Final answer:
Historically, those in power have used tactics such as bribery and ideological manipulation to maintain control over the lower classes and ensure their participation in conflicts. Karl Marx viewed social conflict as a necessary process towards an egalitarian society. Power dynamics and the perceived benefits of war are complex, often resulting in those with less to gain being drawn into the struggle.
Step-by-step explanation:
The question pertains to the historical reasons that the lower class has historically been involved in conflicts, and it can be largely attributed to the control and ideologies imposed by those in power. By maintaining a balance of weakness, which prevented any single group from challenging the entire system, elites could manipulate and control warrior forces. These methods included bribery, divided control, and ideological manipulation.
As seen in African societies, wars often weakened government structures, and in cases of both victory and defeat, the social fabric suffered significant losses impacting social order and production.
Karl Marx believed that social conflict was a necessary step towards a more egalitarian society. His viewpoint suggested that revolutions are a historical pattern, eventually leading to the dispersion of wealth and more equal authority among populations.
People's personal freedom and economic stability tend to increase after toppling elite power structures. Likewise, historical conflicts, such as the American Civil War, show that those who suffer the most do not always directly benefit from the conflict, highlighting the complexities of war and social class.