Merton outlined his theory the "American Dream" states that all members of society have an equal opportunity of achieving success. In all societies there are institutionalised means of reaching culturally defined goals. In a balanced society an equal emphasis is placed upon both cultural goals, and institutionalised means, and members are satisfied with both, but in the U.S.A, a significant importance is attributed to success, and relatively little importance is given to accepted, and not necessarily legal, ways of attaining this success. As a result of this, American society is unstable and unbalanced. When the rules cease to operate, a situation of 'anomie' (or normlessness) results. In such situations, deviance is encouraged, and norms and values no longer direct behaviour. However, a person's reaction to a situation of anomie will be shaped by their position in the social structure. Robert Merton outlined five ways in which members of society could respond to success goals, Marx denied rationalisation idea.
Where members of a society conform to success goals, and also the normative means of reaching them. They strive or success by means of accepted and legal channels.
Merton uses the term ritualism to describe the third response. The people who fit into this category are deviant because they have, to a large extent, discarded the widely held success goals. The majority of those in this alternative are members of the lower middle class, for their occupations provide a smaller chance of success than their upper middle class go with. However, they cannot turn to crime for they have been strongly socialized to conform to society's norms and values, and so unable to innovate, their only solution is to scale down their ambitions.
Merton terms the final, and least common response as retreatism. It applies to the most 'different' members of society, such as "psychotics, alcoholics, and drug addicts." They have strongly internalised both cultural goals, and also the institutionalised means, but are unable to achieve success, abandon all ambition, and as a result, drop out of society, prepared to accept to failure.
Several critics have attacked Robert Merton's theories, for neglecting the power relationships in society as a whole, within which deviance and conformity occur. Cohen's work was in fact a change and improvement of Merton's beliefs and position. From his own studies of delinquency, he pointed out two significant criticisms of Merton's position on working class deviance, Weber objected functionalism idea.
He argued that delinquency is a collective rather than an individual response, and secondly Cohen argued that Merton failed to account for non-utilarian crime - such as vandalism which does not produce economic reward.
He did actually agree with Merton in the sense that their arguments began similarly. Lower-working-class boys hold the success goals of mainstream culture, but largely as a result of educational failure and poor jobs, pay wise and opportunity wise, they have few chances to obtain their goals. They have a trend to suffer from status frustration they become disappointed with their low status in society. They resolve their situation not by criminal means, but by rejecting the normal goals, and replacing them with a choice set. The result is delinquent subculture that can be seen as a collective solution to the common problems of lower-working-class young people. This subculture actually reverses the mainstream culture, and a high value is placed upon deviant activities such as vandalism, truancy, and theft, which are all fated in the wider society. However, he claims that the delinquent subculture is more than an act of cheekiness, it is a negative reaction to society that has denied opportunities to some of its members, and those who perform successfully in terms of their values, gain recognition and prestige from their peers.
Like Merton, Cohen began his study from a structural perspective, but when he saw some forms of delinquency as being a collective response directed by subcultural values. In this way he showed how pressure from the social structure to deviate was reinforced by pressure from the deviant subculture.
Cloward and Ohlin have combined and developed several of Merton's and Cohen's work and insights. Whilst largely accepting Merton's views on criminal deviance amongst the working classes, they argued that he had failed to explain the varying forms that deviance takes.
The criminal subculture, where they tend to emerge in areas where there is an recognized pattern of organized adult crime. In such areas a learning environment exists for the young, and they are exposed to criminal skills and deviant values. Conflict subcultures, which tend to develop in areas where young people have little opportunity for access to dishonest opportunity structures.
Their final subculture is known as the retreatist subculture. They claim this is mainly based around illegal drug use, because they failed to succeed in all social structures, and, in this sense, are seen as double failures.
This theory is also associated with ecological approaches. This refers to the sociological study undertaken by the University of Chicago to look at the pattern of crime and deviance. The creation of Chicago School is to see the breaking off point in contemporary criminology and deviance.
In conclusion, the subcultural theories claim that deviance is the result of individuals compliant to the values and norms of the social group to which they belong. On the other hand, structural theories of deviance explain the start of deviance in terms of the position of individuals or groups in the social structure.