Culture of poverty existent in Roma communities in

Romania

Abstract:
Why the Roma people do not… (work, learn, respect)?
In an unstable European and Romanian socio-economic environment, risk analysis is an
important issue on the current political agenda. In this context, the vulnerability of Roma
people is a subject of debate and work for many national and European institutions.
Regionally, the active policies of inclusion and equal opportunities, one hand, and the
deficit in terms of education, housing, heath and especially labor insertion of Roma people, on
the other hand, seems to be the paradox of the century which remains an obscure matter
without objective  coverage.
Their history and the various social changes that Roma people had to endure over time,
explains the existence, mainly in isolated and rural communities, of a culture of poverty which
defines broadly the vulnerability causes of this minority.

Key words:  Roma people, poverty, culture of poverty, rural communities

            The cultural anthropology and sociology delimit the concept by the culture in the area
of the knowledge, believes, customs, judicial codes, morals, art, behavioral techniques,
availability and skills acquired by man as a member of society. The Culture, after the
anthropologist Alfred Kroeber Louis (1968), prominent figure in American anthropology
from the early twentieth century, is what we learn from other people, from elders or from the
past, plus what can we add to it. Later, the anthropologist Ralph Linton, present the culture as
a ‘’role model of a company comprising and aggregate, more or less organize by cultural
models […] guided independent and stable life in all circumstances’’
           In XIX century word meaning culture has started to get close to the concept of
civilization, although there are many cons [...] and represent ‘’that complex whole which
includes knowledge, religious believes, art, moral, habits acquired which the man he obtain as
a member of society [...] and according culturalist, culture, as a life mode of a nation  is a
acquisition human getting stable, but submissive to continue changes, which determine the
course of our lives without conscious thought requires…”. In light contrast, the Polish
sociologist Jan Szczepanski in his studies concern on the transformation of social structure,
captures the cultural definition of “all human products, everything arises from human activity
and represents an outcome of thinking and his work”.
          The plurality definitions that capture complementary aspects, contour culture as a
coating covering different products but selected by one or more common criteria, criteria with
limited flexibility, generally accepted and transmitted perpetual.
           Poverty, defined by social psychology as “state permanent lack of resources to ensure
a decent living  considered acceptable in a collectivity level”, represent a large topic of a
broad interest in social studies and cannot be analyzed without be taken into account a number
of issues, such as the pyramid of needs, quality of life, level of expectations and satisfaction.
‘’The quality of living is measured not in terms of universal needs, constant, but in terms of
level concrete needs at a time characterizing individuals, groups, communities.”
            Thus, in determination and shaping the concept should be noted variable character,
relative of this. Adapting aspirations to real resources is determined in each case different
standards and ideals. “Many have noticed, moreover, that poverty in rich countries is more
ugly and more degrading than poverty in poor countries. And this is not an effect of the
comparison that makes the observer, but of what which the poor himself made it. In a poor
country there a certain dignity of poverty, an assumption of it as something more or less
natural, and not as a personal failure. There are peoples who seek, within data, to organize
their lives more enjoyable. In a rich country, the poor can feel a marginal, one failed,
unrealized. He lives the drama of failure, of lack.  He is not a normal person, but a cripple.
His poverty is no longer dignified and serene, but darken by frustration and bitterness.
Whereas the poor from a poor country can have a quiet life at his aspiration level, then the
poor from a rich country.”
Thus the analysis of poverty should take into account two perspectives which might
say that conceptually divided into two sub-concepts: absolute poverty and relative poverty.
Absolute poverty is ‘’the threshold below which any community, a person is considered to be
poor […] and found the idea of subsistence, while relative poverty focuses on identifying the
minimum acceptable in a given socio-cultural texture.”
The concept of subsistence so coherent to poverty area was defined as a result of research
conducted in York County – United Kingdom, in 1899 by English researcher Seebohn
Rowntree as ’’condition in which a family get (at least) minimum income necessary for its
members to maintain health and psyhical efficiency.’’ 3
Due to characteristic shape of relativity concepts of poverty, quality of life,
satisfaction, minimum income, needs, etc... and supports the concepts of subsistence
additions, arguments and counter-arguments. Basic needs also discrepant from one person to
another, depending on age, social level, health, etc... Also is not be neglected poverty during
the period of time in which the person or the group is situate at this level. Thus, defining
precisely of the concept, raises questions, especially since any analysis suppose the accept
ease of interpretation. 
Peter Brereton Townsend, renowned British sociologist pointed out that ’’the main
problem of the concept of subsistence can be summarized as being that human needs are
interpreted as physical needs – food, shelter and clothing – rather than social needs. But the
crucial reality of human beings is that they are social beings rather than physical beings.
Needs arise through relationships and social roles. There arise from being parents, partners,
neighbors, frineds are citizens for example.’’ 1
Culture of poverty concept was fist used by anthropologist Oscar Lewis in the
shaping American culture and lifestyle of those who love for some reason the lower limit of
experience. It argues that a culture of poverty present in a given community (social class,
group of individuals) shows the following syptoms: a strong sense of marginalization and
helplessness, a sence of dependence, inferiority and lack of social personalities, resignation
and fatalism. (Lewis,1966)
Following these symtoms sets of beliefs and rules of conduct that include attitudes of apathy,
immediate gratification tendencies, early sexual experiences, unstable family life, social
discredit, etc..
Culture of poverty is not only a lifestyle but also a reaction (negative) to poverty, a behavior
the sink deeper into poverty and tends to form stable chronic poverty pockets true that once
formed are difficult to treat. The biggest border to overcome this problem is not, as might
think, lack of funds, but lack of motivation and hope, apathetic and fatalistic attitude states
that gerenrate abandon their fight against the poor situation of poverty.2

 Idem, p.319
2 Ibidem
3 Preda, Marian , în Pop, Luana (coord.), Dicţionar de Politici Sociale, 2002, Bucureşti, Editura Expert, p710

           Thus,
Lewis argues, based on his studies, that the poor lifestyles are very similar,
regardless of society to which they report and within which they live. ’’Poverty itself is
determined by similar situations and problems created by poverty tend to produce the same
consequences, which causes a specific culture.’’ Also, individuals or groups in this
classification, ‚’bent on subculture that tends to is permanent and create a world of their own,
which often reuse to escape. Lack of awareness of any future makes the poor to adopt a
specific behavior, assuming future responsability, feelings of apathy and needlessness so.”

Elements of the Roma history

The Roma ancient migratory population of Indian origin settled and establiches
several centuries on the European continent and within America and Australia. According to
statistics based on recent census, currently the largest number of Roma lives in Romania. It is
known that the Roma have entered in the European continent several times, after a long
migration between IX and XV century and spread from the territories south of the Danube in
many regions, including the Romania. 
For the first time it mention the Roma presence on actual territory of Romania, in a
donation act of voivode Dan I of the Romanian country to Tismanadin Monastery 1385 as
”aţigani’’. Also during the reign of Mircea the Old, exist attestations which is mention the
present of Roma groups on the in Transylvania, in the period 1390-1406.  The chronicles
repords that in 1416 exist donations being by the Brasov town to a Roma group in passing
through the region. The Roma in Moldova is record for the first time in 1428 in period of the
voivode Alexandru the Kind, also an act of donation to a monastery:’’For many centuries,
during their stay in Moldova Romanian Country and to the middle of the nineteenth century,
Roma had a social statute at the edge of society: the statute of slaves. The slaves constitute a
social category lacks freedom, completely deppendent and being among property owner.
Women and children were also submissive to obligations to the owner. Once with the right
on land, the owner, whether prince, a nobleman, or a monastery, there obtains also rights on
’’foreigners’’ who setteld in that area.”  
         On that time Roma were craftsmen. Thus occupied an important place in the Romanian
economy, which is based in that period almost exclusively on agriculture. Roma joined the
craftsmen from majority

 population and there have even managed to dominate the guild of the conduct required by the
economic needs at that time.’’In the Romanian country, Roma slaves were the cheapest and
more secure labor, being bounds by the legal owner. They were left by their owners or the
state to ’’feed’’ through with them ’’craft’’. In the first centuries of their arrival in the
Romanian country, Roma number which establish to aristocratic or royal courts, and of those
who move into villages or cities remains very low. Throughout the period of centruies XV
and XIX is an increasing number of Roma who are sedentary or even there blend with
dominant population.” However, the Roma have preseved traditions, ports, customs, language
and Indian elements until the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, after all they will alter, some
will be lost gradually, through the socio-cultural communities and societies by they attached. 
              During the Communist regime, Roma were officially ignored by the authorities. They
have recognized among the coinhabiting nationalities, lacking any mention of them in official
discus, present one homogenization formal of country’s citizens. However, was continued the
marginalization of Roma. Due to lack of qualification and especially a training school
education, they were forced to accept unskilled work, demeaning. ”The main measure taken
by the communist authorities, according to a plan has not made public, had in sight the forced
sedentary of Roma which they kept nomadic or semi-nomadic lifestyles. Is did so first
virtually complete elimination of this way of life in the early ’80s.”

Elements of Roma culture

    Roma lifestyle is related to nomadism. The way of habitation was influenced long time by
memory and tradition of nomadism, including where a lot of Roma was sedentary.
’’Traditional tents and waggons with tarpaulin have become common in small houses, lack of
comfort and situated on the outskirts of towns. Along with low importance traditionally given
to the house through tradition becuase of the emphasis on movement, as if at any time should
be ready to go to a new destination, must be mention the marginalization, contempt and
discrimination that Roma were subjected during the last centuries.” 1
     The lack access to the major community resources,  due to the permanent status of
’’newcomer’’ and difficulty or inability to become the owner contributes also to maintaining a
marginal status and an extremely low standard of living for many Roma communities. 
                  In contrast with the importance accorded to the family, in individual and
community life is a frequent neglect of external issues, administrative, family related. So
many marriages of Roma are not officially. Regarding the language spoken by Roma –
Romani, cannot be said at present there is only one language, but the coexistence of several
dialects. The presence of these dialects is assumed to be due to the absence of a written
culture (until recently Romani language  was a purely oral language). Also cannot spoken
about a specific religion of Roma, in most cases they adopting religion of whom they lived. 
                 Over time Roma were a number of occupations more or less traditional like:
pottery, grist, the extract of stone or of the salt, ’’Gold Washing’’, making the bones objects,
trade with flowers, with horses or carpets and silks, the brickwork, the tinsmithing, the
ironwork. There were also from the feudal period Roma: locksmiths, tinsmiths, shoemaker,
harness, man cooks, innkeeper and of course musicians. 2

Causes, facts and effect of the poverty culture in Roma communities

Causes Facts Effects

Nomadism ♦free people to decide ∙ tendency to disobey the rules or
their own (in strangers by family or community
community) that have to ∙ oppose a resistance to cultural
do   models of other 

♦homelessness ∙ lack of stable neighbors ‘’different’’

than it requires a reduced social
interaction  and lack of rules and
standards that could motivate changes
in attitude and ‘’trajectory’’
∙ lack of social personality
∙ improver living space
∙ precocious sexual relation
∙ children at a young age of the couple

♦ reduce hygiene diseases

∙
∙marginalization of the population
that are exposed
♦lack of material or ∙ lack of respect for ‘’value’’
spiritual values
♦ trades learned ‘’on the ∙ low income – as a living from ‘’
fly’’ and can be applied today on tomorrow’’ orientation
‘’on the fly’’
 ♦ lack of school ∙ illiteracy
attendance form ∙ low (even lack) of education, specific
behavior, low self
∙ lack of their literature or written
tradition
♦coexistence of all ∙ decisions are taken by the family
family members (extend elders
family)  ∙ young people not to assume
responsibilities, there not make plans
and not intended to achieve objectives

Sedentary ♦ royal residence in ∙ lack or orientation to a home to  a

horizon (as household comfortable frame
slavery)

♦ the owner has full ∙ marginalization / obloquy

rights over them  ∙ law personality
∙ dependence
∙ feeling of inferiority
∙ lack of social personality  resignation

♦ the owner decide for ∙ lack of initiative, plans of future

themselves on the ∙ law income (accepted what they
marriage, the activities, gave)
income
The     ♦modern technology ∙ labor market exclusion and lack of 
modernization (which requires skills and unqualified base and lack of school
education) training
of society
(acceptance of unorganized activities
and complete with the majority
population)
      ♦evolution in ∙ an attitude defensive/offensive
psychology and social (negative self), waiting for ‘’help’’
sector development that from the society
supports acceptance and
help individuals in need 
      ♦transfer of authority ∙ creating conflict between high
from the natural solidarity Roma community and stat
community, the specialized authority
agencies of the state 
      ♦state authority and ∙ the acceptance of state authority and
law-justice (high efficiency) law, just as a foreign power that can
influence not only avoid, trick or tame
∙ attitude forma submission
      ♦life family centered on ∙ maintain a significant percentage of
the nuclear family  families – households (cohabitation of
several generation)
        ♦high interest for ∙ marginalization because of  ‘’training
training school ‘’ traditions in the middle of family
 ∙ disregard for the values (health, food,
art)
   ♦ trends toward raising ∙ gap created by lack of interest that is
living treated this area – poor housing,
unsanitary, minimum equipment (or
nonexistent), low quality 

          Poverty, specify of major number of individuals in contemporary Romanian society

affected in a big part the Roma community. 
          Free life, without anyone to telling them when and where to go, satisfy with a low
standard without worrying for the next day, of being impregnated in their tendency of
disobedience and lack of ambition to achieve. Hygiene reduced is presumed the sickness,
children with disabilities, transmissible illness, smell, which is created a form of discrediting
from major society.
          Lack of training school, which phrase the Roma population from the time of nomadism
until present had and has a negative effect about their status. Their aspirations are not to high
and the finished school it is a big performance. Besides limiting the intellectual must to
remind professional exclusion, in jobs or trades which are need the qualification, law-income
default.
         Living towards they never had a ‘’cult’’ represent a clear discrepancy between them and
the others. The servant status has not helped to give up to a ‘’standard’’, on the contrary is
accentuate the feelings of inferiority. 
Note: We have not considered the relatively small percentage represented by the exceptions, the Roma
have exceeded the ‘’borders’’ culture of poverty

 Townsend, Peter, in Preda, Marian , in  Pop, Luana (coord.), Dictionary of Social Policy, 2002, Bucharest,
Expert House, p.
711
 Dan, Adrian, Theories and perspectives of poverty,
http://www.iccv.ro/index.php/ro/component/content/article/102-ds-t/168-ds-teorii-saracie, 12.10.09/ 16: 40
 Ibidem

The share the Roma population. Europe

Number of Roma in different European countries (estimate 2009/thousands)
Source: Radio Romania Actualităţi News (Online) 
Author: Solomon, Sorin, 2010, Gypsies: origin and spreading -  http://www.romaniactualitati.ro/tiganii_origini_si_raspandire_harta-18846 

 Council of Europe estimated the number of Roma in our country is three times more
than recorded in the census, exceeding the 1.8 million people.
 Over time, the number of Roma from Romania, which there declared the census
ethnicity, fluctuated depending by restrictions of political regimes. 
 Thus, in 1930 in Romania were just over 240.000 Roma, in 1956 the number of Roma
declaring deduct at 104.000 and ten years later, their number decreased to 65.000.
 The1977 Census identified 227.000 of Roma, in order as in 1992 their number reached
more then 400.000 of Roma.

Roma share. Romania

Percentage of Roma – Cnsus 2002/2011
According to data from the 2011 census, the share of Roma is as follows:
  

Comparing the situation of Roma share, according to results from the 2002 census, is not
observer a major change in the counties of Mehedinţi and Dolj. However, the same report for
comparison, one can see a transition from urban area to rural area. Also the significant
proportion of the Roma is in rural areas. 
Roma share. South-West  / urban – rural (2002-2011)
Census 2002  Census 2002 Difference
2011-2002

TOTAL           
    In the total
population 2.47%   3.25%   0.78%  
   urban   39.0%   37.0%   -2.00%  
   rural   61.0%   63.0%   2.00%  

South - West          
 
    In the region’s total
population 2.59%   3.17%    
0.58%
   In the Roma’s total population
11.26%  10.12%  -1.14% 

   urban   44.6%  42.4%  -2.20% 

   rural   55.4%  57.6%  2.20% 

Regarding the Roma population declared, according to the census dates of 2011, Roma in the
two counties mentioned in the countryside, represent a major group of people.
Resistance                 Stable population                                                               Ethnic
                average                         TOTAL                   Romanian     Hungarian       Roma     German      Serbian     Czech     Turkish     Greek     Other     
Undeclared 
         
 County of  Mehedinţi         254570                      241501          153              10956         158            1002         473          38              19           82            
190
Municipality and towns      116333                      113235           121               2386          140              127         140          38              18          57               
71
 Communes                    138237                      128266            32                8570            16              876         333           -                 -            25             
119

Resistance                 Stable population                                                               Ethnic

                average                         TOTAL                   Romanian     Hungarian       Roma     German      Serbian     Czech     Turkish     Greek     Other     
Undeclared 
County of  Dolj                   314437                      302799           178              10116          86                17            43            -                8           527            
661
Communes                     303898                       284750            40               18795           6                   4           10             -                 -           213
78

¹) includes all ethnic groups with less than 20.000 people declared at the national point, respective: Serbian, Slovak, Jew, Bulgarian, Czech,
Croatian, Greek, Polish, Armenian, rutean, Italian, Albanian, Macedonian
* Population and housing – Romania 2011/provisional results

We analyzed some external causes ‘’poverty culture’’ lifestyle that characterized and
characterize Roma. Actual, the Roma population is free, had the same rights as the majority
population. Equality is trying to bring individuals to a common denominator in terms
opportunities. 
According to critics of Oscar Lewis – external factors have changed, but not changed the
behavior. 
The culture of poverty present in Roma communities, characterized their lifestyle and
behavior justifies specific source labeling and marginalization.  The modern Rom of society
tends to remain tributary to community life and traditions. 

According to statistics, The Roma population in the south-west, Dolj and Mehedinţi
represents a significant segment for regional development policies aimed at identifying
effective measures to improve their lives and community and social relations. 
In these circumstances, the question that come off is:
To what extent solutions focused on problem solving behavior can change based on a culture
that creates and supports demotivation, apathy and the present fatalistic attitude?

Selective Bibliography

   · Burdus, E., Caprarescu, Gh., 1999, Fundamentele Managementului Organizatiei, Ed. Economica,
Bucuresti 
  · Dan, Adrian - Politici si Programe Sociale  -suport de curs – 2002-2003- Universitatea Bucuresti 
  · Kroeber, A. L., 1968,  What Culture  is,  Aldime Publishing Company, Chicago 
  · Linton, Ralph, 1986,  Fundementul Cultural al personalitatii, Editura Stiintifica, Bucuresti 
   · Pop , Luana (coord) – Dictionar de Politici Sociale, Editura Expert, Bucuresti 
  · Preda, Marian, 2002, Politica sociala romaneasca intre sărăcie si globalizare, Editura Polirom, Iasi 
  · Szezpanski, Jan, Notiuni elementare de sociologie, Editura Ştiinţifică, Bucuresti 
   · Zamfir, C., Vlăsceanu, 1998, Dicţionar de sociologie, Ed. Babel, Bucureşti
   · Zamfir, C., Zamfir, E. (coord.), 1993, Tiganii intre ignorare si ingrijorare,  Editura Alternative, Bucureşti 
   · Zamfir, Elena, 1997, Psihologie Sociala, Editura Ankarom, Iaşi