Critical Analysis of Oscar Lewis' Culture of Poverty Theory

This essay provides an analysis of Oscar Lewis's 'Culture of Poverty,' a theory that posits poverty is perpetuated by cultural values passed down through generations. The essay examines Lewis's arguments, which are based on his studies of economically disadvantaged families in Mexico and Puerto Rico. It discusses the core tenets of the theory, including the idea that individuals in impoverished environments develop a distinct culture that reinforces their poverty. The analysis also explores criticisms of Lewis's theory, such as its resemblance to capitalist viewpoints and the debate surrounding whether poverty and the culture of poverty are distinct. The essay references Lewis's observations about the impact of poverty on children and the debate around whether poverty and culture of poverty are distinct. The conclusion acknowledges the theory's complexities while highlighting its contributions to understanding the persistence of poverty. The essay is supported by Lewis's research and the work of other scholars in the field.

Running head: analysis of the essay, culture of poverty
Analysis of the essay, culture of poverty
Name of Student:
Name of University;
Author note:

1Analysis of the essay, culture of poverty
Culture of Poverty was popularised by Oscar Lewis, which says that poverty is a result
of cultural values that is passed down generation after generation as a lineage of the family. This
essay will analyse lewis' piece of work and produce its main arguments and ideas. The paper
aims to analyse 'Culture of Poverty' critically.
Oscar Lewis based on his studies on 171 families economically weaker family of Mexico
and Puerto Rico produced his theory. Lewis states that there is an increase in publication about
the poor and they reiterate two contradictory points, one connects poverty with honesty,
independency and virtue and the other states that the poor are sordid, evil, criminal and violent.
The conflicts in the viewpoints reflect the inability to differentiate poverty and culture of poverty
that has been explained by Lewis.
Lewis believes that people who grow up in an economically weak family inherit values
that contribute in continuing their impoverished condition which creates a cycle of poverty
generation after generation. This is a major reason why, despite the anti-poverty programmes, the
state of poverty does not improve. Lewis states that individuals living in a particular
impoverished environment have no sense of their history and instead of alleviating themselves,
they become used to their way of living and adapt to this kind of lifestyle and pass their legacy.
He also states that putting an end to poverty will not put an end to the culture of poverty because
both are different things and even if poverty is improved the people do not lose the
characteristics that has been for a very long time. According to Lewis, not all who live in poverty
have the culture of poverty in them, for example, the low castes of India, Jews of Eastern
Europe, Russian Jewish and German Jewish immigrants.

2Analysis of the essay, culture of poverty
Lewis talks about the effect of culture of poverty on children; "By the time slum children
are six or seven years old, they usually have absorbed the basic values and attitudes of their
subculture and are not psychologically geared to take full advantage of changing condition or
increased opportunities which may occur in their lifetime" ( Lewis, 2019). Lewis’ theory is often
contradicted when seen in the light of the imperialist theory or capitalist theory. It is often said
that it resonates the theory of the colonists who considered the blacks as savages and responsible
for their own destruction or exploitation. Likewise, Lewis’ theory of culture of poverty says that
the poor is responsible for their own state of poverty and deprivation which is often looked down
upon as it resembles the believes of the capitalists. However this theory has gained a lot of
popularity over the years and many of the renowned writers like Harrington has supported his
theory. Michael Harrington reiterates Lewis’ theory and says that because of the socio-economic
exclusion from the mainstream society the economically backward grow increasingly hopeless.
They adapt to this lifestyle and think and behave differently from the mainstream society.
It can be safely concluded from the above discussion that Lewis’ theory might have
contradictory notion but it certainly states some valid points that are reliable since the theory is
based on his study of 171 economically backward families in Mexico and the data that were
collected by other scientists in the same field.

3Analysis of the essay, culture of poverty
Reference:
Lewis, O. (2017). The culture of poverty. In Poor Jews (pp. 9-25). Routledge.