Sociology A-level Syllabus Notes

CRIME & DEVIANCE

MARXIST PERSPECTIVES ON CRIME

According to Marxist theory, the law, agencies of social control, and definitions of what is regarded as criminal/deviant all serve ruling class interests. Thus laws are not an expression of value consensus (as Functionalists argue) rather they are an aspect of false consciousness designed to protect ruling class interests.

The State passes laws which justify and legitimise the exploitation and oppression of the working class, minimise the extent of ruling class criminality and amplify working class criminality.

CORPORATE CRIME AND THE PROTECTION OF PRIVATE PROPERTY

From a Marxist perspective ruling class power is based on ownership of private property and business. Mannheim notes the excessive prominence given by the law to the protection of property , and Snider argues that the capitalist state is reluctant to pass laws which threaten capitalist businesses profitability: for example, laws relating to pollution, worker health and safety, etc. She claims that white-collar crime and corporate crime does far more damage than typically working class crimes such as burglary, robbery and murder. For example, the annual murder toll in the US is 20,000. This compares to 14,000 deaths in industrial accidents, 30,000 from unsafe consumer products, and 100,000 from occupationally induced diseases such as asbestosis. Working class street crime accounts for loses of $4 billion dollars/year whereas it s estimated that corporate crime involves loses of $80 billion. As evidenced through the study of official crime statistics, white collar and corporate crime is less likely than working class crime to be defined as criminal, less likely to be investigated, and more likely to result in lenient sentencing. Working class crime, on the other hand, is amplified.

ORGANISED CRIME AND THE RULING CLASS

Chambliss longitudinal study of organised crime in Seattle in the 60 s found that the wealthy and powerful were the main instigators and beneficiaries of a range of criminal activities. He claimed that Seattle s main crime syndicate was composed of leading businessmen, politicians and policemen, and that they controlled illegal gambling, drug dealing, prostitution and pornography. Crimes were more easily committed and covered up by the criminals legitimate profession. For example, tax-free profits were concealed by the vice-president of a local bank. Meanwhile, 70% of arrests during the period of Chambliss study were for public drunkenness and the courts and jails were filled with the poor and powerless.

THE VALUES OF CAPITALISM

Marxists view crime as a natural outgrowth of the values that capitalism promotes.

Capitalism emphasises personal motives of self-interest, competition and maximisation of personal wealth rather than public duty and collective well-being. These values inevitably breed aggression, hostility, mutual suspicion and, for the losers, frustration. In such a world crime is a rational response to the competitiveness and inequality of society and all members of society are likely to engage in crime if they are desperate enough or calculate they are unlikely to get caught.

At a deeper level of analysis, Chambliss argues that capitalism itself is criminal, allowing as it does, such massive inequalities to exist between the world s wealthy and poor. Angela Davies, a former leader of the Black Panthers (a Black militant group) claims, the real criminals are not all the people who populate the prisons, but those who have stolen the wealth of the world from the people .

THE AMPLIFICATION OF WORKING CLASS CRIME

By amplifying working class crime and blaming social problems caused by crime on the working class, the ruling class diverts attention away from its own criminality and turns the working class against itself. This is achieved through the way in which crime is defined and thought about in society. Consider the following points.

Criminals are regarded as personal failures or evil rather than as failures of an unequal social system which subjects the working class to poverty, drudgery and inevitable failure. By imprisoning large numbers of the working class who may potentially rebel, opposition to the ruling class is neutralised. For example, in the late 90 s in California 1 in 4 Black males in their 20 s were either in prison, on remand or on probation. By amplifying working class crime in the media and drawing attention to grotesque crimes such as rape, child abuse, etc. the frustration and anger of the working class is directed back towards members of the same class.

CONCESSIONS TO PREVENT REBELLION

The ruling class is, however, in a precarious position as the working class may rebel. If the ruling class sense high levels of dissatisfaction they may pass laws to appease the working class. Thus laws are sometimes passed which appear to benefit the working class, although in reality they serve the ruling class by preventing rebellion.

For example, during the 60 s Martin Luther King mobilised huge number of Black Americans who were deeply unhappy about the racism, lack of opportunities and segregation evident in American society at that time. In the face of such a force which could have threatened capitalist interests, the US State passed civil rights legislation guaranteeing equal rights in terms of education, employment, housing and the law.

LEFT REALIST CRITICISMS OF MARXISM

During the mid-80 s traditional Marxist-inspired sociology and political thought underwent a crisis. The Soviet un ion collapsed and a number of right-wing political parties gained power in the US, the UK and throughout Europe. Left-wing thinkers challenged the traditional Marxist explanation of crime as na ve, simplistic and unhelpful. From a Marxist perspective crime can be viewed as a working class reaction to ruling class exploitation, and thus in some ways legitimised: e.g. a burglar robbing a wealthy house was fighting back against capitalist exploitation. Marxists also argued that nothing short of a communist revolution could halt crime.

Left Realists pointed out that it was in fact the working classes, particularly women and ethnic minorities, who were most likely to be victims of crime, and that those who offended were also working class: i.e. crime was intra-class. Left Realists also argued that although police bias and racism may exaggerate crime levels among young Black males, this group did still commit a disproportionately high amount of street crime.

Feminist sociologists have argued that Marxists tend to ignore the role of patriarchy in influencing the criminal justice system and for failing to address the importance of specifically male to female crimes such as rape, domestic abuse, etc.

Marxists argued that crime would cease to exist under communist rule. This was not the case in the USSR, although crime rates were probably far lower than in the West, partially due to a lack of private wealth and property, partially due to particularly harsh sentencing of criminals.

Jones points out that the relationship between capitalism and crime is not straightforward. Switzerland -a country that has long embraced capitalism- has low crime rates. This may be due to high overall standards of living in Switzerland. Left Realists suggest it is relative deprivation that is associated with high crime rates- thus cities with high concentrations of the very wealthy and very poor (Johannesburg, L.A., Mexico City, Rio de Janiero) tend to have very high levels of criminality.