Prompt 6: Apply Strain Theory to the episode of Cocaine Cowboys
- 1.5-2 pages
- Draw on what we’ve read and what we’ve discussed.
- Include at least 2 concepts/ideas from the reading. The goal is for you to demonstrate engagement and understanding.
In Cocaine Cowboys, Sal Magluta and Willy Falcon grew up during the 1970s in the ghetto of Little Havana, Miami. Their quest to achieve the American Dream led them to be some of the most successful drug dealers in the US, living a celebrity lifestyle complete with expensive cars, gorgeous penthouses, and beautiful women. In this paper, I will discuss how episode one of the series illustrates many social structure theories of crime, such as Emilie Durkheim’s anomie theory, Robert Merton’s strain theory and Richard Cloward and Lloyd Ohlin’s opportunity theory.
Magluta and Falcon were first generation Cuban immigrants. Their parents emigrated to Florida in hopes of the American Dream. However, the parents didn’t speak English, which acted as a barrier to getting access to good paying jobs. Although hard working, the cowboys’ parents worked long hours to make ends meet. Early on, Magluta and Falcon recognized that they needed to find another way to obtain success.
This scenario from Cocaine Cowboys is an example of Merton’s social strain theory. US society values materialism as key to achieving the American Dream. The myth of the American Dream is that anyone can obtain it if they work hard enough, however, the reality is that not everyone has the chances and connections to do so. In US society, people can also attain prosperity in other socially accepted methods, such as higher education, generational wealth, and employment. However, Magluta and Falcon didn’t have access to any of these legitimate possibilities, so they experienced structural strain, where there is a breach between societal aspirations and the means to make them happen (Brown 2013). Merton’s theory on structural strain then states that the subjects have five paths: conformity, innovation, ritualism, retreatism, and rebellion. In the episode, the friends turn to innovation as a solution, where they start making money by unacceptable means: drug dealing small amounts at high school (Brown 2013).
Historical and cultural shifts during this time should be considered when observing strain theory for this episode. Emile Durkheim’s theory of anomie comes to mind, where he theorized that anomie, “a condition in society where the norms are no longer effective in regulating behavior”, is also a result of the gap between desires and the means to make them happen and occurs in times of rapid change, especially economic growth (Brown 270 2013). In the 1970s and early 1980s, the US experienced a series of high inflation, which caused immense financial instability for Americans (Yaner 2018 156). However, inflation improved during the later 1980s, causing a flurry of materialism, with designer clothes, dazzling jewelry, and expensive cars as must haves to gain acceptance in high society. Cocaine, an expensive illegal drug, suddenly became seen as a luxury, dominant in the upper class lifestyle (Crack 2021). As demand for cocaine grew, so did the illegal drug trade, and possibilities for lower class drug dealers to break through the glass ceiling in American society.
Magluta and Falcon were somewhat successful with their drug dealing at high school, but they were still missing specific skills and connections to be profitable. In Cloward and Ohlin’s opportunity theory, people looking to innovate due to their strained circumstances must learn skills and values to take advantage of the opportunities within their community. That is exactly what the cowboys did. Through their Cuban community, they were introduced to Jorge Valdez, a successful drug lord/entrepreneur, and through that association, eventually gained access to his exclusive contact with the Columbian cartel. This lucky break led the duo to create a large criminal organization comprised of close friends and family, resulting in dizzying wealth, and acceptance into the upper class society of Miami. This also conforms with Cloward and Ohlin’s definition of a criminal gang, whose ultimate goal is to be accepted through society due to innovated and illegal means (Brown 2013).
In conclusion, episode one of Cocaine Cowboys contains numerous themes of strain theories. US society equates the American Dream to happiness, so much so that people will do anything to achieve it. The quest is more intense and arduous for people of the lower classes, as they don’t have the advantages and resources to make the dream a reality, forcing them to seek an alternative route.
References:
Brown, S. E., and G Geis. (2013). Criminology (8th Edition). Waltham, MA; Elsevier.
Corbin, Billy. 2021. Cocaine Cowboys: The Kings of Miami.
Lim, Yaner. (2018). “Understanding the War on Drugs in America through the Lens of Critical Race Theory.” Bristol Law Review 156-170.
Nelson, Stanley. 2021. Crack: Cocaine, Corruption & Conspiracy.
Prompt 7-Consider the social process and social reaction theories discussed and think about your own conformity and/or deviant behavior.
Do any of the theories resonate with you? 1 – 1/2 page informal reflection
Born to Conform!
I have always been a conformist-so much so that people make fun of me! I joke with my friends about committing an act of primary deviance and then calling the authorities on myself. The idea of knowingly committing a crime, even a slight one where I would have a low chance of being caught, makes me physically sick. I have never really tried to examine why I conform so much to laws and rules in general, but after watching the lecture, I have some ideas.
Travis Hirschi’s Social Bond theory resonates the most with my philosophy and life experiences. I believe that social bonds are the key to my conformity, especially when it comes to the attachment factor. Attachment in this context relates to my sensitivity to the opinion of others. I was a middle child, quiet, and strove for approval from my family members by excelling in school. I would conform to commit to that reputation or persona; breaking conformity (not following the rules or committing a primary deviance) would jeopardize my family’s acceptance.
The commitment element is also essential to me today, as I have attained a reputation of being an honest, honorable person, as well as role model for my children. Since I have worked to hard to maintain this brand, I would not want to damage my community’s perceptions by committing a small crime and risking social reactionary labels or stigmatization from society.
Another theory, the ratio of definitions, where a person is impacted by unfavorable definitions versus favorable definitions in regards to violation of the law, may also pertain. Much of my moral code and perceptions of the do’s and don’ts of the law were ingrained in childhood by my grandparents and parents, who adamantly believed in abiding by the law. My family consisted mostly of teachers who held value in discipline and taught me what our society’s perceptions of right verse wrong were.
According to the ratio theory, if an individual absorbs these definitions early in life, it should have more influence on them than if they were exposed to them in later life. Therefore, the standards of conduct that I learned from my family have stuck with me to this day. It does not mean that I question them as an adult, as over time certain types of deviance can be accepted as standard norms due to social change.
Although it is possible that my family committed acts of primary deviance, I was not aware of it, and no one that I knew of in my family had been convicted of secondary deviance. Is it possible that my conformity is part of an intergenerational transmission?
As final proof of my tendency to conform and uphold rules, coincidentally, I am also taking a Psychology 101 summer class during this one. I needed to take the Big Five Personality test. One of the five personality traits on the test is conscientiousness, which is described as, “Reflecting the tendency to be responsible, organized, hard-working, goal-directed, and to adhere to norms and rules” (Psychology Today 2024). It was not surprising to me to find that my conscientiousness level is a 94. It was definitely interesting to explore these theories through my own personal lens, but after this semester, I will be happy to stop analyzing myself through assignments!
References:
Brown, S. E., and G Geis. (2013). Criminology (8th Edition). Waltham, MA; Elsevier.
Psychology Today. 2024. Conscientiousness.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/conscientiousness.
