Culture of Honor: The Psychology of Violence in the South

For all its great hospitality and unique literature and music, the American South has often been seen as having a much darker side in the form of higher levels of violence than found elsewhere in the country or in other developed nations. In "Culture of Honor: The Psychology of Violence in the South", Richard Nisbett and Dov Cohen closely examine violence in the American South and show the extra violence in the South to lie in the culture of honour inherited from the original settlers of the South, who were herders from the mountainous regions of Scotland and northern Ireland. The culture of honour, in which people are expected to carry out revenge if their honour or ability to defend themselves is insulted, arises as a result of resources being easily stolen, so that in the absence of big government theft becomes a viable route to bounty. Such conditions are fulfilled by herders who are always in danger of losing their extremely portable animals to another herder. Nisbett and Cohen show that herding peoples have always been much more violent than farmers or hunter/gatherers. Nisbett and Cohen use very well-selected data to show how the difference in violence between the South and the rest of the United States relates to violence committed as a result of arguments, which are seen as threats to the power of not only men but also women in the South. Many other uses of violence are supported no more or even less in the South than in other parts of the United States (for example violence as a means of achieving social change). They also refute arguments that income inequality or slavery is responsible for the violence in the South by showing its concentration in the mountain areas where slavery was very rare due to the cooler climate. The book also gives a very good explanation for a number of important facts about honour cultures unrelated to herding or the American South. For example, they show that honour cultures can arise for the same reasons in slash-and-burn farming cultures (see Peggy Reeves Sanday for a description of the Yanomamo) and in certain urban societies. (An undiscussed case that I am curious about is forestry-based societies, where the portability of timber might easily produce honour cultures). Nisbett and Cohen also show how non-portability of resources precludes honour cultures in settled farming societies and among primitive foragers. They also take an extremely thoughtful look at the persistence of honour cultures even after the South has become totally divorced from a herding economy. All in all, "Culture of Honor: The Psychology of Violence in the South" gives a good look at the American South with some surprising conclusions that few even among those with a good historical education understand.

Excellent book! Used in my M.P.A. Thesis (ARP) literature review for "DO MESS WITH IT! A Sociopolitical Study of Littering and the Role of Southern and Nearby States" (www.uweb.txstate.edu/~ps07/sspacekabs.html). Nisbett and Chen mention the historical yet negative effects of prevailing Scotch-Irish temperament dominating the entire Southern United States. An "absence of the state" and the region's remote population and geography conspired against law enforcement demanding citizen compliance with regulatory edicts. "A man's personal strength," not always based on good character, determined his social credibility, leading to a might makes right mindset and accompanying violence--"a Culture of Honor." My thesis takes Nisbett and Chen further to plausibly explain why this "Culture" helps contribute to a negative legacy of southern environmental attitudes: a corrupt, elitist, Traditionalistic Political Culture; leading high state murder rates; year after year low quality-of-life scores (in comparison to non-southern states).

This is an excellent scientific study which methodically argues several strains of evidence to support the overarching theory. The arguments are very well supported with many graphs and data tables.

The culture of honor is a fascinating look at the role that cultural traditions can play in determining the incidence of homocide and other forms of violence. What I liked most about the book was the way Nisbett and Cohen used all the tools of social science, from survey and archival research to clever laboratory experiments to test their thesis. The way in which they "broke down" their data was particularly convincing. For instance they showed that where cultural influences were strongest(for example, in small towns rather than big cities)the North-South differences in homocide rates were greatest.While there were a lot of statistical tables and graphs, the book was easy and entertaining to read. I would especially recommend it for people who are interested in understanding about regional differences in American ideas about taking the law into your own hands, and for undergraduates who want to get a good look at the way social scientists can tackle complicated questions.