Notes on Social Problems by Dwight Adams 1992

When you study history, you find that many occurrences make you uneasy about the past. Perhaps the gathering up of Japanese-Americans into camps during WWII bothers you, or the "taming of the west" which meant the elimination of millions of American Indians. The Viet Nam "police action" is yet another event that affected millions of lives.

But does large numbers of people being affected necessarily mean the phenomenon is a "social problem?" Not always. It may be hard to have a social problem when only a handful of people are involved, but history shows that millions can be affected and not consider it a "problem;" or at least not consider it a problem initially. One example is Germany in the early years under Hitler. "The Wave," a video found at the library, has an excellent way of bringing to your understanding the early years of Nazism and how it appealed to the people; it was not considered a "problem," but a blessing.

But even when we have a happening that affects significant portions of the population in an undesirable way (recognized as bad), do we necessarily have a "social problem?" not if we as the population do not see changing it being within our power.

Is the weather a social problem? It may kill and destroy (like in hurricanes in the past year in Florida and Hawaii) and create great physical suffering and financial ruin. But do we think we can do much about it? If we began to have the scientific power to control the elements, then collective action by the populace would consider bad weather as social problem.

"Age Wars" has the potential to become a very serious social problem in the 21st century.

**************************************************************

Some things give us frustration until it is thrust upon us once again as a "social problem" that we can't ignore. This correct definition of social problems allows us in social science to look beyond the current news and see trends that help predict the future problems. Current news is seen within the long�term social movements and the rising of a charismatic leader is watched for. The news is integrated on a planetary scale, rather than hidden away as only of local interest. Many Historical Sociologists may see today's happenings being influenced by events as far back as thousands of years, let alone centuries or decades.

This is easier to understand when you look at an example: slavery in the United States and it's social impact on race relations today in contrast to slavery practices in South America and the very great social difference they have today. Our slaves were not only bought and sold, but the offspring of those slaves were also considered property. But in South America, the offspring were free. This created an environment different than ours; color of skin did not become the automatic badge of slavery or the automatic assumption that races were genetically different. This influences the current definition of race relations and of "social problems" in the two geographical areas.

Some question as to whether we in the United States have the equality that we claim; they suggest that we no longer have a pluralist country (where political decisions are made by constantly changing coalitions of many political forces). This idea was expressed by C. Wright Mills in his book "The Power Elite"; that we are now ruled by a small unified "ruling class:"
1) Nearly one-third of our own federal funds goes to the military, making it the largest single customer of American business
2) Our current peace�time figure of troops in the military is more than 2 million, whereas we only had 3.5 million at the peak of the Viet Nam War.
3) According to the General Accounting Office, there is a 91% chance of a major cost overrun on the average military contract.
4) Fraud and waste, according to the General Accounting Office, costs the Department of Defense at least $15 billion per year.
5) The budgets of many of our multi�national corporations are many time larger than that of the GNP of many of the countries in which they locate.
6) Evidence suggests that our corporations are simply using up the resources of these countries (even to the point of economic control, due to sheer dominance in the market place, over what is produced in these countries).
7) Many of those same countries spend the money they make from our multi-national corporations to buy weapons from us
---------
The Social Clock : Not "acting your age" will often bring swift retribution. The society is saying that you've overstepped good taste and tries to force you back into the mainstream of "polite company."

Some things are codified into laws, the next level of norms. Laws require legal sanctions against the offending individual. In this level the society feels that breaking the law is too threatening to the existing order; the offender must pay for the crime, if for no other reason than to be an example to others who might offend. These norms are considered too important to be left to chance or only public ridicule.

Another yet stronger class of norms may not even need to be place into the law books, as many of them are simply unthinkable. These are the taboos which are "horrifying" to the individuals which make up a society. To do a taboo is unthinkable, and that is why the public tries so hard NOT to see when one is broken. A current example is the question of cult ritual abuse to children: it is so horrifying that even law enforcement personnel often deny that it exists in any form.

It is important that you understand that these various norms CHANGE OVER TIME and BETWEEN CULTURES. That is why sociologist say that man has NO INSTINCTS--because norms change in their relative nature--although they are found in all cultures at all times in one form or another (we call this "Cultural Universals").

One example of a cultural universal that is in all lands, yet is found in quite differing forms, is the incest taboo. All peoples had and do have some very serious prohibition concerning sexual intercourse with defined relatives. But the striking thing is WHO is defined as a relative for "non-sex" purposes. Some societies have made OPPOSITE definitions from other societies! Cannibalism is yet another interesting subject. To us the idea is a taboo, but to other societies eating your spouse was critical and was the greatest form of love: it sets the spirit free from the body to live on, whereas anything short of cannibalism is to permanently entrap the loved one's spirit.

With these definitions set form as to "normative" life in any given society, the definition of deviance is simple; it is not conforming. Not conforming does not necessarily imply damage to the society. Charismatic leaders (a Weberian term) go against the prevailing norms of the day and change society into a new creature, yet they are very deviant in their doing so. In our society, there seems to be a prohibition on growing old----unless you die young, you very well may be a deviant yourself!
-------------
The first chapter in this lesson talks about crime--those norms that have been codified. But are certain laws still, in society's viewpoint, needed now? Are "victimless crimes" real crimes, or should they only be mores or folkways? Do you always know  what the interactive effect may be? (which came first the religious doctrine shift or the society shift--like on the subject of abortion--or the sex education in the schools?).

Even when it is thought that a social question has been answered, it is often the case that we later find new evidence that asks the question all over again (example: when did AIDS start? The first known AIDS case was in the late 50s! A person died with an unknown disease and tissue samples were frozen. Only 3 years ago these tissue samples were thawed and checked out: AIDS was the cause of his death. So what happened to the virus all those years? Why is it now a pandemic social problem after being dormant so long? What made it "re-appear?").

Do people really follow religious teachings, or do the religious teachings follow social movements? Actually the answer is BOTH are true, depending on the time and event. A simple example is shown during times of war: religious dogma, which usually has some type of "thou shalt not kill" and "love thy neighbor" will be put away for more of a "United we stand against the Godless enemy" stance. Yet society looks to religious holidays to bolster the common values of the population and often uses religious leaders to add value to the political leader's power (example: Popes blessing Kings, or even doing the crowning of Kings).

In some societies, the political and religious are blended together forming a Theocracy (example: Iraq). In such countries, it is difficult to separate "church and state" as each portion is blended together and supports the other. Even the decisions of courts in these countries blend the secular law and the religious teachings together in determining what the society will accept or punish.
----------
Prejudice is the "inward" feeling of being superior over another group while discrimination is the "outward signs" (behavior) of contempt directed towards that group. It is possible to have a great deal of prejudice built up before discrimination bubbles over in some overt act (usually due to the societal norms discouraging such actions). The opposite is also true, an individual may take part in a discriminatory act (to belong to his peer group) but have little actual personal prejudice.  India has a caste of people have been labeled as "untouchable," and even the shadow of these people, should it fall on one "higher born," is "dirty" and will cause "ritualistic pollution" (leaving the need for special cleansing of the unfortunate well-born who had the shadow touch him).

However the labeling is accomplished, prejudice robs any society of the potential and the human capital of the group so labeled as inferior. Discrimination goes further to victimize the minority and to lead the majority into a false sense of reality (they blame the minority for things the minority have nothing to do with, and thus miss the real cause for the problem).

The concepts of prejudice, whether based on race, gender, age, or whatever, were considered above. Now we will carry on the idea into areas that perhaps you are not yet sensitive to, for there are many areas of prejudice found in our society.

One concerning area of prejudice is in the Military Services. Scientists have noted throughout this century that the poor--no matter what their race--are the ones who die most often in battle. They are also the ones more numerically likely to serve (as a percentage of the population, blacks, as an example, serve in the military at a much greater rate that do whites). For many, this is an opportunity to have a job, though the job may entail fighting for their life.

But the "inferiority" concepts of those who hold prejudicial views still stand--despite the valor of those who preserve our freedoms. One such example resides in Japanese-Americans (born in the United States in some cases for 2-4 generations!). At the very time that their parents and families were in "settlement camps" during World War II, platoons of Japanese-Americans fought on the front lines and won more battle ribbons than any other of our fighting men--and had a higher percentage of them die in battle as well.

Hispanics number a large minority in the United States and it is a growing population (growing faster than the white population). Scientists who study this growth suggest that Spanish will become an increasingly important language in the U.S. But they also note a social movement to declare "English" as the national language (to stop the "threat" of Spanish) by those who believe we are a "melting pot." Which is it? If we are a "melting pot," then we should not be afraid of Spanish becoming an important part of our language (ask any Englishman, we have never spoken English correctly anyway!).
-----------
Besides the shear numbers of older people, the economics of medical costs (which increase in older ages) is also of great concern. Some social scientists suggest that, by 2030, the entire GNP of the country will need to be spent only on medical bills of the aged (an impossible situation). Others suggest that, even now, a full one�half of the Medicare budget is spent on only the last 6 months of life (and then we only extend life by 4-6 months!).

Any way you look at it, the economics appear to be gearing up for a serious labeling of some group as deviant, and, therefore, having no rights to medical care. Could it be that those who are minority�status now and also become old will be the greatest targets? That is what we are seeing already and it is called "triple jeopardy:" old, female, and a minority race.
-------------
In the past two decades, America has experienced a tremendous growth in the number of homeless people. Homelessness in America has increased to such an extent that almost two thirds of the cities cited in a 1987 report were compelled to turn people away from emergency shelters due to lack of resources.

There is a misconception among many Americans that homeless people have made the choice to be homeless and wish to be such. This is not always the case. Among the homeless are: retired people on small fixed incomes; runaway teens and school dropouts; drug addicts and alcoholics; disabled and mentally ill people; unemployed; young mothers; and families who lost their housing.
-------------
In the last decade of this century, we are bombarded with some protest in some part of the country or the world each night on the news, so this form of gaining public notice is not quite as powerful of a tool as it once was. Some believe that terrorism is slowly replacing the peaceful demonstration as a means of gaining the public's sympathy to a cause.

People are being effected by environmental issues and see that they often must be social issues, as they are usually beyond the control of a small group of concerned citizens. Horror stories of genetic alterations and early deaths have come from both our country and abroad with reference to radiation pollution or chemicals seeping into the drinking water. In Utah the "downwinders" recently won a suit with the Federal government over the long-term effects of above-ground nuclear bomb testing in the '50s.

Although radiation leaks are not the only environmental concern, it is interesting to note that Russia is slowly admitting to serious trouble from at least two major radiation leaks in that country. The U.S. military now has confirmed at least 37 nuclear "accidents" within our boarders (including our 7 mile territorial water limits).

Yet as scientist claim that our "3-mile Island incident" was very low as a health threat (less than getting a dental x-ray), people are still concerned and do not necessarily believe that such a low amount of damage is true. Whether the damage really is more or not, social scientists measure the perceived threat and notice human behavior change with relation to this social problem.

Such social concern has jumped the boarders of countries, as cited by the example of the U.S. concern of the burning of the Rain Forests in Southern Countries. Not only is this destruction causing the extinction of many species of plants and animals, but it also is now seen as destructive of the human species for several reasons.

We'll name a few here: 1) medicines, both some that are known and others that scientists are hoping to discover, often are directly linked to the growth found in the Rain Forests, 2) the slash and burn techniques many be changing world-wide weather patterns and warfare incidents) ever known to man. They consider it more terrible than during the World Wars.

Yet the Super Powers seem to be at peace and we are fond of hearing the term "peace dividend." With the Cold War officially at an end, it appears that the parts of the world who are in War have gone mad. In Bosnia an "ethnic cleansing" is being conducted and in Kampuchea (Cambodia) strife and death still dominate. Why all this conflict?

In the last lesson, the idea of World Systems Theory was introduced. Social scientists who hold to that theory claim that the Super Powers are still fighting for resources (which is the major reason, they claim, for all wars) but doing it through "agents" or Lesser Powers. They cite the fact that the United States is STILL the world's leader in exportation of weaponry (even though the former Soviet Union is selling vast amounts of arms at very, very low prices to Third World countries).

These theorists say that the United States sells weaponry to buy Third World resources (even though those resources are often turned into goods for Americans by Second World Powers).