Conceptions about conflict in the field of political theory: an irreducible conflict?

In the discourse tradition of Western political theory concern for order is constant. The thought of Plato and Hobbes, for example, stands with its back to the conflict, valuing the order above the previous one. The State - just State in the case of Plato - is conceived as the opposite of conflict, chaos, war. On the contrary, Machiavelli was able to see in the conflict a constitutive element of politics and fruitful, if well conducted, for the greatness of the State. The philosophers of order, Plato and Hobbes, are faced with a type of thought linked to tragedy as an artistic genre, the one that unfolded in the golden age of Greece and in England at the end of the 16th century and the first half of the century XVII. Tragic thinking made the conflict an object of reflection, and that is why it constitutes a valuable contribution to the field of political theory. This thought conceives politics according to a double reference, order and the elements that make this order wobble or subvert it - revolutions, revolts, wars -, putting away any attempt to dissolve them. The tension between order and conflict has no solution for tragic thinking; is irreducible