114 THE SOCIAL THEORY OF GEORG SIMMEL 
durable. The power and the right to oppose tyranny, ego- 
tism, and lack of tact make it possible to protect the integ- 
rity of the individuality on the one hand, while maintain- 
ing on the other hand interrelations which would other- 
wise have to be dissolved. Opposition is then not only a 
means for the preservation of the relationship, but is also 
one of the concrete functions of which the relationship ac- 
tually consists. Aversion and antipathy as the latent sub- 
jective forms of opposition serve in a similar fashion in 
other types of socialization. 
Although antagonism by itself alone does not consti- 
tute socialization, it is seldom lacking as a positive sociolog- 
ical element in human association. Socializations might 
be classified in a series according to the proportion between 
the unifying and opposing tendencies of which they con- 
sist. There are conflicts in which the unifying aspect of 
socialization is wholly absent. Such a marginal case is the 
conflict between the thug and his victim. When a struggle 
of this sort goes as far as complete annihilation, then the 
unifying element has become nil. But in such a case the 
concept of reciprocal action is really no longer applicable, 
because that annihilation means the non-existence of the 
other party to the reaction. On the other hand, as soon as 
any sort of consideration or any limitation of violence is 
present, there comes into play by virtue of that fact a so- 
cializing factor, if only in the form of restraint. 
Another marginal case appears if the conflict is stimu- 
{ated exclusively by the love of fighting, if it is a struggle 
for struggle’s sake. The moment any other stimulus in- 
duces the struggle, such as contempt, revenge, a desire to 
possess or to control, limitations are placed upon the strug- 
gle. The object desired or the condition to be attained will 
impress upon the struggle certain norms and restrictions 
which apply to both parties. Also the fact that the stake