NCJ Number
69559
Journal
International Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal Justice Volume: 4 Issue: 1 Dated: (Spring 1980) Pages: 75-84
Date Published
1980
Length
10 pages
Annotation
By providing a psychohistorical analysis of significant policy controls which have regulated American Indians, this article examines cultural anomie among Indians and its contribution to Indian violence and aggression.
Abstract
The principal perspective on minority conflict considered is that of Robert E. Park, who developed a race relations cycle which addressed itself to western colonialism. The cycle asserts that competitive-oriented, colonializing forces represented the majority society, while the 'underdeveloped' cooperativeoriented, traditional cultures were assigned a minority status. Within this perspective, the article explores the effect of primary conflict generated by the policies of slavery, Indian wars, removal, allottment, reorganization, termination, relocation, and self-determination. It links these official policies to conflicts existing within Indian communities, also. Park recognized that majority-minority relations are relevant to power and authority and do not necessarily reflect population characteristics per se. Basically, Park contended that interracial adjustments resulting from colonialism usually progressed through four stages starting with initial 'contact,' followed by 'competition/conflict,' 'accommodation,' and eventual 'assimilation.' Reciprocal animosity between cultural groups within a society tends to strengthen both groups' internal cohesion while at the same time maintaining the rigid class or caste lines and social distances between these groups. Furthermore, the more rigid the group divisions within the society, the more serious will be the psychocultural ramifications experienced by those caught up in the majority-minority cultural gap--the alienated marginals. Indian marginality, the direct result of cultural ambiguity, is believed to be the major cause of Indian violence today. Viable solutions to Indian violence must address the sources of conflict, and they must be culturally relevant. Twenty references are provided.