The Concept Of Conflict Theory By Karl Marx

The concept of Conflict Theory has largely been in tandem to Karl Marx’s essay, Wage-Labor and Capital (1846). A house may be large or small; as long as the neighboring houses are likewise small. . . But let there arise next to the little house a palace, and the little house shrinks to a hut… the occupant of the relatively little house will always find himself more uncomfortable, more dissatisfied, more cramped within his four walls. Through this piece of text, alongside many others where he shares his fervent views on Capitalism, Karl Marx highlights the inevitability of conflict in society as a result of its hierarchal tendencies. It is an unfortunate reality today that in order to maintain what Man deems as “balance”, there will always serve to be someone better, worse, richer or poorer. However, this seemingly harmless cycle becomes detrimental to when the less fortunate and the marginalized are exploited, thus subsequently leading to the presence of both the oppressor and oppressed, the served and the servant. This is exactly why Karl Marx had a vision of an idealized world where people would begin and end on the very same pedestal; complete equals, and consequentially eradicate any need for comparison or inequality.

An article by The Straits Times (2018) recently highlighted this very ugliness of society. An admin staff from a maid agency was charged in court for having used Carousell, a local online Amazon-esque platform, to “sell” maids to families. The “lucky” few who did end up getting picked up by new families had the luxury of receiving a scarlet “SOLD” tag. This situation oddly reminisces that of children bickering over which pet they would choose to bring home. Many of these young helpers, who potentially would not have been treated with such disrespect back home, must have felt entirely humiliated. Yet, in order to ensure a livelihood and future, they were rendered completely helpless and at the mercy of their oppressors. It is easy to dismiss Karl Marx’s Conflict Theory as nonsensical and mere philosophical dogma- this is exactly what Leszek Kolakowski (1978) publicly expressed multiple times. However, with prevalent and exploitational embodiments of boss-employee relationships such as the one mentioned above, Marx’s incessant striving for an equal utopian world can be better understood. Karl Marx himself was not only an extremely charismatic leader, but also a brilliant orator. He understood that in order to enact significant social change, the upheaval had to begin from the oppressed. The Communist Manifesto (1888) shows exactly how he aimed to garner the support of the people. One of his famous rallying speeches, “Workingmen of all countries unite! You have nothing to lose but your chains!” has remained to be one of the most influential sayings in modern day history. Yet, it can be pondered upon why Marxism has perpetually failed to implement itself between the walls of social class and segregation.

When discussing the failure of Marxism, Class Consciousness, as studied by Georg Lukacs (1920), is an interesting factor that must be mentioned. The bourgeoisie and the proletariat have a mutually beneficial relationship, albeit the benefits skewing significantly in favor that of the former. It was found that the proletariat wholly understood the demands that were expected of them, and acknowledged their lesser status for immediate protection and financial security. Much like the aforementioned article, it is unlikely that any of the helpers would have been brave enough to stand up to a greater person; the same person who had their futures resting in the palm of her hand. The sparking dregs of a revolution requires much sacrifice and risk to grow into a blazing fire. And the effects of it, if unsuccessful, will live to weigh down its leaders the very same way the dire consequences of the Russian Revolution have amounted to our moral inability to confidently call it a Triumph.

Marx failed to consider the fact that authorities would be able to pinpoint and agree on the very same problems he had identified as leading to a society’s eventual demise. The gaps are perpetually being bridged, and the marginalized are increasingly protected without having had to implement Marx’s extremist views of revolutions and overthrowing. The rights of these people are better fortified now than could have ever been imagined in the 1800s. For instance, maids today have seen a 25% increase in their average wages as compared to just a mere year ago, and society no longer stands as silent at acts of disrespect and indecency. Authorities are now swifter to punish regardless of class- as seen in how the agency was promptly fined, had its license suspended, and the perpetrators at risk of facing jail time. Relative to the news article mentioned above, it is comforting to know that situations like those do not occur all too often. In fact, the failure of Marx’s communist approach has better allowed the marginalized to branch out, find work, and make a better living for themselves. This would not be the case in a Marxist society; where merit is obsolete, and there is no incentive for people to improve or strive to achieve personal fulfillment. This could effectively cause a complete societal and economic shut down where no one individual is willing to work. This potential consequence is likely even more significant of a problem than the Conflict Theory could ever pose.

Perhaps it is to be said that Karl Marx simply undermined the progress of society and the very extent of its self-awareness. He failed to account for the vastly growing diversity of labor alongside a mostly effective dispersion of wealth amongst the members of an industrial society. His predicted inability for society to function under any non-communist rule thus no longer holds true, for there have also been greater efforts to ensure that all members of society are better represented today.