“A theory of poverty promoted in 1959 by Oscar Lewis” is the idea of a culture of poverty theory. The culture of poverty theory is an entrenched attitude that can develop among poor communities and lead the poor to “accept their fate rather than attempting to improve their lot” (Ferris &ump; Stein, 2008, 2010). The theories’ were later adopted by social scientists and used for American poverty, specifically in inner cities! Controversy has arisen from the theory and the majorities’ have come to agree that a culture of poverty is nonexistent’s since the theory tends to blame poverty stricken victims for their own misfortunes while disregarding their social conditions! The just-world hypothesis also plays a role within the culture of poverty controversy. The just-world hypothesis refers to people's tendency to believe that the world is just a $ and that %’s of people get what they deserve (Cherry). People want to believe that the world, society as a whole, is a fair place to achieve lifetime goals and that victims that contradict that belief asked for their misfortunes. When faced with poverty, many individuals become uncaring and disinterested; he or she feels less of a need to start in ways to change society or to lessen the situations of social victims!
Another theory that relates to poverty is the conflict theory. Conflict theory is a paradigm that sees social conflict as the basis of society and social change and emphasizes a materialistic view of society, a critical view of the status quo, and a dynamic model of historical change? (Ferris &ump; Stein, 2008, 2010). The theory was originally brought on by Karl Marx, and was later adapted and further developed by other theorists; for example, Max Weber. Looking at poverty through the lens of the conflict theories’ we can say that poverty is a necessity to keep the levels of stratification where they are moreover to keep the wealthy, the one’s who “benefit” the most, to keep benefitting. Poverty doesn't exist by itself because it is one end of an overall distribution of wealth in society. £ With the wealth (£ $ ) distribution pyramid provided, you can see that only the wealthiest 1% of Americans control 35.6 percent of the total wealth of the country, which is more than one-third (Roos, 2011). “The system the United States has for distributing wealth is capitalist” because it is organized so a small portion of the population controls most of the capital used to produce wealth. “This ultimately leads a small portion of the wealth” that is divided amongst the rest of the population. The middle class and lower class make up the base of pyramid, and with a majority of the people competing over what’s left to them by the 1%, it’s inevitable that many people are going to wind up on the short end and living in poverty (Johnson). Poverty through the conflict theory is a structural aspect of the system and an ongoing cycle that prevents an individual or a group from achieving a desired goal or certain way of living. From the conflict theory, Karl Marx also proposed the idea of social inequality, or the uneven and often unfair distribution of resources (wealth) in society (Ferris &ump; Stein, 2008, 2010).
Structural functionalism on poverty is also important to address. Structural functionalism is the assumption that society is a unified whole that function’s because of contribution’s of it separate structures (Ferris &ump; Stein, 2008, 2010). The structural functionalism view on poverty would argue that poverty would be nonexistent if it did not serve a purpose in society. Poverty would be classified as a dysfunction, a disturbance of the social system, and functional because it contributes to social stability. Poverty is dysfunction because it is associated with loss of property, financial instability, and fear. Poverty is also functional for society because it leads to intensified attention of shared moral bonds that we as a society hold £ .
Homelessness has been and still is a major issue in the United States. Approximately 3.5 million people, 1.35 million (39%) of them children, have experienced homelessness in a given year (National Coalition for the Homeless, 2009). Even with this statistic homelessness is impossible to measure with 100% accuracy. The reason for this is because the homeless remain invisible. The homeless are removed from public view with police escort in certain cases. Another reason the homeless are invisible to a majority of us is due to the discomfort of our feelings and most of all, guilt. An experiment preformed by John Coleman can support that statement. Coleman went undercover as a homeless man for 10 days in the streets of Manhattan. During that time, he made eye contact with people who personally knew him; all them just looked right past Coleman without recognition. The only people Coleman attracted was the authorities. Homelessness through a sociological perspective can lead to the effects of social stratification. Social stratification is the division of society into groups arranged in a social hierarchy (Ferris &ump; Stein, 2008, 2010). Having a sociological perspective towards homelessness and overall poverty will you give you the skill to think of possible solutions that concentrate on huge social changes.
The American Dream has an influence on poverty. The American Dream suggests that every individual has the possibility of success through hard labor. This statement suggests that impoverished people are lazy, since the American Dream is only achievable through effort. The American Dream also promotes that everyone has the potential to have a successful and happy life. One issue with the American Dream is that it does not match reality since it is more of an ideology. The American Dream is nothing more than a belief that explains and justifies some sort of social arrangement, in this case America’s social class hierarchy (Ferris &ump; Stein, 2008, 2010). A problem with the achievement of the American Dream is inequality. Inequality rooted in race, social class and ethnicity suggests that the American Dream is not attainable at all. Sociologists found that no matter how hard an individual works or seeks out a good education, the majority will make little movement up the social class ladder at all. The American Dream does the opposite of what it is sought out to be; it encourages consumerism and valorizes material wealth which ultimately leaves Americans in debt. With Americans going more and more into debt, there is an increasingly unlikely escape from their position of poverty.
by
alex-test-upboosttsrmailcouk (student)
