Explain the consensus versus conflict debate.
Post Merge: 12 years ago
Locke believed that people were created by God to be free, equal, independent, and with inherent inalienable rights to life, liberty, and property—and the right of self-protection against those who would infringe on these liberties. In Locke’s view, although most people were good, some would be likely to prey on their fellows, who in turn would constantly have to be on guard against such evildoers. Therefore, people formed governments and surrendered their right of self-protection in exchange for government’s protection of their lives, property, and liberty. Governments thus give protection and receive loyalty and obedience in return. Under the social contract theory, Thomas Hobbes argued that all people were essentially irrational and selfish, with just enough rationality to recognize their situation and to come together to form governments for self-protection. Therefore, they existed in a state of consensus with their governments. Jean-Jacques Rousseau, conversely, argued that “Man is born free, but everywhere he is in chains.” Rousseau associated this loss of freedom with the development of private property and the unequal distribution of resources, and described conflict between the ruling group and the other groups in society. Thus, the primary difference between the consensus and conflict theorists concerns their evaluation of the legitimacy of the actions of ruling groups in contemporary societies. Locke saw those actions as consistent with natural law, describing societies as consensual and arguing that any conflict was illegitimate and could be repressed by force and other means. Rousseau evaluated the actions of ruling groups as irrational and selfish, creating conflicts among the various groups in society. The consensus model assumes that all parts of the system work toward a common goal. The conflict model, holding that agency interests tend to make actors within the system self-serving, provides the other approach. This view notes the pressures for success, promotion, and general accountability, which together result in fragmented efforts of the system as a whole, leading to a criminal justice nonsystem.
Quick Reply
