How Three Sociological Concepts Connect to Dallas - Essay Example

?Running head: HOW THREE SOCIOLOGICAL CONCEPTS CONNECT TO DALLAS How Three Sociological Concepts Connect To Dallas Insert Insert Grade Insert Tutor’s Name 28 February 2012 How Three Sociological Concepts Connect To Dallas Introduction Dallas is one of the biggest and fastest growing cities in United States of America. The city is rated as the ninth largest city and fourth largest metropolitan area in the country (Dallas Convection and Visitors Bureau 1996-2012). In addition, the city occupies an estimated area of about 343 square miles and has a population size of about 1, 299, 543 people (Dallas Convection and Visitors Bureau 1996-2012). Moreover, Dallas magnifies characteristics of an ultra modern and sophisticated city, which is home to many travelers from around the world. It is from this understanding of the city that efforts will be made to describe the city in sociological perspective, and this will require analysis of three sociological concepts. The concepts to be analyzed are Urbanism by Robert E. Park, Cosmopolitan Canopy by Elijah Anderson, and Broken Windows by Wilson and Keeling. Robert E. Park: Urbanism Urbanism as concept emerged from the Chicago school, which was headed by Robert E. Park. According to Chicago school, urban as a way of life can be characterized by aspects of large size in terms of population, density with regard to crowding, and overstimulation and heterogeneity in terms of insecurity, sophistication, and also the idea of multiple group identities (Rao, 2009). On the other hand, urban as a mode of life exhibits unique characteristics such as persistence of secondary contacts as opposed to primary contacts, weakening kinship bond and rise of individualism, the lose of significance of the family as social entity, the lose of neighborhood, and the overall undermining of tradition basis or conceptualization of social solidarity (Rao, 2009). In a more sieved manner, Robert Park views the concept of urbanism to be associated with rampant urban social inequality, a situation the author likened to Darwinian evolution (Lin and Mele, 2005). According to the author, urbanism brings about competition, which in turn affects the existing social natural systems; there is tendency for urban cities to be highly populated (concentration), people moving away from the city to suburban areas (dispersion), and the scarce resources leading to ‘zoning’ of the city (Rao, 2009). Moreover, as zones become prosperous, they attract outsiders as value escalates, and this leads to ‘succession’, a situation that results into the city being re-organized profoundly. As it can be observed, urbanism is largely associated with cultural, social, and economic changes that result into re-organization of urban communities. The city of Dallas can be said to have undergone tremendous social, economic, and cultural changes as a result of urbanism. For example, Dallas is today one of the few cities in the USA with modern sophisticated infrastructures that support communication and transport. The city has DFW International Airport, which has been identified as the world’s third busiest airport (Dallas Convection and Visitors Bureau, 1996-2012). As a result, the airport is the major avenue for commerce, social interaction, and all other activities that define urbanism’s way of life. Moreover, the city has become one of the tourist destinations, housing some of the magnificent tourists’ hotels and restaurants (Dallas Convection and Visitors Bureau, 1996-2012). It has to be known that development of tourism in the city constitutes a major avenue for increased interaction, assimilation of different cultures, and reorganization of the city’s regeneration and planning. As a result, many people find themselves having to move to the sub-urban regions in order to give room for construction or just as away of moving away from city’s numerous disturbances and disruptions. More importantly, Dallas city promotes its position, as well as what it does, through slogans such as ‘Live Large, and ‘Think Big’, which indirectly connotes and expresses urbanism spirit and conviction (Dallas Convection and Visitors Bureau. 1996-2012). Elijah Anderson: The Cosmopolitan Canopy Elijah Anderson presents the city/urban as a place where people appear to be strangers to one another and there is general feeling of uneasiness with one another, but social cooperation, interaction and sharing has to take place (Hutchison and Haynes 2011). This ‘strangeness’ among the urban people is the reason for emergence and persistence of ethnic art worlds that exist in urban cities. Such cities are characterized by neutral social settings, where no-one group can claim ownership to one or any of the neutral social settings (Hutchison and Haynes, 2011). Anderson depicts urban as a place where people are crossing over the boundaries of racial, social, cultural, and ethnic enclaves, and come together in a civil exchange in neutral public spaces such as museums, parks, universities, train terminals and hybrid institutions (Hutchison and Haynes, 2011). As a result, people in urban areas are forced to participate in social relationships that encourage social sharing guided by kind of protective umbrella (Hutchison and Haynes, 2011). Moreover, the cosmopolitan canopy is seen by Anderson to function and operate like a space in which people share common interests, thereby putting little regard to their particular distinct ethnic, racial, or social groups, and end up mixing with people from other cultures (Hutchison and Haynes, 2011). As a result, cosmopolitan canopy in modern world explains the various aspects of racial, social and ethnic ‘cross-over’ by people of different cultures that in turn leads into people to move and cross racial and ethnic boundaries in order to interact with others of different cultures in a situation that encourages intercultural understanding and cooperation. The understanding of cosmopolitan canopy is that cities and urban centers in different parts of the country host people who are different from each other in terms of social, economic, cultural, ethnic, and racial aspects. As a result, these people appear not to be comfortable with each other and some levels of mistrust, suspicion, worry, and so on are likely to emerge and persist. For example, Anderson describes some instances by noting that majority of people in urban centers are likely to ‘divert their gazes’ by looking up, looking down, looking away, ignoring each other, or feigning at the strange fellow or person (Spanniger, 2011). Despite these circumstances, Anderson observes that some places in the cities provide opportunity for social space in such a way that the places offer respite that is different from that exhibited in well-ingrained wariness (Spanniger, 2011). For instance, Reading Terminal in Philadelphia, where the author conducted research observed that, despite the place having many people from diverse racial, ethnic, cultural, and social groups, it provided a neutral space where different people could feel comfortable to an extent of reducing wariness feelings and end up interacting with people who are totally strangers (Spanniger, 2011). Anderson theory of Cosmopolitan Canopy can be applied to discuss some of the social issues in Dallas. For instance, given its potential and suitability as a commercial, business, leisure and entertainment city, Dallas is home to diverse groups of people who differ in terms of culture, race, ethnic, religion, and socio-economic status. These people meet each other everyday as they go about their activities in the airport, in industries, in shops, in public transport system, in hotels and restaurants, in entertainment joints, in learning institutions, and so on (Dallas Convection and Visitors Bureau, 1996-2012). As a result, there is a big likelihood that mixture of cultures is likely to be present, a situation likely to make individuals uncomfortable with each other. Sense of uneasiness and wariness is likely to dominate, and this is likely to reduce social interaction among the individuals. However, as it has been seen, Dallas has some of the best shopping shops, has excellent hotels and restaurants, and has one of the largest urban arts center in the district (Dallas Convection and Visitors Bureau, 1996-2012). Moreover, the enhanced rail transport in the city is favored by majority of people. All these aspects are likely to act as ‘terminals’ of contact of diverse people of different cultures, a situation likely to prompt social interaction and mixing freely without much worry, suspicion, or concern of who the neighbor or the other person is. Wilson and Keeling: Broken Windows The ‘broken windows’ theory was pioneered by Wilson and Kelling in the 1980s. Wilson and Keeling observed that crime constitutes an inevitable result of disorder. For example, when a window is broken and no repair is being undertaken, people passing it will gradually become convinced that no one seems to care about the window and no one is in charge (Seekri, 2011). As a result, more windows will be broken, a situation that will result into spread of anarchy in the neighboring regions of the building with broken windows. According to the authors, when society takes more initiatives of addressing minor disorders in the society, then it becomes apparent that serious crimes can be dealt with more easily (Seekri, 2011). The authors noted that in a city, there are relatively minor problems like graffiti, public disorder, and aggressive panhandling that reflect broken windows, and are, therefore, avenues for more serious crimes (Seekri 2011). When serious crimes aggravate, they become primary reason for community’s loose sense and disorder (Seekri 2011). It is this understanding that the broken windows theory explains that, when the sense of community is undermined, society or community quickly becomes the basis for the aggressive clampdown, and crime accelerates in major cities. As a result, ‘broken windows’ theory advocates for revolution in the nature and style of policing and maintenance of order in society or community. For instance, it advocated for change in policing initiatives in such a way that law enforcement needs to address minor criminal activities, and through this, major criminal activities become easy to deal with. In attempt to apply the broken windows theory and recommendations, some states and cities in the country have put more emphasis on initiating aggressive enforcement laws (misdemeanor laws) that aim to deal with minor misdemeanor (Seekri 2011). For instance, in some areas of the country, these initiatives are known as ‘order maintenance’ policing. In Dallas, minor crimes have acted as broken windows, which motivate and increase criminal intent that, in turn, results into serious crimes being committed. Implementation of some recommendations of Wilson and Keeling’s theory of broken windows has seen the restructuring of the police and law enforcement agencies to deal more with minor crimes in attempt to reduce overall crime cases in the city (Eiserer, 2011). There has been revolution in policing initiatives in the city, ranging from curfews to increase in number of police patrols, increase in number of crime monitoring, and so on (Eiserer, 2011). All these initiatives have been adopted in an attempt to ensure minor crimes are ‘suffocated’, hence, preventing serious crimes from being committed. At the same time, police in the city have increased the number of minority police officers, where the officers have been place in minority communities in the city to deal with cases of minor crimes in such areas (Eiserer, 2011). Overall, recommendations of broken windows theory in the city of Dallas can be viewed to have resulted into reduction of about 10% of crimes according to 2010 statistics, and the situation has been witnessed for about seven years (Eiserer, 2011). Some of the cited factors for this reduction include increase in public surveillance cameras, increase in the number of police officers, and enactment of more demeanor crime laws (Eiserer, 2011). Conclusion This paper has looked at the three sociological concepts, as well as how they apply to the city of Dallas, Texas. It has been established that urbanism, cosmopolitan canopy, and broken windows are three sociological concepts that explain social aspects and reality in Dallas. Through precise analysis and capturing of facts, the researcher has presented facts of Dallas with regard to the three concepts. Therefore, it is hoped that the analysis of the three facts will concisely add to the existing body of knowledge about sociological application of concepts to real life situations. Reference List Dallas Convection and Visitors Bureau. (1996-2012). Dallas Today. Retrieved 28 February 2012 from: http://www.visitdallas.com/visitors/about_dallas/dallas_today/ Eiserer, T. (2011). Dallas Crime Fell 10% in 2010, for Seventh Decline in a Row. The Dallas Morning News, 08 January. Retrieved 28 February 2012 from: http://www.dallasnews.com/news/crime/headlines/20110108-dallas-crime-fell-10-in-2010-for-seventh-decline-in-a-row.ece Hutchison, R., & Haynes, B. D. (2011). The Ghetto: Contemporary Global Issues and Controversies. CO: Westview Press. Retrieved 28 February 2012 from: http://books.google.com/books?id=UokTijcn-CgC&pg=PT28&dq=The+Cosmopolitan+Canopy&hl=en&sa=X&ei=UPdMT__jHqem0QWJhrg0&ved=0CDwQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=The%20Cosmopolitan%20Canopy&f=false Lin, J., & Mele, C. (2005). The Urban Sociology Reader. NY: Routledge. Retrieved 28 February 2012 from: http://books.google.com/books?id=MOx34MBcHDMC&pg=PA2&dq=emergence+of+concept+of+urbanism+at+Chicago+school&hl=en&sa=X&ei=gOVMT9m3CeO50QWf-PXMAw&ved=0CDEQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=emergence%20of%20concept%20of%20urbanism%20at%20Chicago%20school&f=false Rao, D. (2009). The School and Community Relations. New Delhi: Discovery Publishing House. Retrieved 28 February 2012 from: http://books.google.com/books?id=M0yx2KPJVg4C&pg=PA245&dq=characteristics+of+urbanism&hl=en&sa=X&ei=LvJMT5-zGcOq0QWtgLWeBQ&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=characteristics%20of%20urbanism&f=false Seekri, B. (2011). Organizational Turnarounds with a Human Touch. Trafford Publishing. Retrieved 28 February 2012 from: http://books.google.com/books?id=yrTgqf1TkpgC&pg=PA124&dq=Wilson+and+Keeling:+Broken+Windows&hl=en&sa=X&ei=IBVNT7SyH5Gb1AWeu8GeBQ&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Wilson%20and%20Keeling%3A%20Broken%20Windows&f=false Spanniger, M. (2011). Bridging Racial Divides in ‘Cosmopolitan Canopies. Retrieved 28 February 2012 from: http://www.npr.org/2011/04/04/135116342/bridging-racial-divides-in-cosmopolitan-canopies Read More