Indonesia
Social conflict is an ever-present, unavoidable phenomenon in human life, often involving multiple stakeholders with diverging interests. According to Dahrendorf (1959), societal existence is rooted in power struggles. Departing from the Marxist emphasis on economic friction, Dahrendorf argues that conflict is a fundamental aspect of the unequal distribution of power. Within social organizations, authority is rarely shared equitably, sparking tension between the powerful and the disenfranchised. For those lacking influence, life is governed by mandates imposed by those in command. Dahrendorf posits that this conflict is endemic a permanent fixture of organized society.
Conversely, Coakley (1986) offers a different perspective on social dynamics, suggesting that societal order stems from social institutions, norms, and shared cultural values. In this context, sports serve as a vital reflection of that order. Coakley describes sports as an organized competitive arena where individual or group conflicts are mediated by agreed-upon regulations. Within sports, friction occurs within the boundaries of fair play and integrity, embodied in the ethics and morals of sportsmanship.
However, Coakley’s model reveals a profound nuance: order cannot exist without difference or structured competition. In sports, for instance, parties compete to outmaneuver one another within a framework of clear rules, overseen by referees who ensure impartial enforcement. This demonstrates that despite inherent conflict, order can be achieved if a robust structure governs the struggle itself.
Read also: Beyond Claims of Coexistence: What Is Forgotten in Indonesia?
In a basketball game, for example, while teams compete intensely to win, they must operate within strict regulatory bounds. Violations result in immediate penalties. This distinguishes structured sports competition from chaotic social conflict, where clear rules and impartial “referees” are often absent. In politics, as F.G. Bailey (1969) notes, political processes are essentially group competitions for status or power. Like sports, these rivalries require fair play to ensure competition remains civilized rather than devolving into anarchy.
Social conflicts frequently erupt due to perceived injustices in the fulfillment of interests. Dahrendorf argues that every entity seeks to satisfy its own needs; when one group’s gain necessitates another’s loss, the potential for conflict ignites. This tension escalates if shared rules are flouted or if one party feels systematically disadvantaged. Conflict can evolve into structured competition through mutual agreement on civilized “rules of the game”; without them, it risks descending into violence.
Consider a community embroiled in a resource dispute. If a dominant party leverages its power to seize resources while ignoring the rights of the vulnerable, conflict is certain. When societal rules are disregarded, the sense of injustice deepens. Disenfranchised groups may develop deep-seated resentment toward the powerful, which can eventually culminate in physical confrontation or widespread violence.
In such volatile conditions, the law and law enforcement agencies play a pivotal role in maintaining stability. However, if the law is applied inconsistently or weaponized to serve specific interests, social conflict becomes inevitable. Biased enforcement erodes public trust in institutional protection, acting as a catalyst for violence. Conversely, impartial legal enforcement ensures that grievances are resolved through civilized mechanisms rather than bloodshed.
Global social conflicts, including those in Indonesia, are frequently rooted in resource competition. When multiple groups vie for limited assets, procedural unfairness breeds hostility. These disputes can become protracted if no impartial mediator exists to resolve the deadlock. In many instances, the stronger party’s tendency to dominate and ignore the rights of the weak serves as the primary trigger for strife.
Read also: A Manifesto for Building Peace: Rethinking Conflict and Resolution in Indonesia
Yet, conflict does not strictly necessitate violence. In the sporting world, despite intense rivalry, fair regulations and the presence of officials keep the competition orderly. Here, disagreements are settled with honor. The same logic applies to politics. A healthy political ecosystem requires transparent, universally recognized rules to ensure fair competition. Without such a framework, politics risks becoming a zero-sum power game that victimizes the weak.
When discussing social conflict, we must recognize it is not merely a clash of interests; it is often rooted in divergent identities and values. In these scenarios, individual identity is frequently subsumed by collective identity. Conflict ceases to be a matter between individuals and becomes a collision of rigid group identities. Individuals are no longer viewed as persons, but as components of a hostile “other.”
This shift is evident in conflicts involving ethnicity, religion, or social class, where group stereotypes dominate the narrative. When individual humanity is disregarded in favor of opposing group labels, violence can spark rapidly, as members feel existential threats from those perceived as enemies.
Read also: Regional Content Creators: Genuine Creativity or the Pursuit of Cheap Virality?
Nevertheless, social conflict is not unsolvable. As demonstrated in sports, structured competition based on equitable rules can de-escalate tensions. Within society, if “rules of engagement” are clear and respected by all, disputes can be settled peacefully. It is imperative for society to realize that conflict should not be resolved through force, but through fair and civilized channels.
In conclusion, conflict is an inescapable element of society. However, our response to it depends entirely on the existence of fair and mutually recognized regulations. Much like sports, order can flourish alongside competition, provided there are clear rules and an impartial “referee” to oversee the process. If the law is upheld with integrity, social conflict can be navigated and resolved without ever resulting in violence.
Author: Imam Alfafan Yakub
