In introductory sociology, we are often taught to choose a side: Are you a Functionalist who believes society is a harmonious machine working toward a common goal (Consensus)? Or are you a Marxist/Weberian who sees society as a ruthless battlefield of power and resources (Conflict)?
But as we move into the era of Neoliberalism, these neat boxes start to break down. If we map these ideas onto a “Sociological Quadrant” of awareness, a much more cynical—and fascinating—picture emerges.
The Quadrant of Awareness
If you look at the political landscape, the Center (the moderates of both sides) typically occupies a space of “Naive Consensus.” They genuinely believe that the system is a neutral “meritocracy.” In their view, if we just tweak the policies and fund the schools, everyone gets a fair shot.
The “Realist” side of the quadrant tells a different story. Here, the Far Left and the New Right actually agree on the “what.” Both groups have taken off the rose-tinted glasses and recognized the reality of Conflict Theory: society is a high-stakes, zero-sum competition.
The Neoliberal “Starter Motor”
The genius of the New Right and Neoliberal thinkers is that they don’t see this conflict as a “bug” to be fixed—they see it as the starter motor of the social engine. While the Left wants to dismantle the struggle to achieve equity, the Neoliberal wants to harness the struggle to drive efficiency.
However, because open class warfare is politically unpopular, Neoliberalism performs a masterful “reframe” of the conflict to keep the “Naive Center” on board.
Three Ways the Conflict is Reframed

1. From Class Struggle to Individual Competition
   Margaret Thatcher famously declared, “There is no such thing as society. There are individual men and women.” This wasn’t just a catchy quote; it was a strategic move to delete “class” from the conversation. By reframing the struggle as a purely individual one, the system is off the hook. If you lose, it isn’t systemic oppression—it’s a personal failure to compete.
2. From Social Closure to “Maintaining Standards”
   Conflict theorists talk about Social Closure—the way elites rig the game to keep their status exclusive. Neoliberals rebrand this as “Rewarding Ability” or “Rigorous Standards.” It turns a barrier designed to exclude people into a “benchmark” designed to inspire them.
3. The Meritocracy Mask
   Neoliberalism uses the language of the Consensus Center—words like choice, empowerment, and merit—to mask a ruthless Conflict engine. It allows the winners to feel like they earned their spot, while convincing the losers that the game was fair.
   The Verdict
   Is Neoliberalism just Conflict Theory with a better marketing department? In many ways, yes. It is a “Realist” ideology that acknowledges the power struggle but chooses to weaponize it rather than resolve it.
   By keeping the Center focused on the myth of “Consensus,” Neoliberalism ensures the “Conflict” engine keeps running—fueling a global race where the starting lines are never quite as equal as the brochure claims.
   Since you’re looking at Chinese students in Thailand, would you like me to add a final section to this post specifically applying this “rebranding” to the international school market?