Living in a Violent Society in Gang for a Day: A Rogue Socialist Takes to the Street by Sadhir Venkatesh

Life in the ghetto was subjected to death. Many took their own lives, and others tried to escape.

In the book, Gang Leader for a Day, a rogue sociologist passionately dives into the lives of one of Chicago’s toughest housing projects in an attempt to develop an insight as to how the urban impoverished lived. Throughout the text it becomes clear that a conflict paradigm is being reflected. A conflict society is based on social inequality, in which some individuals benefit and thrive more than others, which tends to lead to conflict and thus change. This is evident both in the housing projects where a gang known as the “Black Kings” take over and also in the surrounding neighborhoods where the more elite citizens, including persons from the authors university, shy away from associating with the nearby poor black nearby public, thus

In the book, Gang Leader for a Day by Sudhir Venkatesh, a sociology student from the University of Chicago starts out simply trying to understand “how it feels to be poor and black,” and ends up spending years and years figuring out the ins and outs of a gang society (Venkatesh 14). Sudhir receives the chance of a sociologist’s lifetime to see first-hand what life is like in the projects. He follows gang leader, J.T. around and studies his life at the Robert Taylor homes for years. Throughout Venkatesh’s experience he witnesses many things some people go a lifetime without seeing. For example, he was no stranger to seeing people use drugs or get beat up by gang members. One interesting aspect of Venkatesh’s experiment

Shelby defines the ghetto as a primarily black, urban neighborhood with high concentrations of poverty. He identifies two inherent problems, extreme chronic poverty and the behavior demonstrated by residents deemed as deviations from mainstream norms, such as engaging in crime. Furthermore, Shelby refers to two common criticisms concerning ghetto poverty. One asserts that poverty is a symptom of moral depravity in the urban poor as beneficiaries in a perpetual welfare state. Another concentrates on the failure of government to fight poverty and insists on more public assistance. Shelby distinguishes his argument by focusing on the actions of ghetto resident through the principles of justice. He introduces the concept of society in terms of a cooperative scheme in which participants benefit from a mutual advantage. It then follows that individuals who benefit from the scheme must adhere to the civic obligations which enables such a scheme to develop. Consequently, refusal to adhere to these norms of society while benefiting from it violates the principle of reciprocity.

In chapter 5 in the novel Gang Leader for a Day by Sudhir Venkatesh he writes about his experience of how he began to tag along with Ms. Bailey more often. Venkatesh says the more time he would spend with her, the more he would understand her work ethics and why she is so important to the community. Since Venkatesh was spending more time with Ms. Bailey he began to help her with food drives and food donations in the community as well as go to meetings that she would run. Venkatesh says the reason that Ms. Bailey was helping the housing projects, community and their building was because it was low on clothing and food for the winter. This portion of the novel teaches us about how many people out there have needs and the altruism in the way some

After reading the essay “The Ghetto Made Me Do It” written by Francis Flaherty, I thought differently about the situation than I had before hearing both sides of this tragic story. My perspective changed from being bias toward Felicia Morgan to feeling a sense of sympathy for her. However, regardless of what defense there is to this story, it does not change how ruthless and tragic this homicide actually was.

Tommie Shelby is an American philosopher and a professor of African American studies at Harvard University. In his article “Justice, Deviance, and the Dark Ghetto” Shelby discusses poor, black neighborhoods that have persisted in America for decades due to few public policy efforts to make things better. In his article Shelby brings up two approaches to this dilemma that he opposes. The first is the personal responsibility approach which appeals to American values of hard work and ultimately places blame on the poor rather than the government or society. The Technocratic approach on the other hand does the opposite. It blames the government for failing to fix the social conditions of the poor and refuses to blame the poor themselves even if they have done actions that have not necessarily improved their well-being. Shelby’s approach is a mix between the two. He says that we cannot blame the poor if the injustice of our society has changed the content of their obligations and thus making their behavior reasonable due to the unfair conditions they were subjected to. In other words they are a product of their environment. Shelby wants to get his point across that the existence of ghettos today is evidence that our society impaired by structural injustices and that the ghetto is not only the problem of those living in it, but all of ours.

Alex Kotlowitz’s There Are No Children Here is a documentary exploring life in inner-city Chicago during the late 1980’s. The book follows the lives of two African American youth, Lafeyette and Pharoah Rivers, who live in Chicago’s Horner Homes over the course of two years. It tells of a lifestyle that is a reality for many Americans and forces the reader to acknowledge a broken system that so many turn a blind eye toward. Kotlowitz does not sugarcoat the struggles and hardships that the citizens of the inner-city face every single day. The Rivers’ boys, like all the children of inner-cities, experience situations and know of unimaginable horrors that rob them of their innocence and childhoods. Lafeyette and Pharoah have to face and overcome many forces that can change their lives for the worst, such as: gangs and drugs, the social system, the Chicago Housing Authority, and the battle within them to give into the worst of society. Sociological concepts, including: racism, strain theory, and social stratification can explain some of the exploitation of Lafeyette and Pharoah.

Moreover, he lives in a society where the predominant caste system inherently assigns each individual with a predetermined role. Thus, children like Jamal, Salim, and their companion, Latika, become both socially and spatially excluded by society. In fact, they are denied the same opportunities as regular children and their freedoms are regulated by the absent, yet restrictive influence of the social system. It is absent because these kids lack the basic necessities to aid them in their survival; they are on their own, with no one to look out for them except for themselves. On the other hand, the same system limits these kids by denying them access to resources that would help improve their situation (i.e. education, healthcare, etc.). Through the fates of such characters, the viewer is given glimpses into the relatively unexplored, misunderstood and complex world of street children, as their live their lives outside the conventional view of childhood. More often than not, those who are born into such impoverished conditions, remain in the same state, up until their death. Jamal, for instance, becomes a “chai wallah...[who serves] tea [to] people.” His mobility is restricted, and his opportunities are limited due to his lack of education and reduced social status. It also is implied that this is the fate that society has set out for

Gilbert Osofsky’s Harlem: The Making of a Ghetto paints a grim picture of inevitability for the once-exclusive neighborhood of Harlem, New York. Ososfky’s timeframe is set in 1890-1930 and his study is split up into three parts. His analysis is convincing in explaining the social and economic reasons why Harlem became the slum that it is widely infamous for today, but he fails to highlight many of the positive aspects of the enduring neighborhood, and the lack of political analysis in the book is troubling.

Understanding that the poverty of black Americans did not just stay within the home is a big step in understanding urban poverty. Urban poverty reached outside the home, into the parks, schools and playgrounds. With poverties reach being that extensive, there was something other than adversity causing this. Louis Gates wrote an article about this called “Black America and The Class Divide.” (Jr.)

This chapter is about a man named Sudhir Venkatesh he is 25 years old. He is a University student studying Sociology. After Sudhir has attended two seminars by the college he is invited to do a study on how black people live day to day. After finding a specific building he was looking for, the Robert Taylor projects, he walks right in. When walking in from left to right he could see the use of drugs. Right off the bat Sudhir is treated like an intruder, even though he is there for information and is not known around the city of Chicago. The gang that Sudhir runs in to in this book is everything but pleasant if you’re not their "own kind". Sudhir is called a Mexican, the only reason he was called Mexican was because of the way he looked. The gang, the

However, Wacquant brings the term “inner city” to light, breaking down its meaning: “black and poor.” Living in Chicago gives one an exemplary example of the term “inner city” meaning “poor, black ghettos.” The references to “inner city” schools being synonymous with “poor quality” and “mostly African American” are damaging to urban terminology and creating a predetermined perspective of those who call the “inner city” home. The “hypersegregation” of the city of Chicago is a topic within itself, but the institution of segregation is, without question, existent here. In addition, “inner city” is becoming a label which implies unavoidable incarceration.

I the article Race the Power of an Illusion, Dalton Conley says, “the Civil Rights movement of the 1960s really marks both an opportunity and a new danger in terms of racial relations in America. On the one hand, the Civil Rights era officially ended inequality of opportunity. It officially ended de jure legal inequality, so it was no longer legal for employers, for landlords, or for any public institution or accommodations to discriminate based on race. At the same time, those civil rights triumphs did nothing to address the underlying economic and social inequalities that had already been in place because of hundreds of years of inequality.” (Conley pp 1). What goes on in the American ghetto is not as glamorous as Hollywood makes it out to be now, this film does a great job at depicting what life in the ghetto for black teens is really like. The ghettos in America are full of broken culture that is left behind from centuries of oppression by the white man. Most teens like those in the movie never make it out of their neighborhoods alive. Thousands of kids die every years from gang on gang violence, damaging all chances of them escaping the ghetto and making something of themselves. Death, gangs, and drugs is the more common way that young people are left with to deal with a life of poverty and survival that seems to have no escape.

These places have broken or cracked parts of the house, dirt land, and tight spaces. It is also referred to as the “Ghetto” (“Culture of Hate: Who Are We”, 2002). So disparities among these racial and ethnic groups, even among whites, are unequal and a struggle.