4.8: The Emergence of Power-Conflict Theories

The social upheavals of the 1960s exposed the limitations of assimilationist models. Scholars began to argue that racism was intrinsically linked to the development and maintenance of capitalist class systems. Such models drew upon parallels between domestic racial oppression and international colonial systems as an explanation for the persistent subordination of Communities of Color.

While many of his contemporaries explored the social psychology of prejudice, the Trinidadian-American sociologist Oliver Cox, in works like Caste, Class, and Race (1948), presented a radically different argument: that modern racism is not a universal human tendency or a simple product of ignorance, but a deliberate ideology created to justify and maintain the capitalist economic system. Cox fiercely challenged the idea that racial antagonism was similar to ancient caste systems in India, arguing instead that it was a uniquely modern tool of exploitation. He contended that racism emerged alongside European colonialism and capitalism because it provided a convenient and powerful justification for the brutal exploitation of non-white labor. By classifying certain groups as inherently inferior, the capitalist class could rationalize paying them lower wages, denying them rights, and treating them as expendable tools for production, all while maximizing profit.

Cox argued that racism was intrinsically functional for capitalism. It created a divided working class, preventing poor whites and enslaved or low-wage Black laborers from recognizing their shared economic interests and uniting against the capitalist elite. This strategy, often called ‘divide and conquer,’ ensured a stable, cheap labor supply and weakened the potential for worker solidarity and uprising. For example, the ideology of white supremacy offered even the poorest White laborers a privilege that W.E.B Du Bois (1935) referred to as a “public and psychological wage”—a sense of social status and superiority based on their skin color—which made them more likely to identify with the wealthy White capitalist class above them than with the Black workers beside them. In this way, racism wasn’t just an attitude; it was a central pillar supporting the entire economic structure, deliberately fostered by the ruling class to protect their power and wealth.

Cox’s perspective was a direct challenge to the mainstream sociological thought of his time, which often viewed racism as an irrational prejudice or a cultural holdover. By rooting racism in the material needs of capitalism, he provided a powerful Conflict theory explanation that highlighted power and economics over individual psychology. His work was a precursor to later Marxist and critical race theories, and it forces us to ask a provocative question: does ending racism require merely changing individual hearts and minds, or does it demand a fundamental restructuring of the economic system that has historically benefited from racial hierarchy? For Cox, the answer was clear: racism and capitalism were two sides of the same coin, and you could not truly dismantle one without confronting the other.