122 THE SOCIAL THEORY OF GEORG SIMMEL

sults, makes it also extremely valuable to the wider social
circle to which the competitors belong. Conflicts which result
 from subjective pugnacity, or which are fought for
something that one of the opponents possesses, are of no
benefit to the group as a whole. But if a competitive struggle
 is fought without the intermixture of other conflict elements
 and for something the group has to give, the results
will be most beneficial. For the group as a whole, the competition
 will then be a way to stimulate the creation of objective
 values by means of subjective motives. For the
parties concerned, the competition forces an increased production
 of objective values as a means to subjective satisfactions.
 This is the situation in the modern business
world, where the producers fight their competitive struggles
 by the production of better and cheaper goods.
But apart from these indirect advantages for the larger
circle, competition has immediate sociological results of
no less importance. As the objects for which the competition
 exists are in the hands of the group and can be obtained
 only by incurring its favor, the contesting parties
are forced to establish intimate relationships with the
group and to anticipate its wishes and desires. Competition
 is therefore a socializing force. It is a synthetic force
weaving a whole network of threads through the social
structure, and adds to the strength of its texture. It seems
that since the breaking up of the small group and the resulting
 disappearance of solidarity, individuals act in the
interest of other individuals only if they are forced or stimulated
 to it by competition. Competition produces results
which could otherwise be brought about only through love
and altruism. In its modern form it is not merely a struggle
 of all against all, but also a struggle of all for all. This
latter formal synthetic aspect is often overlooked by the