H. P. SAND
analyze the phenomenon of gangs in four larger Norwegian
towns. Central problems were: What kind of processes create
violent gangs? What processes create the special form of
“bonding” that is found in gangs? Are these forms of social
bonds special for gangs, or are such structures surrounded by
special ways of thinking, norms and values? How are gangs
transformed from one stadium to another, from group of friends,
to a violent gang, and eventually to a more organized and pro-
fit-oriented criminal gang?
It seems to me that these were more or less the same ques-
tions Thrasher posed.
The four towns that were chosen for the project were Oslo
(the capital of Norway), Drammen, Kris tiansand and Stavanger.
It turned out that the researchers came to consentrate on Kris-
tiansand and Oslo. In Kristiansand the immigrant gangs were
dominated by second generation latin American boys, while in
Oslo most gangs were of second generation Pakistanis. Outside
Drammen there existed an organized group of Nazis or neo-
nazis who displayed aggressive language against young immi-
grants. These were studied by Fangen (1995). But while the at
that time dominant Marxist analysis emphasized that Norwe-
gian gangs were neo-nazis, in fact the group outside Drammen
was the only organized group with a clear ideological view.
The researchers maintain that there may be many and invisi-
ble causes that a part of the youngsters with a minority back-
ground flock together in groups that become involved in violent
and other criminal acts. An especially important such reason is
conflict with other youngsters or youth groups. And they quote
the man they regard as the pioneer of American gang research,
Frederic M. Thrasher, who stated that “The gang is a conflict
group. It develops through strife and thrives on warfare”. They
conclude that later research has shown that this postulate is still
valid.
The researchers then go on to discuss gangs and gang vio-
lence in a way very similar to Thrasher. They write that immi-
grant youngsters can enter into gangs consisting of youngsters
from only one ethnic group, or in multi-ethnic gangs, were also
Norwegian youngsters may participate. The axis of conflict
may sometimes go between gangs of the same ethnic origin,
which has been the case with the recurring conflicts between
Pakistani gangs in Oslo. The conflicts between the gangs Young
Guns and Killers and between the A-and B-gang in Oslo are
such examples. But the lines of conflict may also go between
groups of majority youngsters and groups of minority young-
sters. Then the two groups tend to articulate the antagonisms in
the form of articulate racist and anti-racist positions and ways
of acting. The discussion ends up with a conclusion quite dif-
ferent from the afore mentioned marxist researcher. They write:
“But under this seemingly political conflict there is often hidden
dimensions of conflict that are about quite different things” (my
underlining, my translation).
The patterns that are outlined in several Norwegian towns is
that minority youngsters seek together in strong groups and
gangs to protect themselves against a perceived threat from
racist and neo-nazist groups. At the same time some majority
youngsters who have experienced being threatened or robbed
by immigrant gangs, will tend to seek together in ethnic Nor-
wegian gangs to protect each other—or already existing racist
groups offer them protection.
Some researchers (Eidheim, 1993: p. 17) argues that “racism/
neo-nazism” or “antiracism” are so morally authoritative con-
cepts—and saturated by meaning and associations—that it is
easy to loose the ability to analyze and reflect critically around
the phenomena that get these labels.
In a similar vein, Katrine Fangen almost feels like asking for
excuse for studying so-called neo-nazis:
“The report is meant to be a contribution to the understand-
ing of how the participants think and interact. Such a research
approach will for many people be provocative, because such an
understanding often will be misunderstood in the direction of
‘being sympathetic to’ or ‘defend’. My point of departure is
that a closer knowledge of the life-world of these youngsters is
essential in order to grasp the development in a reasonable
way” (Fangen, 1995: p. 8, my translation).
She also argues that the concept of gang is more suitable
than the concept of subculture when we shall look at definite si-
tuations of interaction, both between the nationalists in encoun-
ter with their adversaries, and when we shall look at the inter-
action withing the collective. And she refers explicitly to Thra-
sher. A gang is, as Frederic M. Thrasher defines it, character-
ized by that it has a spontaneous, undefined origin. A gang
arises when a number of youngsters are present at the same
arena, for example that they constantly meet each other on the
street corner or the gas station. To constitute a gang, they must
in addition meet regularly in face to face situations. The typical
gang behavior has a certain playful character. The gang often
develops a characteristic humor, a characteristic language and a
characteristic way. Its members are out for adventurous ex-
periences that break with a conventional, routine way. Different
forms of partying behavior like games, drinking, smoking and
picking up girls are typical gang behavior. The goal of the gang
members is to have fun together. In encounters with other
gangs, however, most gangs will, according to Thrasher, be
able to participate in fights and behave as “mob”. It is the spe-
cial organization, solidarity and morale that enables the gang to
behave like a ruthless mob with great destructive urge, far be-
yond what the single member can account for on his own.
Bjorgo and Carlsson discuss in their research report (1999)
the distinction between racism as expression and racism as
driving force. This shows, in my opinion, that the dominant
discourse about racism still had some grip in the Norwegian
debate and even in the research community. Hovewer, they
argue that when we are dealing with the phenomenon of “rac-
ist” violence, it can be useful to go deeper into the division be-
tween racism as an expression, and racism as a driving force or
motive. Many of those acts that express racism—for instance if
a youth gang breaks the windows of a shop run by immigrants
and paints swastikas—is run by other motives than racist ide-
ology. For example, it often is about showing yourself for the
gang, and to outdo each other in aggressivity and courage, or a
wish to get publicity and attention.
And they go on to argue that relatively few of those who ex-
ercise racism are motivated first and foremost by a racist con-
viction and ideology. For those racism is both driving force and
expression. For a considerably larger portion it is quite other
motives than ideology which is the primary driving force be-
hind their racist acts and expressions. Other who exercise ra-
cism have a combination of motives, where racism only make
up one element among others.
Racism does not only have connection with “white” young-
sters against “black” youngsters, but it can also be an affecting
factor in situations where the violence goes the other way.
When youngsters with immigrant background seek to violent
gangs, this often has to do with the experience of racism, dis-
Open Access 255