The Fragility of Peace: A Strain Theory Perspective on the Lack of Political Will and Persistent Poverty

WPS News Staff Reporter
Baybay City, Philippines | February 1, 2025

Peaceful settings often foster a sense of stability, where the populace feels secure and the threat of immediate conflict appears distant. However, this tranquility can lead to complacency among decision-makers, particularly regarding the pressing issue of poverty. Strain theory, which posits that social structures may pressure individuals to commit deviant acts when they do not have adequate means to reach culturally defined goals, can provide valuable insights into why such peace cannot endure without addressing the underlying issues, particularly poverty.

In peaceful environments, the urgency to tackle poverty often diminishes. Political leaders may believe that as long as peace is maintained, there is no pressing need to dedicate resources towards reforming socioeconomic disparities. This leisurely approach can result in a lack of political will to enact necessary reforms. The connection between strain, societal expectations, and the failure to mitigate poverty becomes evident. When societal goals, such as economic success and stability, are unattainable for a significant portion of the population, individuals and communities may experience a strain that leads to frustration and resentment.

The lack of political will to address poverty creates a cycle of disenfranchisement and hopelessness among the lower socioeconomic classes. Individuals from these backgrounds often feel alienated from the political processes that govern their lives, leading to a perception that their needs and concerns are marginalized. As disenchantment grows, some may resort to deviant behaviors as a means of coping with their circumstances or attempting to achieve their goals through any means necessary. This strain can manifest itself in various ways, from criminal behavior to political unrest, indicating that even in times of peace, unaddressed issues can simmer beneath the surface, poised to disrupt the status quo.

Moreover, the connection between peace and prosperity is tenuous if the benefits of peace are not distributed equitably. In many post-conflict societies, for instance, a fragile peace might give way to renewed unrest if economic disparities remain ignored. In times of relative calm, the absence of war can lead to an illusion of stability, blinding policymakers to the simmering tensions rooted in poverty and inequality. The strain of unfulfilled aspirations among the marginalized can eventually erode the fabric of peace, leading to cycles of violence as these individuals strive to secure their place within a society that has largely turned a blind eye to their plight.

Political leaders often face a choice: either actively engage in policies that combat poverty and promote equality or risk the emergence of social turmoil when discontent reaches a boiling point. Without mobilization of political will, policymakers may prioritize short-term stabilization measures over long-term systemic reform, leading to superficial solutions that inadequately address deeper societal issues. The resulting frustration can culminate in an explosion of social unrest, pushing societies back into conflict.

In conclusion, applying strain theory highlights that peaceful settings do not safeguard society from the effects of poverty. The lack of political will to confront socioeconomic disparities can engender significant strain within the populace, fostering conditions ripe for conflict. As the cycle of impoverishment continues unabated, the facade of peace will inevitably crack, revealing the underlying tensions that threaten societal stability. For peace to be sustainable, it is essential that political leadership recognizes the importance of addressing poverty as a vital part of governance, ensuring that all citizens find pathways to viable opportunities and that no group is left behind. Only then can long-lasting peace be achieved.