UnConflict Theory

As I read about Marx I realize that he had many genius ideas and with Engels the two were a philosophical force to be reckoned with. Like many sociologists he wasn’t quite on target with his predictions. Although I agree that some form of communism or socialism will eventually replace capitalism he failed to see the extent that capitalism would come to dominate this planet and become so corrosive in its environmental and social devastation. Another one of his philosophies that I think is incorrect is that of conflict theory. In ancient times the only way for social change was through bloody violent and irreprehensible violence that at times completely annihilated groups of people. I am a strong antagonist of conflict theory, rather I am a believer in peaceful movements and I believe that the only type of social change that is permanent is that of peaceful origins, women’s right, civil rights and such weren’t accomplished through blood shed and shouldn’t be. Gandhi freed India through peaceful means, Martin Luther King made massive progression through peaceful means and the women’s rights movement wasn’t done though masses of women disavowing themselves from their husbands who where vehicles of oppression and going on masculine killing sprees, rather peaceful demonstrations were the means by which women were allowed to vote and progress their rights as individuals. I believe that when a society comes to a place of enlightenment that the most powerful, most formidable means of true and comprehensive change is that of the people peacefully enforcing the new social standard. This is a process that must start with an enlightenment period where literature, including articles, books, movies, music and the like are freely distributed to the people so they can see that a social movement is necessary. Then that group of people can get together and peacefully boycott their movement. At times the greedy will want to force people into submission through violent means and in those cases physical defense should be a last resort. Global pacifism needs to be the political priority whilst creating these peaceful movements of progression. True social change in our modern world cannot take place through violence; the old forces of habit will eventually reinstate themselves and slowly revert to the old system before the violence. Look at Iraq for example the country was invaded and over 600,000 Iraqi civilians were killed in the ensuing bloody crusade to enlist democracy. Although I am in favor of democracy in opposition to their form of government I would rather the people be the ones through peaceful means liberate themselves, because as we are seeing in Afghanistan and Iraq the old system is slowly reenlisting itself. I wouldn’t debate that some powerful change has taken place in those country’s but a much more powerful movement is taking place in Libya and other Islamic countries because they are making the choice for change. The same concept can be applied to simple human psychology in that the dependent addict cannot be freed of their addiction through parents enablement, the addict must see the need for change themselves, and make that individual inspired action to change. And so too must the people under any of the array of humanities oppressive institutions. Freedom, that all elusive and nebulous concept, must be in the mind and heart of the individual and collectively of the people, before it can be embraced or even felt.