Guro Lauvland Bjorknes.pdf - NMMU

2.5.3 Conflict
Bradshaw (2007) notes that conflict is an important topic for every single one of the social
sciences, and has given rise to a number of theoretical understandings of conflict. “There is no
general theory of social conflict” (2007:42); however, they all add to the understanding of the
phenomenon. Some approaches to explain social conflict may be seen as belonging to the
psychological paradigm; however, they cannot be seen as exclusive to that approach. Basic
human needs theory is a social conflict theory which derives from psychology theories
(Bradshaw, 2007:42 and 45). Mark Anstey in Managing Change, Negotiating Conflict (2006:3)
describes conflict to be about change, and states that in every institution or organisation there
will be interests of a conflicting nature. Workers might demand better salaries or working
conditions, and countries might want greater territories or reclaim land that might once have
been taken away from them. We might not even be aware of our participation in the social
processes where we strive to maintain or improve our needs and interests. Rabie (1994:1) wrote
that everyone participates in cooperating or competing relationships on an individual or group
level which is all part of a social dynamic that is constantly changing. Rabie maintains that the
social dynamics cause an alteration in power relations which leads to conflict, and the effects of
inter-group conflicts can lead to structural violence if not dealt with. He brings in Johan
Galtung‟s theory of structural violence where a social structure suppresses a group and deprives
them of opportunities of fulfilling their goals. However, there are not always violent clashes in
these social structures so the term „structural injustice‟ is a more correct description of the
dynamic (Rabie, 1994:1-2).
Himes‟s (1980:14) contribution was the theory of conflict as a struggle for scarce resources
where opponents use social power to conquer each other. Himes‟s emphasis on collective actors
in dispute in a social structure has been criticised by Anstey (2006:5-6) who argues that the
theory lacks an understanding of the conflicts that appear at interpersonal and intra-individual
levels. Coser, as Himes, (cited in Horowitz, 1985:95) also saw the importance of overcoming
the opponents as a way to deal with conflict and he argued for rewards in conflict while at the
same time trying to defeat opponents.
36