Structural Functionalism And Racial Inequality

In analyzing sociological issues such as sexism, racial inequality, and economic disparity, differences in viewpoints have been the origin of three major theories in the field. Structural functionalism, conflict theory, and symbolic interactionism seek to explain respectively, the function, consequences, and origin of sociological issues, for example, racial inequality (Ferris Stein 22-33). Though these three major theories offer answers to different questions on this topic, it does not mean these theories are complete or indisputable, especially because the complexity and natural evolution of societies forces us to review our theories periodically. Émile Durkheim proposed structural functionalism in the late 1800s. He placed emphasis on maintaining

In fact, Karl Marx, when he proposed the ideas that would make up conflict theory in the Nineteenth Century, took an even more radical approach. Based on his analysis, he concluded that the oppression of the majority over the minority would eventually be so unbearable, that the minority would have no choice but to demand change through conflict. In this way, he predicted that the changing of the social order would be not only necessary, but unavoidable (Ferris and Stein 24-26). Events such as the American Civil War and the Civil Rights Movements, both of which arguably resulted in a lesser degree of oppression of the African American community, support the idea that when a minority group realizes their oppression on a large scale, it leads to social change, through a conflict. However, all-out conflict between the groups themselves (blacks vs. whites) does not always need to occur. This is because not all of the people in the dominant group are oppressive, but instead, understand the importance of fighting the injustice along with the disadvantaged group. Both William Lloyd Garrison, founder of The Liberator, and the American Anti-Slavery Society ("Black History: William Lloyd Garrison."), and John Brown, radical abolitionist (Harris), were essential to the abolition of slavery in the United States in the mid-1800s. In a way, they and people like them, though part of the dominant group, saw the interests of the African-American abolitionists as their own and no conflict was needed to make them demand social change as well. In my opinion, this is evidence that Marx did not account for how much people in the dominant group could also value human rights and justice over the status quo. These are also the values that led whites to join the Civil Rights Movement. Both the 1963 March on Washington and the 1964 Marches from Selma to Montgomery had some non-Black participation (an estimated 20% in the former) ("The