Based on his beliefs, it would be difficult to argue that the findings by Mead would be an accurate comparison of the poor to the Culture of Poverty. Many of his statements are that the poor are not willing to work. They would rather stay poor and on public assistance rather than take advantage of jobs they consider to be meaningless or unworthy of their time. This attitude is based on the premise that they do not want to work meaningless jobs with lower wages. He, like other conservatives, are blaming the poor for the situations that they are in. This is something in which these same conservatives accused Lewis of doing in the Culture of Poverty Theory. …show more content…
This leads Harvey to conclude that Lewis was rooted in Marxism and therefore the Culture of Poverty Theory must be interpreted accordingly. Harvey believed that Lewis’ actions and support for the working class, unions, and his advocacy for the causes of the oppressed provided conclusive proof that he a disciple of Marxism.
A portion of Harvey’s analysis includes an interpretation by Susan Rigdon, a writer who postulates that it was not the intention of Lewis to make the poor look as if they were helpless, and that they could not escape from their undesirable conditions. On the contrary, Oscar Lewis believed in the struggles of these individuals much like Karl Marx believed in the proletariat and their fight to rid themselves of the oppression of