This is an essay I wrote for a class in which I "employ Robert Merton's anomie theory to make sense of [...] the Punk movement," posted by what I can only describe (inaccurately) as popular demand. Feel free not to read it, it's a bit terrible. Reference section available upon request.  
------------------- 
This system cannot be reformed! (So how about we try something different?): Anomie as the root of Punk 

There have long been efforts to explain the formation and attributes of youth subcultures, many of which, at some point or other, are considered to be deviant. The punk movement is no exception to this need to explain. This essay will attempt to apply Robert Merton’s anomie theory to the punk subculture, arguing that it can be used to explain the various elements of the subculture that have emerged in the decades since its inception.

Robert Merton’s strain theory rests heavily on the concept of anomie. First popularized by Emile Durkheim, anomie is broadly defined as the loss of norms, values and social cohesion and the accompanying lack of meaningful regulations and objectives in life brought about by modern society (Durkheim, 1951). Merton proposed in his theory that anomie was a driving force behind social strain. He attributed this social strain to the discrepancy between socially approved goals and the legitimate means of achieving them available to members of the society. He believed that when society was structured in such a way as to limit the legitimate means available, people would turn to illegitimate avenues to achieve their goals. Anomie ensues when society can no longer integrate or coordinate the ends and means, and the emphasis is placed on achieving goals while the acceptable ways of achieving them are not available to all members. This, he argued, was the foundation of deviance in society (Merton, 1938).  

The term “punk” refers broadly to a style of music and the accompanying subculture, which is characterized by its nonconformist mode of dress and hairstyle, and uniquely politicized nature (Clark, 2003); (Sabin, 1999). The movement emerged in the 1970s, and is generally associated with left-wing and progressive ideology, though it can cover a broad spectrum of ideologies, ranging from libertarian to right-wing to apolitical (Simonelli, 2002); (O’Hara 1999); (Sarabia and Shriver, 2004). Generally the movement is noted for its anti-establishment overtones, its emphasis on discontent with the status quo, and its focus on individualism, do-it-yourself self-reliance and free thought (Heffernan, 2011); (Hansen and Hansen, 1991); (Moore, 2004). In its more extreme forms, punk has acquired a reputation in the mainstream as a violent and deviant subculture, often aided by the vitriolic lyrics, tendency towards profanity and subversive, confrontational performances given by many of the well-known punk bands (Heffernan, 2011); (Simonelli, 2002); (O’Hara 1999). Though the mainstream tends to associate all punk with one type of person, one style and one sound, it is in fact made up of a diffuse group of people who embrace different elements of the lifestyle and ideologies to varying degrees, and enjoy different styles of punk music.  

In his theory of anomie, Robert Merton describes five adaptations that individuals may make to the pressures of society, specifically to the means and ends that are acceptable within society. These are conformity, innovation, ritualism, retreatism and rebellion. In each of these adaptations the individual decides whether to accept, reject, or attempt to replace the culturally acceptable ends and means (Merton, 1938). The last three are of special interest in an investigation into the punk subculture; most adherents of the punk subculture appear to most clearly display two of his proposed adaptations: retreatism and rebellion while the third, ritualism, is less clearly present but still important.   

One of the major adaptations displayed by the punk community is that of retreatism, in which mainstream culture’s ends and means both are rejected (Merton, 1938). This is perhaps best displayed by members of the punk subculture who withdraw from traditional ways of living or earning a living, often embracing a homeless or transient lifestyle rather than continuing to function normally in mainstream society. These punks, especially those referred to as “crusty punks,” refuse to participate in a society with which they disagree for various social or political reasons, and so drop out almost completely, refusing to engage in culturally acceptable behaviour or to seek out culturally acceptable goals (Heffernan, 2011); (Leblanc, 1999). Of all members of the punk subculture those who retreat from society are most likely to be perceived as deviant, as they are generally most likely to display their subcultural affiliation externally with extreme fashion statements (Leblanc, 1999). They are also more likely to engage in socially unacceptable behaviours such as panhandling or homelessness, and perceived to be more likely to have substance abuse problems or to be violent, even if this is not the case (Heffernan, 2011); (Baron, 1989). Punks of the retreatist adaptation are cast adrift by mainstream society, and experience anomie as a sense of isolation from the society that they feel no longer has anything of value to offer them. They react by refusing to participate in society. 

The rebellion adaptation is perhaps more closely related to punk in the minds of mainstream society, and for good reason. In the rebellion adaptation, ends and means are not accepted, but nor are they outright rejected. Instead, the rebel replaces the values of mainstream society with new ends and means, creating their own rules for behaviour and desirable goals that are subculturally acceptable and which they advocate spreading to mainstream culture (Merton, 1938). This rejection and replacement is best exemplified through the highly political messages conveyed by much of punk music, which often espouse anti-government and anti-conformist messages, as well as advocating for a new order in which their personal goals and ideas are substituted for those of mainstream society (O’Hara, 1999). Punks draw attention to issues such as militarism, racism, animal cruelty and oppression of the working-class, and offer solutions to these social issues, often supporting a wholesale replacement or restructuring of vast swathes of society in their own image (Hansen and Hansen, 1991); (Clark, 2004). They reject available, culturally approved means of achieving goals, such as maintaining gainful employment, in favour of expressing themselves and their dissatisfaction with mainstream society (Heffernan, 2011). Many punks also display disdain for the common goals of society, notably consumerism and capitalism, and reject the opportunity to profit from their art or music. Often this manifests in their disdain for those who have “sold out,” that is, those who have sacrificed their ideals for status or monetary gain (Gosling, 2004); (Davies, 1996). They replace these culturally approved goals with those of their own choosing, usually focused around individual freedom, lax social control or artistic expression (Heffernan, 2011). Many punks also take part in “direct action,” activities including protesting or civil disobedience, designed to make their opinions known and bring about social change (Heffernan, 2011); (Ardizzone, 2005). Punks of the rebellious adaptation are angered by the structure of society, and experience anomie as a result of the hypocrisy of the mainstream. In response they act out and demand change.   

The ritualism adaptation is less associated with the punk movement, but still holds some weight in the subculture, mostly as it involves adaptation within the subculture itself. In the ritualism adaptation, individuals accept the means but reject the ends (Merton, 1938). For many members of the punk movement, especially those who exist on the periphery and affect the punk style without genuinely accepting its ideologies, often referred to as “poseurs,” the rituals of punk have become central (O’Hara, 1999). They do not care about the rebellious or political goals of punk. Instead, they are interested in superficial and inconsequential rebellion, using the subculture as a fashion statement: something that makes them appear tough or edgy without actually having to be so (Heffernan, 2011); (Clark, 2003). These punks are almost universally rejected by the more dedicated punk subculture, though what makes one a poseur is not always clear, and can vary between groups of punks (Levine and Stumpf, 1983); (Heffernan, 2011). Despite their rejection by “true” punks, poseurs remain closely involved in the movement, and probably outnumber the “true” punks due to the rapid commercialization of punk that made it more acceptable and more available to the mainstream (Clark, 2003). For these poseurs the instrumental actions of rebellion, the fashion choices, the values espoused, have become ritualistic expressions of a discontent they do not fully understand or care about. Interestingly, the ritualistic mindset is also seen in some elements of the most dedicated hardcore punks, as members turn searching out “genuine” punks and defending their subculture from poseurs into their main goal. The need to keep their subculture insular, originally a means to ensure that their subculture remained true to its ideals, becomes for them an end unto itself (Moore, 2004).  For poseurs, anomie arises from the wish to reject culturally acceptable goals in order to be seen to rebel or be different, and is dealt with by clinging to subculturally acceptable actions without attachment to the goals. For hardcore punks, the need to protect “their” lifestyle from interlopers becomes paramount, and previous goals are abandoned in favour of staying “pure”.  

Using Robert Merton’s theory sheds a great deal of light on much of the punk subculture. His theory of anomie and adaptation explains the street punks who choose to drop out of society completely, the politicized punks who use their subculture to attempt to force change, and the fashion punks who engage in the punk subculture more as a form of ritualism than as a lifestyle. While it is difficult to fully explain every element of such a diverse subculture, Merton’s theory goes a long way to making sense of a movement that might, at first glance, seem one-dimensional and simple.