Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Can’t we all just get along?.  In 1950-1960s = strain  Policy = provide opportunity to those who lack means for achieving legitimate success.  Turmoil.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Can’t we all just get along?.  In 1950-1960s = strain  Policy = provide opportunity to those who lack means for achieving legitimate success.  Turmoil."— Presentation transcript:

1 Can’t we all just get along?

2  In 1950-1960s = strain  Policy = provide opportunity to those who lack means for achieving legitimate success.  Turmoil of 1960s  criminologists become more skeptical Politicians and other interests groups lack will to make real changes Cloward and Ohlin story Many groups actively oppose providing opportunities

3 ConsensusConflict  Law reflect shared belief about what is wrong  Law resolves conflicts and maintains order  The state is “neutral”  Bias is temporary and unintentional  Law is an end process in a conflict over values  Bias is built into the law (winners punish losers)  The state (CJS) responds to the needs of those in power (not neutral)

4  Central Themes  Emphasis on “inequality” and “power”  Crime as “political” concept  CJS serves interests of powerful  Solution to crime is more equitable society  EXPLANATION OF LAW and CJ SYSTEM rather than crime

5  Conflict Theory  Marxist/Radical Theory  Left Realism/Peacemaking  Feminist Criminology/Gender and Crime

6  George Vold Group Conflict  Multiple groups in society with varying levels of power ▪Political interest groups ▪Social movements ▪Broad segments of society ▪Political parties  Those who win conflict get control over the law and coercive power of the state

7  The formulation of law  Interest groups’ influence on law-making  Research on consensus over laws  The operation of the CJS  Research on “extra-legal” variables “Legal” = prior record, offense seriousness “extra” = RACE, CLASS, GENDER Demeanor?

8  After controlling for legal factors, race-CJS studies are all over the board  Especially if one controls for demeanor (Reiss, 1966  observed police)  Research issues  The meaning of prior record and demeanor  How to isolate and study bias  Different stages of the legal system

9 Racial profiling ▪Difficult to determine ▪Minorities more likely to live in high-crime areas ▪Alfred Blumstein ▪Racial disparity in incarceration due largely to disparities in arrest rates ▪Blacks at a disadvantage in the criminal justice system, especially for less serious crimes

10  Race and Capital Punishment  Victim x Race interactions  Race and Drug Prosecutions  Long history of connecting drugs to “dangerous” populations Chinese  Opium Mexicans  Marijuana African Americans  Crack Cocaine e “Crack Multiplier”  Enforcement patterns for drug offenses

11  Thorston Sellin (1938)  Cultural conflict theory  Gist: violate laws of the majority simply by following the norms of one’s own reference group  George Vold (1958)  Group conflict theory (crime that results from conflict) Labor strife, protest-related crime

12  Communist Manifesto  Means of production determine the structure of society  Capitalism: Owners of the means of production (capitalists) Workers = proletariat, lumpen proletariat

13  The laboring class produces goods that exceed the value of their wages (profit)  The owners invest the profit to reduce the workforce (technology)  The workers will no longer be able to afford the goods produced by the owners

14 ▪Early attempt to tie Marx and Crime Together ▪Altruism as a defining characteristic of society and human nature ▪Egoism characterizes capitalist society ▪Capitalism builds social irresponsibility and creates a climate of crime ▪Solution: socialism (which allows altruism to flourish)

15  Instrumental Marxist Position  Hard line position Crime and the creation and enforcement of law the direct result of capitalism  Structural Marxist Position  Softer Position Governments are somewhat autonomous Over time, the direction of the law (creation and enforcement) will lean towards the capitalists

16  Richard Quinney (1980)  All Conflict is organized around capitalist versus the poor Either you are an oppressed lackey or a capitalist Anyone who does not realize this (or identifies with capitalism) has false class consciousness The real power and authority is exclusive to the ruling class

17  Primary goal of capitalists? Maintain Power!  To do this, must trample rights of others  But, also must portray an egalitarian society  Accomplished by controlling media, academics

18  Capitalists control the definition of crime  Laws protect the capitalists (property, $)  Laws ignore crimes of the capitalists (profiteering)

19  CJS is the tool of the capitalists; used to oppress (not protect) the working population  Crimes of the rich treated with kid gloves  Property crimes strictly enforced “Street crimes” are enforced only in poor neighborhoods Incarceration to control surplus labor

20  Crimes of the Capitalists (must control)  Economic Domination  Crimes of the Government  Crimes of Control  Social Injuries (should be crimes)  Crimes of the Lower Class  “Rebellion”  Crimes of “Accommodation”

21  The policy implication of Marxist Criminology is clear.  Dismantle the capitalist structure in favor of a socialist structure.

22  An “underdog theory” with little basis in fact  Are “socialist societies” any different?  Other capitalist countries have low crime rates  Most crime is poor against poor—Marxists ignore the plight of the poor.

23 ▪The Rich Get Richer and the Poor Get Prison ▪Key point = harmful acts of the rich are often ignored (unneccesary surgery, environmental harm, etc.)  White collar crime less serious and less likely to be enforced ▪Pollution, Hazardous work conditions, Unsafe products, Insider trading, Embezzlement, Fraud ▪ Even w ealthy people who engage in street crime are less likely to be formally charged and better able to avoid sanctioning

24 ▪ Only some forms of capitalism encourage crime ▪Market economy (compassionate capitalism) Japan (Top down) Scandinavian (Bottom up) ▪ Market society (high levels of inequality and poverty) ▪Solution: softer, gentler capitalist society

25 ▪ Mechanisms that link market societies to high rates of violence ▪ Destroys livelihoods ▪ Tendency toward extremes of inequality ▪ Weakens public support ▪Erodes informal social support ▪Promotes a culture of competition and consumption ▪Deregulates the technology of violence ▪Weakens alternative political values and institutions

26  Feminist Criminology  Relationships between gender, crime, and the criminal justice system  Gender Ratio and Generalizability

27 ▪ Emphasizes equal opportunity and importance of sex-role socializations ▪Focus on “patriarchy”—male dominance exerted over females through financial and physical power ▪Types ▪Liberal feminism ▪Socialist feminism ▪Radical feminism

28  Good example of conflict theory in action  Feminists responsible for shaping the law and law enforcement Marital Rape Intimate Partner Violence  Feminists also largely responsible for the recent focus on gender/crime issues

29 ▪Gender ratio (Gender Gap) ▪Males account for the vast majority of delinquent and criminal offending ▪UCR, NCVS, self-report ▪Gender gap shrinking? Liberation hypothesis (Not supported by research)  WHY is gender ratio so large?  Can traditional theories explain? (Social bond, delinquent peers, etc.)  Masculinity & sex roles

30  Generaliziblity issue  Can “Male” theories explain female offending? Many theories blatantly sexist (See, Cohen) Many theories simply ignore females  Mainstream theories do explain male and female offending similarly Could we do better explaining female criminality? Salience of sexual/physical abuse among delinquent girls

31 ▪Street women ▪Harmed-and-harming women ▪Battered women ▪Drug-connected women ▪Other women

32 ▪Research findings ▪When gender effects are found, females are treated more leniently Chivalry Hypothesis Paternalism Hypothesis Seriousness of offense differs in ways that most research doesn’t count Sort-of-legal-factors (“familied”)


Download ppt "Can’t we all just get along?.  In 1950-1960s = strain  Policy = provide opportunity to those who lack means for achieving legitimate success.  Turmoil."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google