Racial Rioting in the 1960S: An Event History Analysis of Local Conditions Author(s): Daniel J. Myers Reviewed work(s): Source: American Sociological Review, Vol. 62, No. 1 (Feb., 1997), pp. 94-112 Published by: American Sociological Association Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2657454 . Accessed: 21/01/2013 18:26 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. American Sociological Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to American Sociological Review. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded on Mon, 21 Jan 2013 18:26:05 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions RACIAL RIOTING IN THE 1960S: AN EVENT HISTORY ANALYSIS OF LOCAL CONDITIONS* Daniel J. Myers University of Wisconsin, Madison Using Spilerman's (1970b) data on the timing and locations of race riots from 1961 to 1968, I use event history analysis to investigate the effects of local conditions on city-level hazard rates of rioting. First, several struc- tural strain and social-psychological arguments, which were the focus of Spilerman's original studies, are reexamined in light of event history analy- sis. Second, I reinterpret ethnic competition arguments recently used to ex- plain a wide variety of collective violence, and apply these ideas to the 1960s' riots. Third, I test two models of the diffusion of rioting. Like previous analyses, my findings fail to support structural strain theories. Contrary to previous analyses however, the size of the non-White population is not the singular predictor found for the 1960s' riot locations. Instead, my results support both competition and diffusion arguments. D uring the 1970s, Spilerman(1970a, States, were better predictors of riots and 1971, 1972, 1976) published an influ- their severity than the 16 theoretical indica- ential set of studies examining racial rioting tors combined. in the 1960s. For many, this research became Despite the apparentclarity of Spilerman's the definitive word on the 1960s riots, and it findings, scholars did not abandon the theo- remains influential today (McPhail 1994). retical constructs he tested. Much subsequent Spilerman examined a number of theoretical research has attempted to challenge his find- explanations for the occurrence and severity ings and revive older explanations of the of riots, including structuralstrain arguments 1960s riots (for reviews, see Bryan 1979; (Smelser 1962), absolute deprivation (Dow- McPhail 1994; McPhail and Wohlstein 1983; nes 1968), relative deprivation (Gurr 1968, Schneider 1992). Despite slight deviations, 1970), unresponsive political structures(Lie- however, the results of these studies gener- berson and Silverman 1965), and geographi- ally support Spilerman's findings: The size cal contagion (National Advisory Commis- of the non-White population accounted for sion on Civil Disorders 1968). In summary, the majority of the variance of riot frequency he concluded that differences among cities explained, and other theoretical variables ex- were unrelated to the frequency and severity plained only small increments beyond it. of rioting. In fact, only two variables, the Ultimately, however, there is still a consid- size of the non-White population and a erable lack of agreement about what factors dummy variable for region in the United should remain under consideration as poten- tial causes of rioting. Some scholars con- * Direct correspondence to Daniel J. Myers, clude that structural strain explanations and Department of Sociology, 1180 Observatory other social-psychological explanations have Drive, Madison, WI 53706 ([email protected]. been thoroughly trounced and that new ap- edu). I thank Pamela Oliver, Gerald Marwell, proaches must be developed to identify the Charles Halaby, Seymour Spilerman, Robert underlying determinantsof rioting and other Mare, Alberto Palloni, Ronald Wohlstein, Ralph collective behaviors (McPhail 1994). Others Turner, Alexandra Corning, and the ASR review- ers for comments on earlier drafts. Parts of this maintain the worthiness of grievance and paper were presented at the 1995 annual meeting deprivation explanations and continue to in- of the American Sociological Association in voke slightly recast versions of these theo- Washington, D.C. ries (Heskin 1985; Koomen and Frankel 94 American Sociological Review, 1997, Vol. 62 (February:94- 12) This content downloaded on Mon, 21 Jan 2013 18:26:05 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions RACIAL RIOTING IN THE 1960S 95 1992; Polletta 1992). These ideas may con- sense of relative deprivation by comparing tinue to be popular in part because of the their situation to that of proximal Whites. ambiguity resulting from different samples Spilerman'sthird variablecluster tested the and methods, or simply because "it is very "expectations"argument (Berkowitz 1968) in difficult to abandon old explanations" (Mc- which expectations for improved social and Phail 1994:5). However, the continued at- economic conditions increase as the disad- tractiveness of these previous explanations vantaged group's position improves, thereby may hint that the empirical examinations that leading to heightened frustrationif the rising tested them were inadequate analyses of the expectations are not met. In this argument, processes underlying rioting. This question the opposite relationship between deprivation can be answered by critically examining pre- variables and racial rioting is hypothesized: vious empirical work using new analytical As conditions improvefor Blacks, an increase procedures and recent theoretical develop- in expectations, frustration, and ultimately ments that are better suited to the problem. the number of riot events occurs. Thus, I reexamine Spilerman's data on ra- Finally, Spilerman tested the idea that the cial rioting in the 1960s using event history lack of access to political representation in- analysis. First, I closely follow his analysis, creases rioting (Lieberson and Silverman re-examining his conclusions regarding the 1965): With no way to address grievances or structural strain and deprivation arguments. to have group interests represented in gov- Then, I investigate two additional explana- ernmental decision-making bodies, Blacks tions for rioting-one based on notions of may turn to violence as a method of express- social diffusion and the other based on ing their demands. As noted above, Spiler- Olzak's (1987, 1992) recent work on ethnic man (1970a) found little or no support for competition. any of these argumentsin his initial work, in which the frequency of rioting was the de- pendent variable. When riot severity was the BACKGROUND dependent variable and also failed to show these Structural Strain and Deprivation support (Spilerman 1976), ideas were further discredited. Spilerman (1970a, 1971, 1976) conducted his In addition to the original four arguments, analysis of the outbreak and severity of riots Spilerman (1970a) also noted several other by grouping structuralstrain and other related potential sources of the tendency to riot, but structural explanations into four basic clus- he provided only partial tests. Of these, I ex- ters and adopting indices for each cluster of amine competition and diffusion. arguments (Spilerman's variable clusters ap- pear in the stub of Table 2 on page 103). His Models first variable cluster tested the "social disor- Competition ganization thesis"-that poorly integratedin- Competition for scarce resources is often as- dividuals are outside the general control of sumed to be a key process underlying most community norms and have less access to tra- conflicts. When two or more groups compete ditional mechanisms for addressing social for a common pool of resources, they inevi- grievances (Downes 1968). Spilerman's sec- tably come into conflict, and as the demand ond and third clusters of variables examined for a good increases and the supply de- the "absolute"and "relative"versions of dep- creases, the conflict will increase. Park rivation arguments.The absolute deprivation (1950) applied such an economic model to argument posits that the most severely dis- ethnic and racial conflict. His faith, however, possessed in society will be the ones who that assimilation would in time relieve eth- engage in collective violence (Downes 1968). nic conflict and lead to peaceful accommo- The relative deprivation argument (Gurr dation has not been substantiated; thus, the 1968, 1970) states that a disadvantagedgroup continued application of economic competi- determines its own level of social and eco- tion models to ethnic conflict in general and nomic deprivation by comparing itself to ethnic collective violence in particular(Lieb- some reference group; in the case of erson and Silverman 1965; Nielsen 1985; Spilerman's studies, Blacks would develop a Olzak 1987, 1992; Olzak and Nagel 1986; This content downloaded on Mon, 21 Jan 2013 18:26:05 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 96 AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW Shorter and Tilly 1974; Spilerman 1970a, Black-initiated violence is more easily under- 1971, 1976; Tilly, Tilly, and Tilly