75%(4)3 out of 4 people found this document helpful
This preview shows page 50 - 54 out of 95 pages.
The conflict amongst classes is always between people in the imperatively coordinated association.These people are struggling over authority, to recognize or protect and enhance their particular interest.Institutionalization of class conflict
oIn marxs view would always result in violence, but Dahrendorfs sees things different he points to the instutuilzation of class conflict, by this he means that class conflict is regulated by institutions. And since its regulated by institution any social change that emerges is reformist is not revolutionary.oIn the economic sphere the instituationzation of class conflict is illustrated by unionization and collective bargaining ( as representatives of labour and management meet to try to work out their differences) they both meet and try to meet an agreement) this is what he means by reformists not revolutionary. oIn the legal/political sphere of the state,, the institutionalization of class conflict is illustrated by the settlements of grievances through the courts and the negoations of policy and legislation through parliamentoThe conflict is contained through an institutional setting.oDahrendorfs sees social conflict is a force for social change, but he sees social conflict as something other than a force social. Sees it as a way to resolving problem and thereby restoring social order. In some ways he’s taking up the points of structural functionalismCriticism of DahrendorfsCriticism of his definition of classesoSees classes as different groups in associations.oThis means that there is a limitless number of class in societyoThis renders the concept of class useless we really need to identify a small number of classes for the concept of class to be usefulCriticism of his approach to poweroSaw every imperatively association as having a dicthomy of positions between those who excerice authority and those who are controlled by authority.oCritics have argued that this dichotomy of position is to simplistic. You cant divide up organization in society this way because they are far more complex.oSome example of the problem the complex system of power in a modern cooperation cannot be reduced to dichotomous relations since it comprisses owners, top exectuces etc don’t know where to draw the line
oExample: many countires , including Canada and great Britain, have multi-part political systems rather than a dichtomous political system like the united states.
04/08/2014Theoretical ideas of C wright millsPublicMany people are expressing opinion and many people are receiving opinion Communication is organized in a way that people can respond to info being received such as a town hall meetingOpinion that are formed within these publics do provide the basis for political action. People can respondMassPeople aren’t really expressing opinion, they are just receiving opinion especially through the mass media