A Brief Reading of 'The Theory of Cost' Part One: 'Competition and Conflict Denial'

This article is part of a series of brief readings on 'The Theory of Cost'. Initially, I intended to write it all in one article, but later realized that the author's language is very concise. Omitting too much would harm the essence, while omitting too little would make it overly lengthy, so I decided to split it into multiple articles. The author of 'The Theory of Cost' is Professor Zheng Yefu, and the first edition of this book was published in 1997. It truly feels like a case of meeting too late. Douban Book Link

Market competition leads to unemployment and business closures, while college entrance examinations result in failures and the phenomenon of 'exam studies', which have almost no utility outside of exams. However, competition also has its positive side; it is an important driving force for companies to continuously produce higher quality products and innovate. Japan's college entrance examination is the most rigorous, and the cost of this has been the leap in Japan's education and technology. Even if college entrance exams were abolished, competition for university admission would still be fierce, and even without a market, the struggle for material benefits would persist. What is abolished is merely a certain rule of competition; competition itself transforms and continues to exist in the form of relational studies. Yet, the cost of this form of competition may not be less than the costs associated with markets and exams. Not to mention that this form of competition fundamentally cannot upgrade industries or improve educational levels. It is a cost without gain.

Conflict is different from competition; competition occurs under certain clear rules and norms. Most competitors strive to develop themselves, making themselves more adaptable to the rules and environment, ultimately winning survival or victory. Conflict, on the other hand, is more intense; it seeks to break old rules to change its own status or replace a certain group's position.

The costs of conflict are self-evident, but people often overlook the positive side of conflict. In some cases, conflict can be constructive. First, people must acknowledge the conflicts between different interest groups, especially between the rulers and the ruled; one must first recognize that there is a conflict and cannot ignore it. Secondly, society must allow interest groups to organize and fight for their rights. Otherwise, merely categorizing a group of people as an interest group conceptually does not constitute a real interest group; it can only be considered a 'quasi-group'. The conflicts of quasi-groups often manifest as a sense of dissatisfaction, lacking clear goals and organized action. When dissatisfaction is not vented, it accumulates and can easily erupt. When and where it erupts depends on the ignition of a fuse, a call from a signal. The signals can be of two types: artificial signals and natural signals. Artificial signals are those that someone consciously orchestrates. Natural signals—such as a holiday, a memorial day, a symbolic date, a certain event, or the death of someone—can easily summon millions and cause turmoil. Movements triggered by natural signals are the least ideal form of conflict. They suddenly descend upon society, stunning both the social rulers and the dissatisfied individuals. No one can control it, whether they are the social authorities or the protesters. Everyone must allow the rampant emotions to overflow. In contrast, movements triggered by artificial signals tend to have more rationality, goals, planning, and organization. Compared to the latter, it is believed that interest groups that are called forth and have some preliminary organization are more likely to bring about positive outcomes for social regulation than the chaotic crowds gathered by natural signals.

Conflict exists in every era and society. Dahrendorf believes that the progress of modern industrial society lies in its ability to clarify and institutionalize potential conflicts, providing a set of regulatory mechanisms for these conflicts, and striving to transform conflicts within social organizations into socially meaningful changes. The belief that conflicts can be fundamentally resolved and eliminated, and that the interests of rulers and the ruled can reach consensus, is merely a utopian dream. It attempts to cover up conflicts and deprive the ruled of their rights to fight for their interests, ultimately causing society to lose the possibility of regulating conflicts and improving structures, leading to social regression.

In summary, competition and conflict can be both great motivators and significant disasters.