Describe Marx's Social Conflicts Theory Of Change (Coursework Sample)

Name
Instructor
Course
Date
Marx’s Social Conflicts Theory of Change
Conflict theory, as postulated by Marx, influences most of the societal changes, especially the variation of class organizations as their interests differ and as they compete for contradicting objectives. This personal interest’s nature of people prompted them to behave in manners that are intended to protect their interests without caring where the self-protection measures interfere with other people’s interests. The other people would be another social class. The created conflict between these two classes leads to changes in the two groups as they try to adapt and get to a neutral point that they can coexist without offending the other. Most often, the change demands sacrifice as the opposing groups try to find a neutral ground.
SOCIAL CONFLICTS AS THE DRIVERS OF SOCIETAL CHANGE
The structural conflict perspectives embark on societal institutions such as education, law, and wealth, to classify people into groups that are made up of varying achievements of these measures. The subjects of these institutions are often abused by the people who dominate and make policies that govern these systems (Tucker 33). Apparently, people think that having established a stable government system is the end game; however, in the real sense, the dynamic nature of economic and political activities leads to a constant need for revision of regulatory systems. Apparently, leaders have to be watched carefully and revoked when they do not perform. Equally, the constitution may require changes using bills, as is the case in America so that conflicting issues are solved using new rules that change the code of conduct (Tocqueville 280).
As the classes develop, the two groups that are created by the classes get to the extreme ends. For instance, the concept of self-interest indicates that the poor languish in poverty while the rich amass more wealth. The difference between these two groups creates a conflict between the two groups, in that while the poor demand for critical survival needs, the rich yearn for more wealth. In New England, the conflict between the people and the monarchs begets an independent judicial system that is not answerable to any of the two institutions. Evidently, the people fear the abuse of power by the monarchs while the monarch fears the abuse of power by the public (Tocqueville 329).
Within Germany, the rise of classes is related to the bourgeois class that promoted a capitalistic system with emphasis on production and market. This class was exploiting the people in the industries, while the poor were regularly explained by the newly developed class of wealthy people. As a result, Marx referred to this concept as “parochial narrowness” as it considered the development of the society as the development of the rich, with oversight to the welfare of the poor who progressively developed changes that would see their strife end (Tucker 148). The concept of self-interest is enhanced by the developing themes of species, uniqueness, and self-consciousness. In context to human nature, these characters are just but fallacies that were created by the wealthy, in order to segregate themselves from the poor in the society.
The development of Manchester, which originally, was a swamp, has been as a result of many industries which have been set in place. As Marx and Engel argue out, the region in England has attained an epic of development as it hosts the top leaders of the nation who contest for economic prosperity. The leaders are interested in retaining their wealth by creating more wealth using the industries. The industrial development in this belt of England has been translated to competition, a concept that is common in competition phenomenon (Tucker 170).
The development of resources among humans can be related to the individual’s ability to utilize the resources around them in a way that the resources create value to people. As a result, the extent of making value is directly related to human consciousness, a concept that the two authors, Marx and Engel support, as they account for development in Europe (Tucker 173). However, this development and human consciousness lead to a perception of self-interest that is engendered towards further personal growth. Evidently, the concept of changing cultures has resulted in changing from communal resources that are tribal-owned to private property. Further advancement leads to exploitation of fellow humans in order to gain more wealth, a concept that leads to a capitalistic division of labor.
As the workers come to realize that they are being oppressed and exploited. Labor organizations are formed with a motive of protesting the oppressive nature of their employers and demanding for improved working conditions and returns. This conflict between the employers and the employed have been iterated by Marx and Engel as they contend that no matter how much the employers make working commensurate to the worker's consistent antagonism continues to exist across the two groups (Tucker 211).
The end resort for the workers is to develop a network of communication that the workers can use to inform each other and ensure that the working class members are not exploited. Evidently, this brings about class identification and development; as people in one class become united to increase their influence against their enemy. The networking can be likened to the current political parties, as described by Tocqueville (280). Great organizations must be committed to their primary goals, which is mostly to improve the welfare of its members and not well-being of a single group. However, competition and rivalry see parties indulge in morally unacceptable activities as they try to meet their objectives.
In America, the two groups of societies agreed on the principle aim of improving the welfare of the people. Instead of developing chaos, as found in other countries, the policy of popular consent is used. This makes up democracy, as exemplified by America, with suppressed aristocratic agendas within the parties and uses universal suffrage to execute the desires of the people and solve the conflict between the contending political subjects (286, 313).
Tocqueville expresses the importance of communication and informing people as a key determinant of the prosperity of a country. The freedom of the press is a critical factor that determines the extent of information that the citizens of a country can experience. While Marx and Engel acknowledged the role of the labor groups as information avenues that were meant to caution exploited workers, the press sheds light to the citizens on institutions that are oppressing and not abiding by the institutionalized labor, and general welfare laws (Tocqueville 289).
The created labor organizations develop political impact to the society as their influence increases. These organizations create a political environment that can be termed as a superstructure. They can make the laws, states and general human behaviors (Tucker 629). While the labor organizations are made up of the majority of citizens, their influence easily translates to political powers. Evidently, even though not directly, the people rule the country, using their chos...