Tuesday, 24 March 2015
POVERTY THROUGH DIFFERENT LENS
JULIET PORTILLO
Many middle and upper class in society seems to blame the poor for the situation that they are in.
They often condemn them for not trying to raise their own standard of living. These individuals
or groups look at poverty through different lens. It is often heard by some that people are lazy,
they lack achievement and motivation, have plenty children who they cannot adequately provide for
and depends on the state for handouts. Has the system failed poor people? Is it a never ending cycle
or as Oscar Lewis puts it, a culture of poverty whereby poverty stricken individuals feels a sense
of hopelessness in their situation. The culture of poverty is a sub culture of poverty. It is
both an adaptation and a reaction of the poor to their marginalized position in a class-stratified,
highly individuated, capitalist society. It represents an effort of cope with feelings of hopelessness
and despair that arise from the realization by the members of the marginal communities in these societies
of the improbability of their achieving success in terms of the prevailing values and goals. It perpetuates
itself thus becoming a cycle passed on from generation to generation.
Re3ference:
Lewis, Oscar. The Culture of Poverty
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The issue of poverty have been widely studied. It is a concept that is ambiguous, a phenomenon difficult tounderstand, define and measure. Defining the concept of poverty has always been filled with complexity and debate. Consequently, there are different argument put forward by researchers on the phenomenon, e.g., Becker (1977) summarised that "the conceptualization of poverty is somewhat dependent upon the political values, welfare policies and the paradigm of the researcher making the definition." In this regard, poverty can be understood in both absolute and relative terms. "Absolute poverty are usually based upon the idea of subsistence. In other words, people are in poverty if they do not have the resources to maintain human life." That is to say food, shelter, clothing and water. Supporters of relative poverty took a different slant. They argue that "a definition must relate to the standard of a particular society at a particular time." (Haralambos and Holborn 2002). Relative poverty implies that one is able to purchase need. However, they may have fewer resources or less income than others within a society. In other words, it is what society define for itself. In this stead, if one do not have a flat sreen television, society thinks that person is poor. This may not be necessarily so, there may be other variables or reasons why those individuals may not possess a television. Perhaps, the individuals may not attain the commodity because of religious persuasion or just do not want to acquire one.
ReplyDeleteC. Samuel