and capitalists are the elements which monopolize the economic market. Another hand Weber states that power relationships are determined by character of political power and they have their own significant responsibilities. Between these two sociologists conflict theories, Weber conflict theories can enforce social change but Marxist only promote changes of system itself (Cohen, 2000).

Until nowadays, conflicts still arise between owners and labours but for modern conflict theories, but the difference is older days workers struggle for basic survival but workers nowadays struggle for more to authority and job entitlement. The welfare of workers does improve and partly solve struggles among both capital and labour. The capitalist phenomena had over taken by modern system theories but still conflicts maintaining such as the conflicts of challenges towards their job advancement or power. Furthermore, conflicts like discrimination of status and classes still exist between societies.

5.0 Conclusion

Nowadays majorly business are globalise hence organizations have to adapt to the challenging environment which full with new factors like technology. In order to improve efficiency, conflicts are the natural process to be experience and develop social changes. Capitalists who owned more assets are main authority to supervise the labour process yet people might misuse the power for own interests. The unbalance of social life will be still exist and so with conflicts, but both does not appear to be crucial mode like early years. Conflicts are continuous and might difficult to handle, but conflicts had lead organizations to more advanced system and make improvements. Communication between individuals helps improving understanding each other and minimizes the occurrence of conflicts but if the information does not send or approach properly it might cause another troubles and make the circumstances worsen.

(1995) words