Sign up to access the complete lesson and track your progress!
Unlock This CourseCharles Murray is an American sociologist who became famous in the UK during the 1980s and 1990s for his controversial ideas about poverty and what he called the 'underclass'. His work has been influential in shaping political debates about welfare and poverty, particularly in the UK and USA.
Key Definitions:
Charles Murray is an American political scientist born in 1943. His most famous work is "Losing Ground" (1984), which criticised welfare policies in America. In 1989, he wrote "The Emerging British Underclass" specifically about the UK situation. Murray is associated with the New Right political perspective, which emphasises individual responsibility and traditional values.
Murray argued that generous welfare benefits create dependency and undermine traditional values. He believed that welfare should be reduced to encourage self-reliance. According to Murray, the underclass isn't just poor - they have different values and behaviours that keep them trapped in poverty. He saw this as a moral and behavioural problem rather than an economic one.
Murray identified three main characteristics that define the underclass. These weren't just about being poor - they were about behaviours and choices that Murray believed created a cycle of poverty.
Murray was concerned about the rise in children born outside marriage. He argued that single-parent families (especially those headed by mothers) were less effective at socialising children properly. He believed children needed male role models to develop proper values and discipline.
Murray linked the underclass to high crime rates. He argued that without proper socialisation and male role models, young men in particular were more likely to turn to crime. He saw crime as a rational choice when legitimate work seemed less rewarding than criminal activity.
Murray believed many in the underclass chose not to work because welfare benefits made it more attractive to remain unemployed. He argued this created a culture of worklessness that was passed down through generations, with children growing up without seeing adults working.
Murray didn't believe the underclass existed because of poverty or lack of opportunity. Instead, he saw it as the result of poor choices and a welfare system that rewarded those choices.
At the heart of Murray's theory is the idea of a 'dependency culture'. He argued that generous welfare benefits created a situation where people could survive without working. Over time, this led to a culture where dependency on the state became normalised and passed down through generations.
According to Murray, this dependency culture undermined traditional values like:
Murray believed that welfare didn't just support people in poverty - it actually created poverty by encouraging behaviours that kept people poor.
In 1989, Charles Murray was invited to the UK by the Sunday Times to investigate whether an underclass existed in Britain similar to the one he had identified in America. He visited several housing estates in places like Liverpool and Glasgow.
Murray concluded that Britain was following the same path as America, just a few years behind. He identified similar patterns of rising illegitimacy, crime and unemployment in certain communities. His findings were published in "The Emerging British Underclass" and caused significant debate in the UK.
Murray returned to the UK in 1993 and 1999 for follow-up studies, each time claiming that the situation was worsening and that the underclass was growing.
Murray didn't just identify problems - he also suggested solutions, though these were often controversial:
Murray advocated for significant cuts to welfare benefits. He believed that reducing benefits would force people to find work and become self-reliant. He argued that while this might cause short-term hardship, it would break the cycle of dependency in the long run.
Murray believed in promoting traditional family structures, particularly marriage. He suggested policies that would encourage marriage and discourage single parenthood. He also advocated for policies that would strengthen male authority within families and communities.
Murray's ideas have been highly controversial and have faced significant criticism from many sociologists:
Many critics argue that Murray ignores structural causes of poverty such as:
Critics like William Julius Wilson argue that these structural factors, rather than individual choices or welfare dependency, are the real causes of persistent poverty.
Many sociologists argue that Murray's theory 'blames the victim' by focusing on the behaviour of poor people rather than the wider social and economic forces that create poverty. They suggest his approach stigmatises the poor and diverts attention from inequality in society.
Critics point out that Murray's evidence is often anecdotal rather than systematic. Research has shown that most unemployed people want to work and that welfare benefits in the UK have rarely been generous enough to make unemployment a financially attractive option.
Peter Townsend offers a very different view of poverty compared to Murray. Townsend defined poverty as 'relative deprivation' - lacking the resources to participate in the normal activities of society.
Unlike Murray, Townsend saw poverty as a structural problem caused by inequality, not individual behaviour. His research in the 1970s showed that many people in the UK were living in relative poverty despite the welfare state.
Townsend argued for more generous welfare provision and greater equality, the opposite of Murray's recommendations.
Despite the criticisms, Murray's ideas have been influential in shaping policy debates about welfare and poverty:
Understanding Murray's theory helps us recognise these influences in current debates, even if we disagree with his analysis. It also highlights how sociological ideas can have real-world impacts on policy and public attitudes.
When studying Murray's underclass theory, it's important to think critically about: