This article builds on criticisms of the Dahrendorf conflict model to suggest strategies for its reformulation. Particular attention is drawn to the fact that the model, as it now stands, abandons the fruitful lead of Marx and falls into the same analytical traps Dahrendorf has imputed to Parsonian functionalism. To correct for these problems, the weaknesses of the causal scheme and the variables conceptualized and incorporated into propositions are examined. This examination suggests paths along which the causal imagery and propositions can be reformulated and supplemented.