Integration is a process in which the relationships between parts (elements) of a system are increasingly organized to allow for the better functioning of that system. Social sciences research integration in different areas – personality, society, culture, economy, politics, international relations, etc. There are two main forms of integration in a society. The first relates to the integration of individuals, through shared norms, beliefs, and values (especially via the process of socialization) into wider society. The other main form of integration refers to the integration of different social subsystems into a well-functioning whole.    

Herbert Spencer argued that the transition from the militant to a new type of society mostly depends on favorable external factors, primarily on the possibility of establishing peaceful relations between neighboring countries. When such favorable external conditions are met, and a large enough number of society's members exist, along with a sufficiently pronounced complexity, economic development of the society occurs. This enables the division of labor and the development of trade, which leads to the differentiation and specialization of functions within society. These processes necessarily lead to increased coordination within society. The division of labor, increased coordination between functions, and increased heterogeneity, together, lead to increased interdependence of parts and increasing integration of society. With further economic development, the integration and coordination of society increase even more, because the division of labor in the primary and secondary sectors becomes geographically localized and specialized, which conditions further improvement of communication and traffic systems, all leading to an increase in trade and specialized trade classes. At this stage of evolution, a new type of society emerges, which Spencer calls the "industrial type of society."

In his book Suicide (1897), Durkheim explored the relationship between different religions and the level of integration of the individual into society. His method to achieve this was to study how different religions influence differences in suicide rates in their adherents.  He argued that religious doctrines were not the ones that influenced suicide rates, but rather the degree of internal integration of a religious group. Protestants are characterized by the highest degree of individualism, while Jews, due to their history of persecution and isolated social status, have the highest degree of internal connection and integration. To explain the connection between a person's individual situation and the form and degree to which that person is integrated into society, on the one hand, with suicide rates, on the other hand, Durkheim introduces four basic types of suicide: 1) egoistic, 2) anomic, 3) fatalistic and 4) altruistic. Factors that affect different types of suicide are: the degree of integration of a society, how much and in what way individuals are integrated into society, and the level to which society regulates the individual behavior of each individual. Egoistic suicide is a consequence of insufficient integration of the individual into the everyday life of the society in which he or she lives. Individuals who follow only their own interests and who are therefore not integrated into the wider society are more likely to lose the meaning of life and fall into depression. Protestant religion emphasizes individualism, both in individual religious experience and in individual life choices, while, at the same time, it emphasizes the importance of a person's economic individualism and allows for selfish economic behavior. In addition, individuals who are not married and have no children are also less integrated into society and more prone to selfish behavior.

Ruth Benedict, in Patterns of Culture (1934), explored the interdependent relationship between individuals and cultures in order to answer the question of “cultural integration.”. Cultures are shaped by choices made by individuals, and, in turn, cultures shape individual personality; thus, we end up with a dynamic synergy of personality and cultural systems and culture-personality isomorphism. The humanistic cultural potential exists in all cultures, but individual creativity and individual choices play out differently in different cultures. Possibilities for the adoption or development of various cultural patterns in every culture are almost limitless, but through individual “selection,” all those individual patterns are integrated into a consistent whole, a cultural totality. The meaning of any individual cultural pattern depends on its place within that whole, that is, on its relationship with all other patterns. Benedict distinguishes two basic types of cultures by the way they shape individual personality. These two types are the Apollonian and Dionysian cultural models. The Apollonian cultural model produced a personality characterized by calm, balanced, and nondestructive behavior. In contrast, the Dionysian cultural model shaped personality with a penchant for excessive, violent, bellicose, and paranoid behavior.

Talcott Parsons’s functionalist approach proposes that every social system, regardless of size, must meet the following requirements, that is, functional pre-requisites: 1) adaptation - adaptation to the environment by changing and controlling it; 2) goal attainment - methodical mobilization of resources to achieve specific goals; 3) integration - solidarity and survival of the cohesive whole; 4) latency / latent pattern maintenance - production, accumulation, and distribution of energy that maintains the motivation of actors, but also the stability of cultural patterns that enable reproduction of that motivation. Functionalism divides social system into four main subsystems: 1) economic system - it serves to adapt society to the environment (A); 2) political system - it works to achieve goals (G); 3) societal community - it should achieve integration (I); and 4) the fiduciary system – works to achieve the maintenance of patterns (L). The subsystem of the societal community has the most important function because this subsystem is in charge of the integration of society. Social integration is realized by creating a sense of loyalty among the actors, both towards the whole society and towards the positions and roles that the actor himself fulfills. Each of the four subsystems has its own communication medium: economic system – money; political system - power; societal community - influence; fiduciary system - values.

Parsons emphasizes the concept of "equilibrium", which serves as a heuristic tool used in conjunction with the concept of inertia. No social system is ever in a state of complete inertia, nor can it achieve perfect integration of parts. To maintain balance, it is necessary to have institutions that can mediate in overcoming internal conflicts or failures in coordination. Such institutions are created by an integrative subsystem, and its function is to adapt individuals by enabling the internalization of legitimate values ​​in the form of value patterns. These patterns maintain the integrative needs of the system and foster cooperation, while at the same time neutralizing deviant behavior. The final effect of the integrative subsystem is to lead to a situation in which the equilibrium (balance) of all parts within the system represents the normal state of human society, while conflict, although constantly present, is a residual and abnormal element.

Julian Steward, in his Theory of Culture Change: The Methodology of Multilinear Evolution (1955) introduces the concept of the „levels of sociocultural integration”. Levels of sociocultural integration are an analytical tool that serves to place different societies at different quantitative and qualitative levels of complexity and integration, although they (levels) do not necessarily represent evolutionary stages. The levels of sociocultural integration are: family, group, tribe, and nation. Some pre-civilization societies functioned at the family level as politically, economically, and religiously self-sufficient groups, while others functioned as highly integrated tribal societies. As the biggest distinction between the tribal and national levels of integration, Steward puts the existence of the state, class groups, and subcultural groups.

C. Wright Mills, in the book The Power Elite (1956), explores the integration of the elite in the US. The elite in the United States control large bureaucratic organizations within three sectors: private corporations, state administration, and the military. Members of all three mentioned elites share many common features: they were born in the upper classes, they went to the same private schools and the most elite universities, and they belong to the same private social clubs. Members of the elite who are not from the upper classes most often perform technocratic jobs: managers, professionals, and lawyers. Elites keep their positions, intergenerationally, by mostly getting married within the elite, but also on the intergenerational level, so that the same person changes positions during their career and moves from one elite to the other two elites. The integration of the elite is accompanied by the growing integration of these three sectors. The elite within the state administration pursues policies that suit the economic interests of corporations, the corporate elite finances the political elite, while the military elite depends on the political elite and creates a "military-industrial complex" with the corporate elite. Of these three sectors, the sector of private corporations has the greatest power. Conflicts within the elite take place at the middle level of power, mainly over the division of spoils, and the media and political scientists pay the most attention to these conflicts, while no one questions the fundamental basis of the system itself. Conflicts within the elites are becoming increasingly integrated into the bureaucratic state apparatus, which replaces the real political struggle between political parties. Trade unions and other professional organizations tend to integrate into the state, and their leaders fight only for their own interests or for the interests of their own members.

Ralf Dahrendorf, in Class and Class Conflict in Industrial Society (1957), argues that every society always has both a static and a dynamic component, and what unites both components is the forces of integration and conflict. Both forces are equally important for every society. The key assumption is that the relations of power and authority have a decisive influence on social dynamics and changes, as well as on social conflicts. Authority, for Dahrendorf, is one of the key concepts of sociology. Authority is associated with legitimate power, primarily with the formal position in the hierarchy itself, while power is the relationship of a particular person who occupies a position of authority with those who are subordinate to him. Positions of authority are those that are expected and that are obliged to carry out forced subordination. Such positions are located within various institutions: the state, schools, companies, churches, etc. Positions of authority serve to achieve integration because they ensure compliance with and respect for social norms. However, the same positions of authority that should ensure integration can be the starting point for conflict. There are different interests within organizations, and if those in positions of authority work in the interest of their own partial interests, then conflicts can arise. When different interests are manifested, an interest group can be created, and when an interest group starts fighting for its interests, it becomes a conflict group.

Peter Blau, in Exchange and Power in Social Life (1964), presents his Social exchange theory. Social exchange theory is based on the study of interpersonal interaction in small groups. He believes that there are four basic processes of exchange: attraction, competition, differentiation, and integration, each of which takes place both between individuals and between collectives. These processes of exchange, when they take place in personal interaction, are guided by the rewards that individuals receive from that interaction. Rewards can be tangible or intangible (emotional). The social structure grows out of the established relations of exchange within the group. The individual search for awards leads to differentiation, but also cohesion in the group. Individuals who have a greater ability to give rewards to others grow into group leaders. Because it is impossible to achieve direct exchange, at the level of global society, between all individuals, at the macro level, common values ​​and norms are supported by the indirect social exchange. Values ​​and norms, adopted as a consensus, govern the processes of social integration and differentiation at the level of complex social structures.

In the theoretical approach of Jürgen Habermas, the most important imperative for maintaining the identity of the system is to achieve integration. Habermas distinguishes between two types of integration, social integration, which takes place in the "lifeworld," and systemic integration, which takes place within the "system". For Habermas, "legitimation" entails systems of ideas created by a political system, or any other system, to justify the existence of the system itself. In that sense, legitimation serves to achieve systems integration. On the other hand, the "system" represents a completely different analytical level. In Habermas's terminology, "system" means what functionalism and systems theory call the social system. The system understood in this way has its own structure, and each part of that structure has the function of achieving a harmonious integration of the entire system. The integration of the system is achieved through the instrumental rationality of the actors. If we applied the terminology of Max Weber to Habermas's theory, then the integration of lifeworld would be achieved through the „value rational action“ of actors, and the integration of the system through the „goal rational action“ of actors. The lifeworld consists of societies, cultures, and personalities. Communicative action achieves the reproduction of the lifeworld by maintaining culture, integrating society, and forming individual personalities. 

In his book Solidarity and Schism (1992), David Lockwood presents a macro-sociological theory of social order. There is always integration in society through common cultural norms and social statuses, but there are also class conflicts that arise over the allocation of scarce resources. The material substratum, where the distribution of power and resources happens, forms the base for social division and schism. Norms and values, on the other hand, limit conflict by creating solidarity and consensus. The difference between two distinct levels of social – „social integration“ and „system integration“ - is crucial for his view of the problems of social order. Social integration refers to social interactions that are carried by norms that people use to define situations where interaction is happening and the resources they use in those interactions. System integration refers to material relations and institutions through which norms and resources are organized.

References:

Alexander. Neofunctionalism (1985);

Blau. Exchange and Power in Social Life (1964);

Comte. System of Positive Polity, 2 vols. (2018, in French 1851-1854);  

Dahrendorf. Class and Conflict in an Industrial Society (2022, in German 1957);

Homo Sociologicus (2022, in German 1965);

Davis K. „Some Principles of Stratification", in  American Sociological Review (1945); 

       -     Human Society (1949);

 Debord. Society Of The Spectacle (2021, in French 1967);

Durkheim. Suicide, a Study in Sociology (2007, in French 1897);

       -     Division Of Labor In Society (2014, in French 1893);

       -     The Elementary Forms of Religious Life (2012, in French 1912);

Freyer. Theory of Objective Mind: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Culture (1991, in German 1923);

Habermas. Legitimation Crisis (1975, in German 1973);

       -      Communication and the Evolution of Society (1979, in German 1976);

       -      The Theory of Communicative Action (1984, in German 1981);

Halbwachs. The Causes of Suicide (1978, in French 1930);

       -      On Collective Memory (1992, in French 1950);

       -      Psychology of Social Class (2021, in Franch 1942);

Lockwood. Solidarity and Schism (1992);

Merton. Social Theory and Social Structure (1949);

       -      On Theoretical Sociology (1967);

Mills. White Collar: The American Middle Classes (1951);

       -      The Power Elite (1956);

Parsons. The Social System (1951a);

       -     Toward a General Theory of Action (1951b);

       -     Economy and Society (1956);

       -     Structure and Process in Modern Societies (1960);

       -     Social Structure and Personality (1964);

       -     Societies: Evolutionary and Comparative Perspectives (1966);

       -     Sociological Theory and Modern Society (1967);

       -     Politics and Social Structure (1969);

       -     The System of Modern Societies (1971);

Patterson. The Ordeal of Integration: Progress and Resentment in America’s „Racial“ Crisis (1997);

       -     Rituals of Blood: The Consequences of Slavery in Two American Centuries (1998);

Schnapper. Community of Citizens: On the Modern Idea of Nationality (2017, in French 1994); 

Simmel. Sociology: Inquiries into the Construction of Social Forms, 2 volume (2009, in German 1908);

Smelser. Economy and Society (1956);

Sorokin. Social and Cultural Dynamics, 4 vols. (1937-1941);

Spencer. First Principles (1862);

       -     The Study of Sociology (1873);

       -     Principles of Sociology, 3 vols. (1876-1896);

Stark. Religion and Society in Tension (1965);

Tocqueville. Democracy in America (2021, in French 1835, 1840);

       -     The Old Regime and the French Revolution (2014, in French 1856); 

Turner B. Religion and Social Theory: A Materialistic Perspective (1983);

Turner J. Theoretical Principles of Sociology, 3 vols (2010-2012);

Wiese. Systematic Sociology (1977, in German 1924/1929);

Wilson. Religion in Sociological Perspective (1982); 

Znaniecki. The Polish Peasant in Europe and in America, 5 vols. (1918-1920).