Louis Wirth

Urbanism as a Way of Life

The urbanization of the world, which is one of the most impressive facts of modern times, has wrought profound changes in virtually every phase of social life. The recency and rapidity of urbanization in the United States accounts for the acuteness of our urban problems and our lack of awareness of them. Despite the dominance of urbanism in the modern world we still lack a sociological definition of the city which would take adequate account of the fact that while the city is the characteristic locus of urbanism, the urban mode of life is not confined to cities. For sociological purpose a city is a relatively large, dense, and permanent settlement of heterogenous individuals. Large numbers account for inidividual variability, the relative absence of intimate personal acquaintanceship, the segmentalization of human relations which are largely anonymous, superficial, and transitory, and associated characteristic. Density involves diversification and specialization, the coincidence of social relations, glari...

Ideology and Utopia.

Foreword, Preface, Preface to the new Edition, Books and Monographs by Karl Mannheim, 1. Preliminary Approach to the Problem, 2. Ideology and Utopia, 3. The Prospects of Scientific Politics

Types of Nationalism

Nationalism, or the social movements of nationalities striving to acquire, maintain, and enhance their status in a world where they are confronted by opposition or conflict, has a vast historical literature to its credit. The scientific study of nationalism must build upon but go beyond the particularistic knowledge of specific cases, on the one hand, and avoid lumping together all instances of nationalism, on the other hand. This paper suggests a tentative typology of European nationalisms which, it is hoped, may find wider applicability. The typology is based upon the characteristic form that conflict and opposition take and the corresponding self-and group-consciousness which it generates. The four types of nationalism here presented are hegemony nationalism, particularistic nationalism, marginal nationalism, and the nationalism of minorities.

The Sociology of Ferdinand Tonnies

Modern German sociology bears many traces of the influence of the various academic disciplines from which the present generation of German sociologist were recruited. It reflects the current philosophical thought of the various schools. One of the most important and influential figures of today is Tonnies, who was greatly influenced by Hobbes. Spencer, and Sir Henry Maine. His most important contribution consists of the fundamental dichotomy, community and society. The former refers to natural, organic groups; the latter to artificial and conscious and deliberate groupings. In accordance with this distinction he conceives of sociology as capable of division into two great fields: general and special sociology. The former, deals with social life in any form, conscious or unconscious. It includes social biology and social pshychology. Special sociology consists of pure, applied and empirical sociology. It deals mainly with structural forms of social life as seen through the concepts community and society. His three most important works are Gemeinschaft und Gesellschaft; Die Sitte, which is a study of the mores; and Kritik der offentlichen Meinung, which is a comprehensive study of social movements and public opinion. Tonnies has systematically exploited a limited number of basic concepts and has attempted to see the whole of experience in terms of these. This has resulted in a conceptual and distorted point of view on the one hand, but a thorough analysis of a very limited phase of experience in intellectualistic terms on the other. In this he is fairly typical of a great number of his European contemporaries.

Culture Conflict and Delinquency. I. Culture Conflict and Misconduct

T HE history of criminology as a science is a record of the successivefumbling with anthropological, psychological and sociological hypotheses which have not brought us appreciably nearer to an understanding of the problems of misconduct. In the attempt to explain delinquency we have been repeatedly shifting our attention from the personality to the surroundings and have emphasized first one, then another biological, psychological or cultural fact, usually to the exclusion of all others. In stressing culture conflict as one of the possible factors in delinquency we are merely selecting for special investigation one of the items in the sociological approach and are neglecting for the moment other factors both situational and personal. In the face of the imposing series of exploded theories of criminality, prudence dictates that a new theory avoid the persistent error of claiming universal applicability. It should be frankly stated at the outset, therefore, that not all delinquency is explained by culture conflict and not all of lifes experiences and social relations involve culture conflict. But, if the social psychologists are correct, conscious mental life arises out of conflict situations. Still it would be an exaggeration to speak of conflict as a universal etiological principle. There are so many significant problems on which it has an immediate bearing that it is not necessary to magnify the importance of this principle to convince others of its usefulness. There have been several widely accepted theories of sociologv which have been constructed around the central notion of conflict. For our purposes, however, we need a much more specific and workable conception than these universalistic theories imply. It is the merit of William Healy to have called attention to the relationship between mental conflicts and misconduct. The sociologist might raise the question whether these mental conflicts as they appear on the inner, personal side of life are not sometimes paralleled by culture conflicts when viewed from the standpoint of the social world. The records of social agencies concerned with the behavior problems of individuals, in their emphasis on the details of biological heredity, on psychometric tests, on psychiatric diagnoses generally reflect the fashion that happens to prevail at the moment with reference to the sciences of human behavior. In our conventional case records we often find, largely due to medical, psychological, and psychiatric bias, a fairly detailed account of the personal characteristics of the individual, but relatively little about the cultural setting, the group customs out of which the individuals behavior at least in part flows. One is tempted to ask: Is it not as important to record the sometimes grossly conflicting family traditions of the paternal and maternal ancestors as to trace their respective childhood diseases? Whatever may be the physical, the psychological and the temperamental differences between various races and societies, one thing is certain, namely that their cultures are different. Their traditions,

Ideological Aspects of Social Disorganization

T HE Ideological Element in Social Problems. The notion that ideologies play an important part in contemporary social life seems to have penetrated into the sphere of popular discourse. Today even the newspapers occasionally refer to ideologies when they wish to allude to a complex of ideas, a body of doctrines, the programs of movements, the platforms of parties-in fact, to any creed or theory that takes on an intellectualized and rationalized form. It would be difficult to imagine a single social problem in the analysis and proposed solution of which we do not have to take account of ideological factors. They are an elusive but significant part of our contemporary social landscape. They serve as landmarks which help us to find our way in what otherwise would be a chaotic social world, by providing us with guidance in defining and evaluating situations. Ideologies enable us to identify ourselves with social movements and groups which offer interpretations and solutions of problems which could only rarely be undertaken by each individual independently. They aid us in reducing excessive individuation and indifference in respect to social problems by furnishing us with goals by which more or less articulate groups become integrated. While they help us to get our bearings and to sustain our capacity for collective action, it must be recognized, however, that much of our confusion and indecision is in part attributable to the wide variety of ideologies to which we are exposed and to the intermixture of conflicting ideological elements that direct the attention and court the loyalties of the several members of the society. A further confusion is introduced by the fact that the beliefs and creeds which men profess do not always correspond to the principles-if any-which find expression in their actual conduct. Consequently, in the world of action as well as in social science, ideologies are often referred to as mere ideologies, as if they were irrelevant epiphenomena having no substantial roots in and relations to the realities of existence. It is the object of this paper to elaborate the proposition that our contemporary social problems cannot be adequately treated and that the situations to which they refer cannot be understood without taking due account of the role of their ideological involvements. There is a widespread belief that the problems of maladjustment of men to one another and to the world in which they live arise out of the nature of men or of things. Despite the work of a long line of social scientists who have indicated that the situations we call social problems are problematical only because they represent deviations from socially accepted norms and

Morale and Minority Groups

As a nation composed of many diverse racial and cultural elements, the United States faces a unique problem of building national morale. The Indian, the Negro, the Oriental, and particularly the European immigrants and their descendants constitute our principal minorities. The great number, the dense concentration, and the isolated group life of some of these, together with their subordinate social position and the consequences of our past Amerivanization policies, raise questions about our national solidarity. The disadvantaged position of our minorities lends itself redily to exploitation by foreign governments. The Nazis and Fascists have employed a propaganda and orgaizational campaign designed for American conditions. Their appeals are directed in part to the minorities, in part to the dominant groups. The situation thus crated inclines us to adopt remedial and precautionary measures, some of which are ill advised. Our strategy of morale-building might well capitalize on the diverse origin of our people and our democratic traditions. Our experience in the last war and the lessons learned from the conquered nations of Europe suggest a more effective national policy for us. We are likely to get better morale by emphasizing our common aspirations rather than our common memories because, if our minorities can be convinced that their minority status is not permanent and that they can hope to share fully in the promises of democracy, their effort in the national enterprise can be relied upon.

Localism, Regionalism, and Centralization

The genesis and present arrangement of political and administrative units are nonrational. Hence they often are obstacles rather than aids in social life. There is an apparent interest in reconstructing them to conform more nearly to contemporary apparent interest in reconstructing them to conform more nearly to contemporary needs. The size of the unit of effective political organization depends in large measure upon the corresponding range of economic and social life which has been profoundly modified by modern technology. The advantages and disadvantages of centralized or decentralized organization, respectively, are ultimately to be viewed in the light of the dominant values of society. Through a consideration of the functional and regional factors in communual life the shortcoming of local autarchy and overcentralization may be circumvented in a segmentalized, technological society. Various practical political programs have been suggested for more effective integration of societies. Social planning appears as a useful instrument in implementing the social aims, especially in democracies.

Is there No Place for Culture in a Sociology of Legal and Illegal Enterprise

in this exchange with Jennifer Lee about our article. Lee gave our article a thoughtful reading. We believe this exchange is very useful for ASR’s readership in that it presents an opportunity to debate some very fundamental sociological questions: The role of structure and culture in social activity and organization, and whether either structure or culture should be assigned primacy in explaining social behavior. Our article and Lee’s comment represent two important broader positions found throughout sociology today. Our position is that ethnic cultural capital is interrelated with social capital and that such cultural capital—which Light and Gold (2000) include as a component of what they call “ethnic resources”—shapes how groups respond to structural opportunities and provide illegal goods and services. Lee’s position is a much more structuralist stance. Is there a place for culture in sociological explanations of illegal (or legal) enterprise? Lee would apparently answer, “No.” Her position seems to be that social structures (including opportunities, market conditions, financial capital, class resources, economic barriers, and perhaps also networks) are paramount in explaining ethnic differences in enterprise. Culture, especially cultural variations between ethnic groups, really has no place in explanations of enterprise. In fact, she sees significant danger in such explanations. According to Lee, assigning cultural factors a role in explaining how groups respond to structural conditions risks confirming negative stereotypes about groups (in this case, African Americans) or blaming them for “cultural shortcomings.” She reminds us of the Thomas’s famous theorem that what people define as real becomes real in its consequences (Thomas and Thomas 1928). Ironically, W. I. and D. S. Thomas spent their careers being vitally concerned with the role of culture in social organization and disorganization. Thomas and Znaniecki (1918) also invoked both culture and structure to explain the actions and experiences of Polish immigrants. In fact, we stand behind a long line of sociologists who have recognized culture, including ethnic culture, as being interrelated with social structure across a wide range of phenomena, such as the following: Emile Durkheim, Max Weber, Robert Merton, Edward Banfield, Robert Park and Louis Wirth, Edwin Sutherland, Peter Berger and Thomas Luckmann, Pierre Bourdieu, and most contemporary symbolic interactionists. Furthermore, Herbert Blumer (1990) pointed out that the causal impact of economic forces is indeterminate and conditioned by social and cultural features of local group life. Our analysis of numbers gambling is congruent with the idea that structural conditions shape and sometimes change cultures, but also that cultural repertoires influence how groups respond or adapt to structural conditions. When we speak of culture in our article, we follow Berger and Luckmann (1967) in viewing culture as “stocks of knowledge” and Bourdieu (1977) in viewing culture as “habitus.” It is useful to revisit our major empirical findings and our theoretical conclusions from them. Our main findings are that black independent ownership of numbers banks was once very common in East City, and black-owned banks once thrived there. Beginning in the late 1970s to early 1980s, however, black ownership and control declined to the point where, by circa 2000, there was only one large, durable, indeReply to Lee, ASR, February 2006

Education for Survival: The Jews

The strong emphasis and high valuation which the Jews have historically placed on learning created a common consciousness and coherence which assured their survival as a separate group despite their wide dispersion. Jewish education until the Enlightenment consisted mainly of rote learning and casuistic interpretation of sacred texts. It remained medieval in spirit longest where the opportunities for participation in capitalistic secular culture were most restricted. In more recent times the increasing migration of Jews to the urban areas of advanced capitalistic nations has tended to weaken the influence of religious education with all but the nationalist groups. For the most part, Jewish learning now serves only as a supplement to the secular public education. The contrast between the highly urbanized, sophisticated Jews and the Negroes is great. Nonetheless, as minority peoples they have many common problems of adjustment and orientation.