izing power. It is important to note that the actual end of conflict in war is not exactly the same as the end of hate or animosity. However, Simmel gives the example of a war between the Lombards and the Italians, with the Lombards conquering Italy. That did not stop the Italians from hating the Lombards. However, that also forced the Lombards to get very involved in Italian society. The ultimate result was "an undeniable convergence of interests" (Simmel, 1908, p. 82). Simmel does not explain that idea in very much detail. However, if this convergence of interests is interpreted as forcing the Lombards and Italians into working out the limits of social rules, then it can be seen that the conflict of war was responsible for creating the conditions for reorganizing society.
Even when the conflict of war operates in a destructive way, that does not mean it is not affecting the social organization in the environment where it operates. For example, wars that result in one party making slaves out of the other party may be seen as destructive. That does not mean that conflict is not right in the middle of organizing society. Instead, it is organizing society very efficiently. The war of conquest has organized a slaveholding society. This may be unjust, but that does not mean that conflict is not present in shaping society. Also, Simmel says that this "sociological condition" can lead to "its own attenuation," or weakening (Simmel, 1908, p. 82).
Simmel's theory of conflict is connected to the recent Iraq War because it shows in various ways how conflict can organize society. Three global societies were affected by the Iraq War: Iraq itself, the countries of the US-led coalition, and the countries that opposed the coalition. Conflict organized each of these three societies in different ways.
In Iraq, conflict affected the society by exposing the divisions of opinion in that country. With Saddam Hussein in power, there was no official ...