The Politics of Drugs: an Inquiry in the Sociology of Social Problems*

While a great deal of sociological attention has been given to phenomena identified as social problems, a general theory of social problems has yet to be presented. The describing and categorizing of social problems has dominated such inquiry, with little attention given to the process of problem creation and maintenance within the context of power, interests, and politics. We must look to the arena of political, social, and economic power, and identify those varying interests vying to define certain phenomena as problematic and those attempting to counter such recognition. The emergence of the “drug problem” in the early twentieth century provides an excellent example of the political nature of problem identification and definition. Early entrepreneurs and their organizations brought about the institutionalization of the problem through the passage of drug laws. While medical interests were victorious in protecting their practice in the Harrison Act of 1914, subsequent efforts by enforcement agencies, among others, brought about the criminalization of the user. The criminalization of the “drug problem” was aided by a change in the image of the user.     

A Sociology of Attachment: Music Amateurs, Drug Users

After describing objects as networks, we attempt to describe 'subject-networks'. Instead of focusing on capacities inherent in a subject, we attend instead to the tactics and techniques which make possible the emergence of a subject as it enters a 'dispositif'. Opting for an optimistic analysis of Foucault, we consider 'dispositifs' and their constraints to be generative: they do not simply reduce but also reveal and multiply. The generative power of 'dispositifs' depends upon their capacity to create and make use of new capacities in the persons who pass through them. Drawing upon a diverse body of literature and upon fieldwork among drug addicts and music amateurs, we show how this point of entry into the question of the subject immediately and irredeemably undoes traditional dichotomies of sociology. It becomes impossible to continue to set up oppositions like those of agent/structure, subject/object, active/passive, free/determined. We also have to look beyond studies of 'action' and describe 'events'. Through the words and trials of the music and drug lovers, it becomes clear that the subject can emerge as she actively submits herself to a collection of constraints. These actors describe necessary yet tentative techniques of preparation to produce this 'active passion', this form of 'attachment' which we attempt to describe as that which allows the subject to emerge—never alone, never a pristine individual, but rather always entangled with and generously gifted by a collective, by objects, techniques, constraints.     

At the Intersection of Urban Sociology and Criminology: Fear Of Crime and the Postindustrial City

This essay examines the intersections between urban sociology and criminology in relation to fear of crime. I argue that there is a disconnect between theory and practice when it comes to reducing fear of crime that needs to be resolved in order for the postindustrial city to attract the new middle‐class demographic that is known for embracing and seeking out diversity. Despite the contributions made by environmental criminologists and new urbanists, the most popular explanation of fear of crime and crime reduction, offered by the field of criminology, focuses on reducing quality‐of‐life offenses and incivilities. Yet, these strategies are not known to significantly reduce fear of crime, but rather for purging the urban landscape of its diversity through exclusion.     

The Relationship between Theory and Research: a Study in the Sociology of Sociology*

While the importance of the relationship between theory and research is given credence in sociology, little has been done in delineating the specific nature of such a relationship. In order to do so, the present article examines data concerning the theoretical orientation and methodological procedures employed by the authors of 1,434 articles (in five substantive areas) which have appeared in nine major sociological journals over the period 1950 to 1970. Analysis of these data reveals the presence of a strong affinity between the utilization of a realist theoretical perspective, centering upon the study of group properties, and the employment of less empirical research techniques. Conversely, those authors shown to employ a nominalist theoretical approach, and hence those focusing upon individual properties, were found to use more empirical techniques and procedures in their research. Further analysis of the relationship between the theoretical and methodological orientations utilized by the authors surveyed appears to indicate some tendency for one's mode of data analysis to be as much a reason for, as a function of, one's theoretical perspective.     

Little Theories and Big Problems: Chicago Sociology and Ethnic Conflicts*

Since this society is oriented toward a specific theory, I thought I ought to say something about theories in general and our little theory in particular. Let me get that off of my chest. I am not overly fond of terms like “theory” and “theorist,” both of which seem to suggest the importance of the person who claims the identity more than anything else. They are pompous terms. To the extent that we are thoughtful about what we are doing and how we are going about it, all sociologists are theorists and methodologists. But if that is all we are, then we are literally people of no substance. We have no substantial knowledge of or concern for the empirical world. The little theory we share is extraordinarily empirical. It is, as one of its most prominent practitioners called it, a “grounded theory” ( Glaser and Strauss 1967 ). I confess that several years after receiving my degree I had no real sense of what symbolic interaction was and how it might differ from other theoretical orientations. Arnold Rose enlightened me on this when he asked me to submit a paper for a new collection he was editing ( Rose 1962 ). I was pleased and flattered. Rose was a mentor of mine, and I had never before been asked to contribute to an edited volume. But I was unsure of what would be appropriate for a book about symbolic interaction. I screwed up my courage and asked Arnold: “Exactly what is symbolic interaction”” He shrugged off my ignorance, turned on his heels, and muttered over his shoulder, “It is what they do at Chicago.”     

Review Essay: Constructing the Sociology of Social Problems: Spector and Kitsuse Twenty-Five Years Later

Sociological Forum -     

A Sociology of the Periphery Versus a Peripheral Sociology: Rural Sociology and the Dimension of Space1

Abstract Rural sociology is intrinsically concerned with the spatial dimensions of social life. However, this underlying research tradition, particularly the use of space as a research strategy, has been insufficiently addressed and its contributions to general sociology are little recognized. I outline how concern with space, uneven development, and the social relationships of peripheral settings have provided substantive boundary and conceptual meaning to rural sociology, propelled its evolution, and left it with a legacy of strengths, weaknesses, and challenges. A willingness to tackle the dimension of space and the thorny problems it raises often sets rural sociologists apart from other sociologists. This research tradition contrasted with general sociology's concern with developing generalization, aspatial covering laws, and proto-typical relationships of modern or Fordist development settings. Conceptual openings have left sociologists questioning their past agenda. Coupled with the “creative marginality” inherent in the questions and contexts addressed by rural sociologists, this makes the subfield central to contemporary sociology.     

The Sociology of the Family in Spain:

This paper analyses research undertaken in Spain on the sociology of the family. A set of intellectual and cultural condi- tions at the end of the 19th century suggested that there would be a rapid growth of this area of specialisation. Nevertheless, the disci- pline did not become institutionalised despite the efforts of Adolfo Posada, who had taken the initiative to formalise its status. Other factors which should have encouraged developments in this field such as the debate on the role of women in society, the survey of the Ateneo de Madrid of 1901 or the profound legal changes introduced by the Second Republic in fact made little impact. Although the emergence of empirical sociology at the end of the 1960s is related to the study of the Spanish family, it is in other fields of sociology where advances were more marked. With the death of Franco in 1975 and the legislative and social changes which followed, the sociology of the family acquired greater vigour, although many gaps remain to be covered by research.     

The Use of Local Statistics in High School Courses in Sociology and Social Problems

Since the inception of mandated testing in reading and mathematics, social studies instruction has been marginalized in elementary and middle schools. After the genesis of several state-mandated testing programs and nearly a decade after the launch of the No Child Left Behind legislation, the effects of limited K–8 social studies instruction are being recognized at the high school level, specifically in high school test score data. This article reveals the obstacles generated by marginalizing social studies in the elementary and middle schools and offers a model for helping teachers understand their role in offsetting the problems associated with early social studies marginalization. The article also provides a way to help teachers collaboratively fill the social studies content gaps.     

Committing Canadian Sociology: Developing a Canadian Sociology and a Sociology of Canada

This paper is a slightly revised version of the author's “Outstanding Career Award Lecture” presented at the Annual Meeting of the Canadian Sociological Association in Victoria, British Columbia on June 6, 2013. The paper distinguishes between Canadian Sociology and the Sociology of Canada. The former involves the explanatory stance that one takes to understanding Canada. The latter addresses the significant social dimensions that underlie Canadian social organization, culture, and behavior. I make a case for a Canadian Sociology that focuses on the unique features of Canadian society rather than adopting a comparative perspective. I also argue that there is a continuing need within the Sociology of Canada to address the issues of staples development. However, I argue that “new” staples analysis must have a directional change from that of the past, in that social processes now largely determine the pattern of staples development. Moreover, new staples analysis must include issues that were never part of earlier staples analysis, such as issues of environmental impacts and of staples depletion under conditions, such as climate change. The paper concludes by analyzing four factors that provide the dominant social contexts for analyzing modern staples development: (1) the rise of neoliberal government, (2) the implementation of globalization and its social consequences, (3) the assumption of aboriginal rights and entitlement, and (4) the rise of environmentalism. These factors were generally not considered in earlier staples approaches. They are critical to understanding the role of staples development and its impact on Canada in the present time. Cet article est une version quelque peu révisé du cours pour le “prix pour contributions exceptionnelles” de l'auteur, présenté à la réunion annuelle de la Société Canadienne de Sociologie à Victoria, Colombie‐Britannique le 6 juin 2013. Cet article ce distingue entre la sociologie canadienne et la sociologie du Canada. Le premier ce concerne la position explicative que l'on prend pour comprendre le Canada. Le dernier adresse les importantes dimensions sociales qui sous‐tendent l'organisation sociale, culturelle et comportementale. Je soutiendrai une sociologie canadienne qui se concentre sur les aspects uniques de la société canadienne au lieu d'adopter une perspective comparative. Je soutiendrai aussi qu'il existe un besoin continu au sein de la sociologie du Canada pour adresser les questions de la théorie des principales ressources. Cependant, je soutiens que l'analyse des principales ressources “nouvelle” nécessite un changement de direction que celles du passé, en ce que les processus sociaux déterminent principalement le système de développement des principales ressources. De plus, l'analyse des principales ressources “nouveau” doit inclure les problèmes qui n’étaient jamais partis des analyses précédentes, comme les problèmes d'impacts environnementaux et de la diminution des principales ressources dans les conditions comme celui des changements climatiques. Cet article ce termine par scruter quatre facteurs qui produisent le contexte social dominant dans les analyses du développement des principales ressources moderne: (1) la croissance du gouvernement néolibéral; (2) l'implémentation de la globalisation et ses conséquences sociales ; (3) l'assomption des droits autochtones, et (4) l'ascension d'environnementalisme. Ces facteurs n'ont été généralement pas considérés dans les méthodes d'analyse des principales ressources antérieures. Ils sont cruciaux pour comprendre le rôle du développement des principales ressources et leurs impacts contemporains sur le Canada.     

The Relationship between Economics and Sociology: The Contribution of Economic Sociology,Setting out from the Problem of Embeddedness

This essay aims to analyse the most recent acquisitions in economic sociology, setting out from the problem of embeddedness. Firstly, the contribution offered by Mark Granovetter shall be illustrated, demonstrating how the interpretation proposed by this scholar is concentrated on a structural–relational perspective that tends to trace the explanation of economic phenomena to a theory of social networks. In order to enrich and integrate this approach, the contribution offered by the new-institutionalist perspective in contemporary economic sociology will be emphasised, which has focused on the social construction of economic institutions. This current has underlined, on the one hand, the cognitive dimension of embeddedness, related to the way in which the uniformities structured by mental processes limit economic reasoning, and, on the other, the cultural dimension of embeddedness, concerning the role of collectively shared representations in the formation of economic goals. It will be concluded by illustrating the acquisitions of some theoretical perspectives linked to the polanyian tradition that have developed a ‘plural’ conception of economy, founded on the emphasis of socio-regulative principles, such as those of exchange, redistribution and reciprocity, which, in becoming hybrid, give shape to variable and historically anchored economic worlds. The concept of embeddedness roots historically and transmits a vision of economic processes as inseparable from non-economic institutions.