Culture of Poverty Revisited

Robert Wade to explain the failure of their programmes to re- duce poverty, to explain their concentration on In an earlier paper' I showed that the thesis of a low-cost education and counselling rather than 'culture of poverty' (COP) lends itself to perni- on more expensive and more directly redistribu- cious political uses, by (a) seeming to attribute tive measures, or to justify the failure to have responsibility for poverty to poor people them- any redistributive programmes atall. Hence it selves, because of their 'culture', (b) focusing on is often said that one should pay attention to the local and family level, ignoring the unseen COP only insofar as it is something which politi- forces of the wider society which determine the cians and planners commonly believe;inthis meagre distribution of resources to the poor, and sense only does COP matter. (e)seemingtogiveprioritytoattemptsto change culture, through counselling services (in Truth and political implication rich countries) and through education. I took it This conclusion, it seems to me, rests on a serious for granted, however, that the question of how confusion between empirical truth-content, on the the culture of poor people influences their be- one hand, and ideological origins and political haviour, and their poverty, is an empirical one, uses on the other (a confusion not unrelated to and thatitis therefore worth looking at the the wholesale retreat of traditional empiricism in available literature to see what kinds of answers British and American universities). it has to suggest. Here I can do little more than restate the dis- Since then I have become increasingly alarmed tinction as I see it. While an understanding of the by the ease with which otherwise subtle, dis- ideological bases and political roles of 'scientific' criminating persons rejectthe very idea of a hypotheses can help explain and predict both culture of povertynot only in saloon bars and their empirical weaknesses and the conditions in over dinner tables, but in serious academic dis- which they become popular among certain groups cussion. The Roaches' book ofreadings on or classes,this understanding does not speak poverty provides an example. The book confines directly to the truth of those hypotheses. In the COP to a footnote in the introduction, on the case of the COP thesis, there are at least three grounds that, 'The thesis of a culture of poverty major hypotheses,allconceivably capable of is such a hazy notion that we have doubts about being questioned by empiricaldata.But the its descriptive value, not to mention its explana- sweeping rejection of COP ideas is in my experi- tory sgnificance'.2 Significantly enough the book ence generally done prior to a careful considera- contains several case studies of the life of specific tion of the evidence. It is true that most of the groups of poor people, and other essays which evidence used to support a COP interpretation- deal ina generalizing way with problems of for example, correlations between income, on the measurement, causes and remedies; but not a one hand, and on the other, questionnaire res- single attempt to deal in a generalizing way with ponses which suggest the degree to which the the lifeways and culture of poor peopleto see respondent sees the world as an unpredictable whether there are not some similarities in the placeis not very reliable. But the fact that the waythaturban slumdwellersofPalermo, Calcutta, Sao Paulo, perceive their situation, in evidenceisnotvery good should encourage the values they (consciously and unconsciously) attempts to improve it, not to ignore it. hold, and in the effects of these common percep- Part of the trouble with COP, for many social tions and values on response to changes in their scientists, is its identification of 'the poor' as a situation. The Roaches dismiss COP on grounds relevant analytical category. To focus on poverty of haziness; a more constructive reaction would and the poor, they argue, is to think about the be to make it less hazy. The usual reason for re- problem of inequality in terms of statistical in- jecting it, however, is because of its pernicious come distributions: the poor are those below a political role, its use by politicians and planners certain (more or less arbitrary) line, the bottom decile or quintile or 40 per cent. This is accept- 1 "A culture of poverty?" IDS Bulletin, 5 (2/3), 4-30, 1973. ablefor purelydescriptive purposes. But an IDS Bulletin, (1),1975 titled "Cultural Dependence," con- tains a number of articles which pay some attention to the explanation for poverty, they argue, must be set role of cultural factors in development. in the context of the systematic nature of class 2 J.Roach and J.Roach, eds., Poverty: Selected Readings, Harmondsworth, Penguin Press, 1972, p.12, n.4. inequality. For explanatory purposes the funda-

4 mental characteristicisnot poverty but sub- independent variables in social explanation. Cul- ordination:itis because of their subordination turalfactors may ofcourse be admitted as that members of the subordinate class are (or causes in an ad hoc kind of way. But this is done remain) poor; subordination generates poverty, in the absence of any general and systematic not vice versa. Those who talk of poverty rather justification for how and when such ad hoc in- than subordination, of poor people rather than corporations are to be made. Concepts such as proletariat,lumpen-proletariat(orotherclass 'utility' and 'leisure preference' in neo-classical categories) are guilty of mystifying this point, and economics, 'falseconsciousness' and even 'ex- of supposing (like the Poverty Warriors of the ploitation' in Marxian analysis are used as ques- American War On Poverty, if anyone still re- tion-stopping devices, to insulate the paradigm, members) that something can be done about to justify ending the enquiry before entering the poverty withoutfirst alteringthe structure of realm of culture. domination and subordination which produces it. The 'situational' orthodoxy, in all its various ex- Surely the connection between poverty and sub- pressions, is thus the direct descendant of the ordination is two-way:subordination generates 18th century Enlightenment view of Man. Man poverty, yes; and poverty generates (or at least in his essence was seen to be as regular, as in- helps to ptpetuate) subordination. Increases in variantwithrespecttotimeandplace,as the income level of members of the subordinate wondrously simple as natural science showed the class maye a necessary condition for collective physical universe to be. action to change the structure of domination and Today, situationalists adopt this view not out of subordination. But the immediate point to make a concern to define what the essence is, but as a here is that whetheritis called a culture of way of allowing concentration on the real, under- poverty or a culture of subordination, one is lying facts of resources and power. But just as interested in discovering the range of responses the Enlightenment thinkers took the vast variety to the facts of poverty, inequality and low status, of human belief, customs and institutions as with- how people in that situation manage to cope, the out significance for defining his nature, so modern designs for living, the codes of understanding, the situationalists assume that culture is gloss, garb, aspirations, the values they adopt. appearance, a mere epiphenomenon of material and physical constraints. The current orthodoxy These days,however, the majorityofsocial scientists would not in fact be interested in such Culture does matter matters, because they believe implicitly or ex- Recentevidencefrom humanbiologyand plicitly that things like perceptions, aspirations, hominid paleontology suppotts a quite different values (meaning-systems, or culture for short) are intrepretation.Inthisview,theoutstanding of little significance for understanding behaviour. characteristic of homo sapiens, in comparison The current orthodoxy, ascribed to by social with other animals, is not so much what he is scientists right across the academic and political capable of learning as what he must learn in order spectrum, fromMarxianandneo-classical to function at all. In place of regular and detailed economists,Marxianpoliticalscientistsand genetic control mechanisms on behaviour, man sociologists, to social anthropologists in the tradi- has generalized genetic response capabilities, plus tion of Radcliffe-Brown, states that the critical culturea learned set of rules and designs (what factors in social causation are the distribution of computer engineers call programmes). The innate resourcesand power, and thematerialand response capabilities, plus cultural programmes, physical constraints. To these critical factors the plus situational constraints, govern behaviour. orthodoxy (called by J. D. Y. Peel the 'situational' Perhaps the best way to convince British and or 'structural' approach)3 applies a rough and American situationalists that culture does matter ready, common-sense view of perceptions and is to ask them why they do not eat dog or cat values: men everywhere seek much the same and indeed feel revulsion at the very thought, things (power, wealth) and perceive their environ- though dog and cat are not lesssituationally ment much as it objectively is. The implication feasible than beef and are probably equally good is that there are few if any circumstances when in nutritional value. Or why do we feed horse cultural factors have to be admitted as significant to dog, but not to ourselves? Why does pig, cut-for-cut, cost less than beef? Why are innards 3 See the excellent paper by J. D. Y. Peel for a fuller treat- less expensive and less prestigious than muscle ment of some of thpoints made here: "Cultural factors in cuts? To understand these things we must ask the contemporary theory of development", Archives Euro- péennes de Sociologie, XIV, 1973, 283-303. about the symbolic relations between men and

5 animals.4 The series:cattle, pig, horse, dog is The similarities were partïcularly marked in the ordered according to our view of edibleness- emphasis on personal achievement of long-range cattle most edible, dog least. The series is also goals, on goal definition in terms of higher educa- ordered according to the type of participation in tion, professional occupations, the building of a the company of man. Dogs are household pets spotless reputation in the community, diligence, and are named. Horses, too, are petted and and respect for authority and parental wishes. named; but have a work role which dogs do not Thesequalitiesearnedthepraiseofwhite have. The pig operates on the margins of society, teachers and employers. Hence the Japanese have asscavenger of human leftovers; and is not succeeded more than other immigrant groups who named or given a work role. Cattle are furthest have been longer in the United States and some removed. Hence the more the animal participates of whom appear to be less handicapped by racial in the company of manthe closer to ourselves and cultural differencesfor reasons to do with it becomesthe less we want to eat it. (Least of certain aspects of their culture in relation to the all we want to eat ourselves!) The same sort of culture of lower middle and middle class America reasoning may lie behind our preferences for (and also, of course, to the position of these muscle-cuts over innards: innards are 'closer in', classes in the American class structure, and the to the animal self, muscle-cuts further out; so responsiveness of American institutionsto the innards are stigmatised as poor man's food (the standards of that culture). 'soulfood' of American blacks); and the price of tongue israther less than the price of steak, Some implications although there is a good deal more steak about So what? What consequences for policies and than tongue. This particularinterpretation of programmes followfromthestatementthat edibility is clearly open to debate. All I want to different groups have different cultures, which insist on is that there is more to questions of make for differential 'success' in a given institu- edibility than nourishment or arbitrary fancy; tional setting? One reason for the rush to dismiss that there is more to the question of why Jews COP ideas6 is the genuine desire not to 'write do not eat pork than hygiene as if Moses was people off', not to say: "the Puerto Ricans don't the first public health inspector!). More generally, make it in the system because of their culture". it is the symbolic (cultural) organization of objects The concern is justified, but I do not agree that in relation to man which organizes demand and to recognize that differences in culture as well as provides the intention for production. Production in situation account for differential response to and consumption areculturalintentions. The changes and programmes, leads in any logical way giveslittleillumination to 'writing people off'. It may be used to do so, situationalperspective but to counter this use requires a different sort here. of argument, not an attempt to deny that culture Take another, quite unrelated example, which is matters. somewhat closer to the burning issues of the day. Situational variables seem to be of very little Situationalists must face the fact that in ignoring help inexplaining the fact that Chinese and cultural factors they do make cultural assump- Japanese immigrants in the United States have tions,assumptionswhichevidencecouldbe within two generations moved into white middle brought to bear on. For some questions and for class occupations, while other immigrant groups, some purposes, cultural factors may be justifiably such as Puerto Ricans and Irish, have tended to ignored. But especially when examining situa- remain in low income occupations and poor tions of change, situationalists concerned with poverty and subordination need to be aware of quality housing. their propensity to assume that the culture of A study of Japanese immigrants, from a mainly poor/subordinate groups or categories does not rural, peasant background, who came (or whose hinder response to changes in the objective situa- parents came) to the United States with only tion. It is foolhardy to claim, as some extreme temporary settlement in mind, showed that they situationalists have done, that people can dis- had values which in some respects were remark- card their ways of adapting to relative adapta- ably similar to those of the white lower middle tion as fast as old clothes, that no 'cultural lag' class, and both significantlydifferent in these is to be expected. However there is remarkably respects to those of the white working class.5 littleevidence on rates of adaptation to new situations, only conjecture and assertion. Most of 4 This example comesfrom the work of Marshall Sahlins the social studies of poor urban peoples have been and Edmund Leach,and follows the hnof analysisfirst developed by Levi Straust. 5 W. Caudil and G.de Vos,"Achievement, culture and 6 And also the idea that there may be genetic influences cn personality:the caseof the Japanese Americans", American some ofthethings whichsociologistsinsist must always Anthropologist, 1956,58, 1102-1126. be due to culture and social structure, for a similar reason.

6 instable, not changing, situations. Hence we know recognizing that individuals do not construct their surprisingly little about matters like how rapidly social worlds in terms of a wholly personal vision, aspirations change. There is some evidence that but with organizing concepts which are part of some poor peoplein America have distinctly a public meaning-system. What then are the major lower aspirations than those who are better off, public meaning-systems 'available' in a society? presumably as a means of coping with their He distinguishesthree major meaning-systems deprivation. But how rapidly will their aspirations available in most Western societies, each of which rise if the possibilities for realising them are en- derives from a different social source and each hanced? To what extent can aspirations learnt of which promotes a different moral interpreta- before adulthood be increased? Do low aspira- tion of class inequality: 1.the dominant value tions (in terms of higher education, job status, system, which promotes the endorsement of exist- housing) in some way block the take-up of new ing inequality, and which promotes among the opportunities? We do not really know, and the subordinate class a definition of the reward struc- situational approach does not lead us to want to ture in either deferential or aspirational terms; 2. know. the subordinate value system, which promotes However, proponents of a cultural approach are accommodative responses to inequality and low not likely to be of much help for these questions status, and which is generated in the milieu of either.Culturalists tend to assume the causal localworking-classcommunities;and3.the primacyofculturalfactorsassituationalists radical value system, which promotes an opposi- assume the situational. Levi Strauss's cognitive tional interpretation of inequality, and which is systems, eerily disembodied from social processes, generated by a mass political party based on the are only extreme instances of a common failing. working class. Variations in the culture of poor! But at least Levi Strauss is analytical. With few subordinate groups or individuals depend to some exceptions, the writers who have used the idea extent on their access to these meaning-systems. of a culture of poverty have used it as no more Occupation,orrelationshiptothe means of than a descriptive device. While their datais production, is one obvious influence on access. useful, they have developed few theoretical con- Parkin goes some way towards describing the structs.Situationalists, then, cannot simply say structure of these meaning-systems, and identify- that culture is for someone else to worry about; ing the factors which incline individuals to draw the onus for arriving at a general and systematic their ideas from one or other of them. One can justification for bringing cultural factors into their see immediately how ideas of the culturalists analyses is theirs. about the structure of cultural systems might con- tribute to the development of the argument, with- Perhapsthemostpromisingframeworkfor in a framework which embraces the material and tackling the issues raised by the idea of a culture physical constraints on action which culturalists of poverty is that sketched by Frank Parkin in a are prone to ignore. Itis a big step beyond the discussionofclassinequalityandmeaning- crude 'culture of poverty' idea. But Parkin says systems.7(Parkin,incidentally,isaMarxist nothing about the question which is at the fore- sociologistif a clear and simple writing style front of the culture of poverty literature: to what does not count as a disqualification.) He begins by extent does attachment to one meaning-system, oneprogramme,influence(facilitate,hinder) change to another when circumstances change. 7 F. Parkin, Class Inc quality cnd Political Order, St. Albans, Paladin, 1972, Ch. 3. He remains too much a situationalist.

7