Carl Cuneo's Notes and Outline of

Ralf Dahendorf, Class and Class Conflict in Industrial Society

Sociology 2R3, Theories of Class and Stratification

(same text as LearnLink, except that this weg version has some graphics which could not be reproduced in LearnLink)

Integration vs Coercion Theory

(Click Here to see Important Chart Comparing these theories)

Question: how do societies cohere?

Answer:
• A. Integration: consensus of values
• B. Coercion: force, constraint, superordination of some, subordination of others

Two Theories fundamental in sociology - descendant of:

• Utopian (integration)
  • Representative example:
    • Integration= Parsons
• Rationalist (Coercion)
  • Representative example:
    • Coercion=Marx
• Both Theories Necessary

Power and Authority

Power: "the probability that one actor in a social relationship will be in a position to carry out his (sic) will, despite resistance, regardless of the basis on which this probability is based"

Authority: "the probability that a command with a given specific content will be obeyed by a given group of persons"

Power: tied to personality of individuals

Authority: tied to social positions or roles

Can you think of an example of: power? authority?

Example: A demogogue has power over the masses, but the officer has authority over his men, because it exists as an expectation independent of the specific person occupying the position of officer.

Authority: Components

1. Super- and Sub-ordination: authority relations always between these two
2. Expectation of control: superordinant expected to issue commands, warnings, prohibitions, orders to subordinant
3. Legitimacy rests in social positions (not character of individuals); this is what makes authority legitimate
4. Spheres of control: e.g. manager has authority over worker in plant, but not in his home or personal life
5. Sanctions: non-compliance with authority can be sanctioned = function of legal system (e.g. jail, fines, capital punishment) Question: can sanctions be applied for failure to follow power directives?
6. Domination: "endowed with authority"; "participating in the exercise of authority"
7. Subjection: "deprived of authority"; "excluded from the exercise of authority"

Imperatively-Coordinated Associations:

"Associations characterized by authority relations within them"

Examples:

• state
• church
• voluntary associations (Kiwanis, Lion's club)
• political parties
• trade unions
• chess club
• corporation

Zero-Sum; Dichotomy

Zero-Sum: one group has authority to extent another group does not have authority; implies ->

Dichotomy: authority not hierarchy, but sharp line drawn in each imperatively coordinated association between those with and those without authority (but not so in general society - why?)

Example of Dichotomous Authority Split (McMaster University)

(NB: Please see chart)

Dahrendorf's Answer:

Same person may have authority in one sphere but not in another sphere (e.g. Jean Cretian may have authority in Canadian political system, but not in Quebec political system)

Quebec and Canadian political systems are two imperatively coordinated associations

Latent and Manifest Interests

1. Interests: "structurally generated orientations of the actions of incumbents of defined positions" - not a psychological phenomenon
2. Latent interests: = role interests = undercurrents of behaviour of incumbents of positions predetermined for them by virtue of holding the positions, and independent of their conscious orientations
3. Manifest Interests: when latent interests become conscious, they are called 'manifest' Note: Marx's 'false consciousness' = manifest interests not corresponding to latent interests?
4. Two Opposed Interests:
   • Those With Authority: Maintain status quo
   • Those Without Authority: Change status quo
5. Exists in every imperatively coordinated association

Quasi vs Interest Groups

(NB: Please see chart )

1. Quasi Groups:

§ aggregate of persons with no recognizable structure

§ members have certain interests in common, which may lead them to form interest groups

2. Interest Groups:

§ have in common behaviour, structure, goals, etc.

§ real groups formed out of quasi-groups

§ quasi-groups are necessary, but not sufficient, condition for formation of interest groups

3 Intervening Structural Conditions

1. Technical Conditions of Organization:

• charter, ideology, or program stating manifest goals
• leadership personnel
• specific norms
• material resources
• regular activities

2. Political Conditions of Organization: Political conditions must exist to allow the emergence of interest groups

• freedom of association;
• lack of a totalitarian police force to suppress its possible emergence

3. Social Conditions of Organization

• Communications must be feasible among members
• Non-random recruitment (in order to form basis of common interests - e.g. ethnicity, gender, wage-labour, ownership of property, etc)

Conflict

Exists between those with authority and those without authority

Why?

Contradictory Authority Interests:

1. Dominant: those with authority seek to maintain status quo
2. Subordinant: those without authority seek to change status quo

Group Conflict:

Conflict over legitimacy of authority relations

a. Ruling group interests: maintaining ideology of legitimacy of its own rule

b. Subordinate group interests: to contest that legitimacy

Class Conflict Defined:

"Class signifies conflict groups that are generated by the differential distribution of authority in imperatively coordinated associations" (Dahrendorf, p. 204)

In a Nutshell: Marx, Weber, Dahrendorf on Class

§ Marx: Production relations: ownership vs non-ownership of means of production

§ Weber: Market relations: interests in marketability of goods & services

§ Dahrendorf: Authority relations: interests in maintaining vs undermining authority

Variability of Conflict

1. Intensity:
   1. energy expenditures
   2. degree of involvement
   3. varies from high to low:
      • high: costs of victory or defeat high; e.g. societal class conflict involves total personalities of society's members
      • low: chess club: involves only part of members' personalities; costs of victory, defeat low
2. Violence: - use of weapons (click to fire gun)
   1. Low: peaceful discussions
   2. High: wars
3. Contexts (superimposition vs pluralism)
   1. Convergence of conflict groups between associations (church, state, industry)
   2. Little convergence: those holding authority in one association do not hold authority in other associations
4. Types (superimposition vs pluralism)
   1. Convergence between types of conflict (religious, class, ethnic conflicts all converge, are superimposed on one another) -> increases intensity but not violence of conflict
   2. little convergence among class, religious, ethnic conflict
5. Class vs Stratification (superimposition vs pluralism)
   1. High Correlation: those with authority own property, have high status, high incomes, etc. -> increases violence & intensity of conflict
   2. Low Correlation: having authority, property, status, incomes independent of one another
6. Mobility and Open vs Closed classes
   1. High mobility and open classes decreases intensity of class conflict
   2. Low mobility and closed classes increases inensity of class conflict

Regulation of Class Conflict: Definition

1. Control expressions of conflict (e.g. degree of violence);
2. Do not control causes of conflict; assumes continued existence of causes (oppositions between authority holders and those subject to authority)

Regulation of Class Conflict: 3 Assumptions:

1. Parties must recognize the conflict as inevitable outgrowth of authority relations and the interest groups they generate
2. Parties must be organized groups, not unorganized aggregates difficult to regulate (e.g. guerrilla groups)
3. Rules: parties must agree to rules under which conflict takes place; rules
   • protect survival of both parties
   • reduce potential injury to each party
   • introduce some predictability into action of each party
   • protect third parties from undue harm

Three Forms of Conflict Regulation

1. Conciliation: parties autonomously come together to discuss dispute
2. Mediation: 3rd party is called in to give advice which may or may not be taken
3. Arbitration: 3rd party forced into dispute at particular stage, and its decision is binding (Note: 1 and 2 more successful than 3 in reducing violence of conflict)

Conflict May Produce 2 Changes:

1. Exchange of Dominant Personnel
   • Complete exchange of personnel: revolutionary and sudden
   • Partial exchange of personnel: evolutionary (e.g. opposition party in elections replaces former majority party)
   • No exchange of personnel: stagnant; dominant group absorbs, coopts subordinate group and its interests
2. Values and institutions of imperatively coordinated associations

Two Propositions about Effect of Conflict on Change:

1. The more violent the class conflict, the more sudden the complete exchange of personnel in dominant positions
2. The more intense the class conflict, the more radical the change in the values and institutions of imperatively coordinated associations

Two Empirical Applications of Theory

• I. Industrial Enterprises and Conflict
• II. Political State and Conflict

I. Industrial Conflict

Industrial enterprise =

§ imperatively coordinated association

§ relations of authority

§ dichotomous split between dominant and subordinate

§ quasi-groups of capital (management) and labour

§ interest groups of business associations and trade unions

Real Issues in Industrial Conflict

§ Wages and working conditions not real issue in conflict

§ Relatons of authority, industrial democracy = real issue in conflict

6 Elements of Industrial Conflict

1. Interest group formation = first step to industrial democracy; ie, organization of business associations (interest group) out of quasi-group of capital and management, and organization of trade unions (interest groups) out of labour reduces intensity and violence of industrial class conflict
2. Collective bargaining & quasi-parliamentary forums for meetings to resolve conflicts = 2nd step to industrial democracy; reduces violence, though not intensity, of conflict
3. Conciliation -> Mediation -> Arbitration:whether they reduce violence of class conflict depends on extent to which parties view them legitimate
4. Shop Councillors: participation of trade union representatives in authority structure of enterprise (e.g. sitting on occupational health and safety committees)¬effect on violence & intensity of conflict ambiguous
5. Co-Determination: worker is appointed to executive board of directors of enterprise to participate in its policy decisions; will not likely reduce violence and intensity of class conflict because it denies underlying causes of conflict in antagon
6. Institutional Isolation of Industrial and Political Class Conflict Reduces Violence & Instensity of Industrial Conflict:

• Political power holders not same as industrial power holders
• Type of industrial conflict (industrial democracy) different from type of political conflict (elections)

II. Political Class Conflict

1. State = imperatively coordinated association with monopoly of authority over citizens in specific territory (Weber)
2. quasi groups of:
   • a. citizens without authority
   • b. government (executive, legislative, judicial branches, plus administration) with authority
3. Classes and class conflict exists in state
4. Ruling class =
   • government elite (heads of executive, legislative, judicial branches)
   • administrative elite (heads of civil service)
   • political interest, lobbying groups
5. Democratic regimes: elections allow subordinant class to assume position of authority on winning vote
6. Totalitarian regimes: purges, mandatory indoctrination
7. Less intense and violent in democratic regimes because conflict groups and interests are pluralistic in democratic regimes, but superimposed in totalitarian regimes (e.g. industrial, intellectual, military and political elites overlapping)

Subjective Class Views of Integration & Coercion Theories

I. Dominant Class = adopts integration theory: views society as hierarchical in order to deny sharp dichotomous class antagonisms

II. Subordinant Class = adopts coercion theory: views society as dichotomous in order to emphasize the difference between their interests and the dominant group

Questions on Dahrendorf

© Copyright. All rights reserved. Carl Cuneo, Sociology, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. L8S 4M4 Cuneo@mcmaster.ca