CULTURE CONFLICT THEORIES

(associated especially with Walter B. Miller, "Lower Class Culture,"
etc. . .

Miller attempts to account for delinquency by LOCATING THE SOURCE
WITHIN THE SUBCULTURE ITSELF---that is, delinquent culture implies a
way of life peculiar to delinquents.  Miller is saing that the
dominant motivating force behind crime/delinquency is really an
attempt to adhere to forms of behavior and values as defined within
the larger community.

In other work on gangs, MILLER says there are two kinds of violence:
a) means violence (what is used whenother means of attaining a
desiered objecte have failed) and b) ENDS violence--used for its own
sake, and gangs tend to do both, but especially the latter.  He
concludes that violence is overrated among gangs (BY RESEARCHERS) but
it is usually spurred by concerns of "honor" as a MOTIVE.  Suggests
that this may reflect larger society. . .

Miller argues that delinquent boys are socialized in a habitat with
standards and expectations that insist on behavior which is
unfortunately UNLAWFUL from point of view of conventional americans.

  1) Some general questions to ask for class discussion:
  2) What is his definition of crime/delinquency?
     (ie, law-violating acts)
  3) What is he trying to do?
      (Show that delinquency derives from the nature of "lower class"
      society)
  4) How does Miller define "lower class?" (a. cultures  with serial
     monogamy (define this as a series of partners, one at at time)
     and b. female-based household.

(critique this definition---is it a "good one" for decribing lower
class?  Does it contain any culture bias of miller's?   What
data does he present for his "docual concerns?  Any data? or just
"discussion" (implies participant observation--he used youth from
"slum districts" obtained from field workers in a large eastern city)
What are the "focal concerns" of delinquent youth and how do
these differ from middle class?

 (How valid are the concerns of 1. Trouble, 2. Toughness 3.
Smartness 4. Excitement 5. Fate 6. Autonomy)

 --ask why these are "values"  How does "lower class" generate
delinquency?   What does this study tell us about the values of
the researcher (ie, it implies that the values/concerns of slum kids
somehow abnormal, since he seems to compare these with "conventional"
values.

Some problems with Miller:   confused definitions (eg,
lowr clas, "values," etc)  No supportive data to illustrate
these categories  No comparative data for "middle class," since
these seem to be middle class concerns as well, at least up to a point
 Elitist (why?--implies "inferiority" of lower class culture---a
class bias)  Tends to see "causes" of delinquency in values (an
independent variable) but does not discuss cultural values---rather
looks at the "values" of his targetted groups--no evidence these are
shared throughout their culture)  Says lower class values are
same as "delinquent values"  Tautological (define this as
explaining something in terms of itelf, ie, delinquents are people who
have these values and people who have these values are deliquent.