|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dr. Pedro Antonio Noguera is a professor of education at the University of California, Berkeley. He is also past-president of the Berkeley School Board. Originally presented to the Latino Think Tank on Violence Prevention, Charles R. Drew University, Medical School in 1991, this analysis (© 1996) is published here by In Motion Magazine as a series of hyper-linked articles which can be downloaded in segments. All sections can be reached from this page, or readers can follow from one section to another. Footnotes will open to a new window and therefore can be left open for easy reference. © 1996 The portrait of Dr. Noguera is by freelance photographer Kathy Sloane (kataphoto@aol.com). © 1996
The Link to Socio-Economic Conditions
Most studies on violence in low income communities link violence and violent behavior to social disorder - the break down of community institutions. (Kornhauser, 1978; Thrasher, 1928; Yablonsky, 1966) Since the mid nineteenth century, there has been a recognizable trend toward a reduction in the influence of community institutions such as churches, schools, social organizations, in most urban areas.(7) This is due both to the anonymity and anomie which characterizes life in many urban areas, as well as a high degree of neighborhood instability and transience which is common to many communities where new immigrants settle. Given that the past role of the social institutions listed above was to impart values and create a basis for community cohesiveness, in areas where these institutions have broken down, only the family remains as an effective agent of socialization. Whereas previously such institutions reinforced values that were deemed important by the members of a community, in their absence families are left on their own to impart and maintain these values.
The progressive decline of the nuclear family as the standard household unit in American society, has contributed to the current state of social disorder present in most American cities.(8) It is not that single parent households are inherently less capable of rearing children, but the added financial burden born by such families contributes significantly to the hardships endured by family members. Moreover, most studies on single parent households clearly demonstrate that such families are more likely to be impoverished, more likely to have children that drop-out of school or do poorly academically, and have a greater likelihood of dependence on public assistance, not only for the head of the household, but for future generations as well.(9)
Available evidence suggests that violent behavior tends to increase when there is both an increase in social disorder and a decline in living conditions.(10) Economically depressed areas that lack sufficient jobs and services, are more likely to have high rates of violence than communities that have greater resources. While the correlation between poverty and crime is high, in recent times there has been resistance to the notion that the condition of poverty itself is responsible for high rates of crime. During the 1980's there was an increase in research that attempted to connect violence and criminal behavior to intelligence (Murray, 1983; Danziger and Gottschalk, 1983), the family (Garfinkle and McLanahan, 1986; Cell, 1982; Ellwood and Summers, 1986) and culture (Jones, 1988; Loury and Loury, 1986). The neo-conservative orientation of such views tends to reinforce the prevailing thinking of policy makers, who over the last ten years, have been more likely to stress punishment over prevention as a way of addressing violence and crime. The tendency to blame the victims of poverty for their entrapment, has become the most popular and fashionable explanation of poverty, violence, crime, drug use and other social ills associated with the condition of poverty.(11)
However, there is substantial evidence to support the notion that the lack of economic opportunities in many impoverished urban communities creates conditions that are conducive to the occurrence of crime and the development of an underground economy. Using Robert Merton's analytical framework for understanding deviant behavior, several scholars have suggested that crime and violence are directly related to the absence of opportunities to achieve social mobility through legitimate channels. (12) In many poor communities, the traditional avenues to mobility are inaccessible, either due to perception or the sheer lack of opportunity. Education and employment, the two routes that have most often been prescribed as the way out of the barrio, often lead to dead ends for aspiring young people. In light of this reality, young people are faced with four basic choices: they can conform - accepting the dead end job; they can escape - to drug or alcohol addiction; they can innovate - finding ways to circumvent the law to achieve personal goals; or they can rebel - rejecting the system that limits their opportunities.
In Latino communities, we see all four responses. Those who work tirelessly at dead end jobs, deriving neither personal fulfillment nor adequate incomes from their labor; those that retreat to drugs and alcohol and cease to function as competent members of the community; those that turn to crime or lead dual lives - one straight the other crooked - as their way of "getting over"; and those who reject the system altogether and demand radical change. Of course there are the success stories, the kids who prevail against the odds, who pick themselves up by their bootstraps and make it big. But too often, such kids are rare. They are the exceptions, the ones we hold up as role models, but too often they leave their communities to pursue their careers in their quest for upward mobility. The sad truth is that those who have been successful often feel that they must leave because they perceive their opportunities for personal advancement are limited in the environment from which they were spawned. More often than not, however, most of our youth must choose between variations of the four options just described.
Crime and violence, like other forms of social behavior, are not random phenomenon, but rather follow patterns. In many Latino communities, crime is organized through gangs and structured underground organizations. The transactions and "business" that takes place within the underground sector of the economy are by their nature illegal. Hence, the participants can not appeal to official channels for arbitration or regulation. If someone refuses to pay for some drugs that have been delivered, or if the fence for stolen goods sets prices that are considered too low, the only recourse available for resolving such disputes is violence. Consequently, there tends to be a high degree of violence associated with the underground economy, much of which is often gang related.
Impoverished urban communities are often relegated as zones where the underground economy and certain forms of crime, particularly vice, (i.e. drugs, gamboling and prostitution) are tolerated and allowed to flourish by the police and official authorities as long as those who control such activities confine their business to those areas.(13) Police are less likely to be visible in such communities, and the officers are less likely to be recruited from there. Furthermore, they are more likely to respond slowly to requests for service, and often tend to possess negative stereotypes of the residents and are therefore often indiscriminate in their treatment of them. Their lack of familiarity with such communities provides them with no basis for distinguishing between hardened criminals and law abiding citizens. As a result, not only do such communities have higher rates of violence, they also experience greater incidents of police brutality and harassment.
A final environmental factor that must be cited due to its link to violence is the fairly widespread abuse of alcohol and drugs, and the marketing of those substances in Latino communities. Recently, there has been considerable attention drawn to the practice of alcohol and tobacco companies who target their products specifically to minority communities. Such advertising practices, combined with the concentration of liquor stores in many Latino communities, contributes directly to consumption patterns, and substance abuse. The link between substance abuse and violence has been well established, and while we can not place all of the blame on the liquor and tobacco companies who are responsible for sale and distribution since no one can be forced to consume, controlling their operations in Latino communities must become part of our effort to confront one of the major causes of violence.
Social and Psychological Factors
In addition to the structural factors that contribute to the occurrence of crime and violence, there are also social-psychological factors that foster and promote such behavior. The dominant values in American society place great emphasis on materialism and power. These are conveyed to us on a daily basis through the media, the primary socializing agent for many young people today. Throughout our society, there are examples of individuals who are able to get their way and achieve success merely because they possess power and wealth: politicians who commit crimes but escape punishment because of their connections; bankers and junk bond dealers who squander the savings of others and then get bailed out by the tax payers; wealthy individuals who perpetrate crimes, including acts of violence, but avoid jail sentences or "hard time" in prison because they can afford lawyers or can appeal to judges for mercy.
The inequity of our system of justice encourages moral ambivalence among many young people. The message that they receive about crime is a relative one; an act is only wrong if you get caught, and punishment only occurs if you don't have the money to defend yourself. In their pursuit of wealth and power, many young people react to their lack of access to opportunities by searching for alternative means. For some, drug dealing and other forms of crime become legitimate alternatives as a means to acquire power and wealth.
On a day to day basis, violence is often seen as a legitimate means for resolving conflict. Since they have learned at an early age that "might makes right", and that the strong generally get their way, violence becomes an acceptable way of maintaining the pecking order or social hierarchy that exists within the community. Studies on community violence show that acts of violence are most likely to be committed by people who know each other.(14) Domestic violence is the most vivid example of this, but so to is the fratricide - Raza killing Raza - that is widespread in Latino communities. The frustration and despair that festers in low income areas is often manifested through violence, which more often than not, is directed by members of the community at their neighbors and loved ones.
Peer groups, particularly when they are formalized into units referred to as gangs, can provide support for violent tendencies. Such groups can be effective in countering the alienation and powerlessness that accompanies social disorder in low income communities. The peer group or gang often provides protection and a sense of security that may be lacking in a violent environment. It also serves as a powerful socializing agent, particularly in communities where families and other social institutions are no longer viable. The persistence of gangs over generations is generally made possible in communities where other forms of social organization are not effective in providing support, protection and a positive value orientation to the young.(15)
Violence is therefore, both a social phenomenon that can be traced to certain kinds of social and economic conditions, as well as a behavioral response that is conditioned by certain values and attitudes. In the final section of this paper, we shall explore how to devise a strategy for confronting both aspects of this problem.
