Agricultural & Applied Economics Association Poverty and Our Social Order: Implications and Reservations Author(s): James H. Copp Source: American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol. 52, No. 5, Proceedings Issue (Dec., 1970), pp. 736-744 Published by: Oxford University Press on behalf of the Agricultural & Applied Economics Association Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1237692 . Accessed: 29/03/2013 12:15 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]. Agricultural & Applied Economics Association and Oxford University Press are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to American Journal of Agricultural Economics. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded from 152.14.176.89 on Fri, 29 Mar 2013 12:15:25 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions RURAL POVERTY-PROBLEMS AND PROGRAMS PROGRAMORGANIZER: WILLIAM C. MOTES, ECONOMICRESEARCH SERVICE, USDA Poverty and Our Social Order: Implications and Reservations* JAMESH. CoPP A FTERsix years of war on poverty, the out- quality.1 The bases of stratification may vary, come remains indecisive. We know where but stratification is found in socialist societies no the enemy is (although we continue to less than in ours. Although there is much debate find new sanctuaries) and we know his numbers about the bases of social stratification in Ameri- (although these numbers are always changing). can society, and the various strata are indistinct, We have appropriated funds, mobilized the there is common agreementthat these strata may troops, and laid down a barrage of programs.We be indexed by such characteristicsas income, ed- have devised some grand strategies and we have ucation, occupation, ethnicity (including race), won a few skirmishes. We have had many fine and life styles. Because these indicators are mod- reports from the field and victory has seemed erately intercorrelated,those at a given relative within our grasp. Yet, the war on poverty has be- position on one indicator tend to be at the same come stalemated and the early optimism moder- relative position on others. For example, those ated. What went wrong? who are low in income tend to be disadvantaged I propose that we retrace our steps and look at in educational attainment, occupational status, the origins of poverty within our society. Perhaps ethnic background, and life styles (identified by there are some structural clues in our social and some as the "culture of poverty"). Thus, when economic systems that throw light on the poverty we talk about poverty in rural America, we are problem and on our human dilemma in trying to talking about those who are at the bottom of the do something about it. Among the points I would heap, the have-nots, and those who don't have like to examine are these: (1) our failure to con- much more-the lower class. ceptualize poverty in terms of social stratifica- When we talk about eliminating poverty, we tion; (2) our failure to recognize that American are talking about eliminating or moving up those society is based to an important degree on ine- who are at the bottom of the stratification sys- quality; (3) our unwillingness to face up to cer- tem, those below some cutting point.2 However, tain basic premises of our free enterprisesystem; if we miraculously succeeded in doing this, the (4) our failure to get overwhelmingcommitment strata immediately above, though better off ma- to the war on poverty from the body politic; and terially, would become the new lower class and a (5) our unwillingnessto admit the true nature of potential focus for concern. Eliminating those our national priorities. Consideration of these who are presently poor will not eliminate a lower points certainly will not solve our problem, but class and the associated phenomena of depreca- facing up to realities may be helpful if we really tion and disparagement from the stratification want to do something about rural poverty. system. But much more important, in our con- Poverty and Social Stratification 'This apt descriptive term is taken from the title of Celia S. Heller's book [6]. All societies are stratified into various levels of 'In this paper conventional operational definitions of power, wealth, and prestige. No society has been poverty (e.g., Orshansky) are taken as the point of de- able to escape a system of structured social ine- parture, although, in my opinion, they err on the con- servative side. The amount of research and administra- *This paper expresses the views of the writer on the tive energy devoted to haggling over cutting points and questions considered and does not necessarily reflect the estimating the number of the poor is appalling. This en- official position of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. terprise, although important, has received disproportion- Special acknowledgment is due William B. Back, Helen ate attention and is an excellent example of goal dis- W. Johnson, and Robert B. Glasgow, Economic Develop- placement from the ultimate objective of doing some- ment Division, ERS, for criticism and suggestions regard- thing about the poor to the particulars of estimating the ing certain sections of the paper. service load. Much of the reported progress in the war on poverty may have been accomplished through up- JAMES H. CoPP is chief of the Human Resources dating estimates utilizing cutting points rendered ob- Branch, Economic Research Service, USDA. solete by secular trends. 736 This content downloaded from 152.14.176.89 on Fri, 29 Mar 2013 12:15:25 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions POVERTY AND OUR SOCIAL ORDER / 737 cern for those who are presently poor we have ologists have opportunisticallytaken the problem virtually ignored the possibilities of reducing the as defined by policy makers and granters of re- chances of the nonpoor becoming poor.3 search funds. Therefore, when we talk about poverty, we are I maintain that if we want to understand pov- talking about our stratification system; we are erty we must begin by looking at the American talking about an established system of organizing stratification system. How, in reality, is political political, economic, and social inequality. To un- power distributed?How, in reality, are control of derstand poverty we must examine the nature of property, access to jobs, and distribution of re- our stratification system-the mechanisms wards allocated? How, in reality, do we socially whereby some people are arrayed at the top, oth- evaluate the worth and desirability of people? ers at the middle, and still others at the bottom. Let us look at our institutions. Let us look at our To alter the condition of those in poverty is to notions of property, government,and welfare. Let alter the functioning of our society. Furthermore, us look at our basic notions about human nature, a genuine war on poverty involves fundamental human potentialities, individual achievement, changes in the organization of our society. I and free will. Let us look at the ways the prod- don't think we have been looking at the poverty ucts and rewards of our economy are distributed. problem in this way. We have been trying to Let us look at our notions of social worth. In change people in the lowest ranks, rather than brief, I am arguing that poverty is a logical out- change the basic mechanics of the ranking sys- come of our social order. I am arguing that our tem. Our social programs are designed to adjust social order is premised on inequality, discrimi- poor people, rather than the conditions that nation, and the preservation of privileges. I say make people poor. this not in criticism of our social order but as a Part of our deficiencies in conceptualization point of fact. I do not believe that any social or- and programdesign can be attributed to the state der can avoid the dilemmas of stratification. of our knowledge. As some critics of stratification However, I do believe we can profitably examine research by American sociologists have pointed our institutions and consider alternatives with out, the field is underdeveloped. Some sociolo- the goal of reducing the severity of conditions for gists have even denied that stratification exists. those at the bottom and opening up channels of The raw truth is that we don't understand the mobility so that those at the bottom, and their American stratification system. We have concen- children, and their children's children shall not trated on status and life styles rather than on the be doomed to an endless "cycle to nowhere" [5]. bases of social class [14]. In recent years, soci- Furthermore,we want to reduce the chances that ologists have been inclined to study poverty as a others, now above the poverty level, will fall into special problem rather than as a product of the the same abyss. underlying structure of our stratification system. We have studied as an individual poverty symp- Inequality in American Society tom rather than as a societal phenomenon.4Soci- 3 Equality is a common shibboleth in popular One of the gravest oversightsin the war on poverty, of American We tell school in terms of political implications,has been the neglect of discussions society. the lower middle class. They see programsdesigned to children and foreign visitors that our country is bring the lower classes closer to them.