Question

Can you Discuss and explain Randall Collins’ Conflict Sociology theory?

Answer 1

Conflict theory refers to competing interests present in society. Conflict theorists believe in struggle for resources between groups.According to Conflict theorists, Conflict theory can appear in many different forms E.g., Capitalism, Structural Functionalism

Randal Collins formulated his Theory of Conflicts based on the works of Weber, Carl Marx and Durkheim. Most conflict theories are oriented toward the macro-level. Stratification is generally understood as operating through oppressive structures that limit access and and power is conceived of as working coercively through the control of material resources and methods of social control Randall Collins wanted to take a micro-level direction, and especially wanted to touch on stratification and organization. It was Collins who lets us know that the conflict around stratified resources has a strong symbolic character. According to Collins Resources aren’t simply material. Collins also attunes us to a different side of conflict. Conflict doesn’t just happen between warring factions. He said that Conflict is dependent upon and occurs in subtle forms within the realm of face to-face interactions and rituals. Collins also sensitizes us to a different mode of conflict.

Four Main Points of Conflict Theory are:

1. The unequal distribution of each scarce resource produces potential conflict between those who control it and those who don’t.

2. Potential conflicts become actual conflicts to the degree that opposing groups become mobilized.

There are at least two main areas of mobilization: The first is emotional, moral, and symbolic mobilization. The prime ingredient here is collective rituals. This is one of Collins’s main contributions to conflict theory.

The second main area for mobilization concerns the material resources for organizing. Material mobilization includes such things as communication and transportation technologies, material and monetary supplies to sustain the members while in conflict

3. Conflict engenders subsequent conflict. In order to activate a potential conflict, parties must have some sense of moral rightness. Groups have a difficult time waging war simply on utilitarian grounds. We have to have some sense of moral superiority, some reason that extends beyond the control of oil or other material good. As a result, conflicts that are highly mobilized tend to have parties that engage in the “ritualized exchange of atrocities.” This is, as Collins says, the negative face of social solidarity.

4. Conflicts diminish as resources for mobilization are used up.Just as there are two main areas of conflict mobilization; there are two fronts where demobilization occurs. For intense conflicts, emotional resources tend to be important in the short-run, but in the long-run material resources are the key factors. Many times the outcome of a war is determined by the relative balance of resources. Collins gives us two corollaries. One, milder forms of conflict tend to go on for longer periods of time than more intense ones. Fewer resources are used and they are more easily renewed. This is one reason why terrorism and guerilla warfare tend to go on almost indefinitely. Civil rights and relatively peaceful political movements can be carried out for extended periods as well. Two, relatively mild forms of conflict tend to deescalate due to bureaucratization.