This essay will give a thorough account of a Marxist understanding of society and what this understanding contributed to criminological theory. To truly grasp a Marxist understanding of society the essay will firstly look at the development of Marx’s work, then draw conclusions on his main era that surrounded crime and law, known as the Historical Materialism era. The essay will then look at how these conclusions relate to crime. Five different theorists work, who use Marxist ideology as their main school of thought, will then be looked at. First the essay will look at Willem Bonger and explore his contributions, making note of his ability to connect the links between capitalism and a patriarchal society. Secondly ‘The New Criminology’ by …show more content…
Marx’s concept of alienation was elaborated on greatly in his Feuerbachian period through his manuscripts, however, it is hard to draw theories and ideologies on crime and law from this period of work as it was not a main point of attraction for Marx. As Marx moved into his Historical Materialism period, with the help of Engels, their positions on crime and law become much clearer and it was around this era Marx moved from a natural human rights outlook on society to a more rationalist egalitarianism outlook (Taylor, Walton and Young, 1975). When looking at Marx writings and relating them to the discipline of criminology, two aspects that stand out are; firstly Marx did not devote his time to writing about crime and law therefore only several aspects of his writing on capitalism can be related to the field of criminology, secondly is the fact that an individual in society will always be defined by their position in the mode of production. This means that both the means of production and the individuals position in the means of production, worker or owner, are important factors that define the way in which their lives are led and experienced. When looking at capitalist societies there is a tendency for them to be the most violent types of societies with considerable amounts of crime. There is a clear visible division between those who own the
Marxism is a political and social system based on the ideas of Karl Marx (1818-83). Marxist criminology theories began in the 1970’s. According to Marxists, society is controlled by the ruling capitalist class. They believe that in a capitalist society, a small group of wealthy people (the bourgeoisie), own the means of production, such as; factories, businesses, land, etc and that they exploit the working class people (the proletariat), so that they can enjoy a huge profit and personal gain, either legally or illegally. Marxists believe that the ruling class therefore decide
This particular work will consist of a critical theoretical review and a comparative analysis on two criminological theories. For the comparison I have chosen Marx’s theory of crime and Merton’s strain theory of deviance. My critical comparison analysis will emphasise the central concepts and arguments within both theories and how each theory explains crime. The analysis will then explore modern day studies in which have stemmed from these theories as well as explore the many similarities and differences between these two theories. Exploring the strengths and weaknesses in both approaches and concluding that although both theories are
In opposition to all previous perspectives is Marxism. These theorists claim that humans are social beings and are products of their own history. As a result, it does not resolve conflicting approaches, but suggests crime is a justifiable adaptive behaviour for some groups that have been criminalised by more powerful societal members. This entails the problem of specificity, where it focuses on the whole society instead of on individuals or groups. Comparing the paradigm of human nature to Feeley and Simons’ (1992) New Penology, the notion
Criminology is a field that has been researched prolong. Most of the information explaining crime and delinquency is based on facts about crime (Vold, Bernard, & Daly 2002, p.1). The aim of this paper is to describe the theories of crime and punishment according to the positivists Emile Durkheim and Cesare Lombroso, and the classical criminologist Marcese de Beccaria. The theories were developed as a response to the industrialisation and the modernisation of the societies in the 18th and 19th centuries and were aiming to create a rational society and re-establish social solidarity (Vold et al 2002, p.101). The criminological perspectives of crime and punishment will be discussed in a form of dialogue between the three theorists exploring
Marxists argue that capitalist society actually generate crime because it encourages greed and crime is a response to the inequalities in wealth.
Marxist Theory and Crime and Punishment Throughout human history countless philosophers have risen with what they thought to be the best form of government for society as a whole. Karl Marx may be the most influential philosopher in Russian history. According to The Free Dictionary, Marxism is the concept that “class struggle plays a central role in understanding society's allegedly inevitable development from bourgeois oppression under capitalism to a socialist and ultimately classless society”. With this theory, Marx had a great impact on Russian literature; specifically, Fyodor Dostoyevsky's Crime and Punishment. According the the Marxist theory, one would interpret Crime and Punishment as a perfect example to
‘Using material from item A and elsewhere, assess the usefulness of Marxist approach to an understanding of crime and deviance’ (21 marks)
Marxist sociologists argue that in order to understand crime and deviance, one needs to realise that it is the nature of exploitative economic systems that capitalist societies have in
For example, it shapes the nature of religion, law, education, the state and so on. According to Marx, capitalism sows the seeds of its own destruction. For example, by polarising the classes, bringing the proletariat together in ever-increasing numbers, and driving down their wages, capitalism creates the conditions under which the working class can develop a consciousness (or awareness) of its own economic and political interests in opposition to those of its exploiters. As a result, the proletariat moves from merely being a class-in-itself (whose members share the same economic position) to becoming a class-foritself, whose members are class conscious – aware of the need to overthrow capitalism. The means of production would then be put in the hands of the state and run in the interests of everyone, not just of the bourgeoisie. A new type of society – socialism developing into communism – would be created, which would be without exploitation, without classes and without class conflict. Marx’s work has been subjected to a number of criticisms. First, Marx’s predictions have not come true. Far from society becoming polarised and the working class becoming poorer, almost everyone in western societies enjoys a far higher standard of living than ever before. The collapse of so-called ‘communist’ regimes like the former Soviet Union, and growing private ownership and capitalist growth in China, cast some doubt on the viability of the practical implementation
Crime in the light of critical criminology is an obvious outcome of disparities established in a system. Capitalist economic policies result in economic misery among powerless class in society and certain conditions are created in which adapting the criminal behaviors become the only possible survival strategy. Critical criminology follows the Marxist approach in stating that criminal laws are based on the interests of
Social conflict theory is the only one out of the vast number of criminology theories that deals directly with this problem. From out of it’s Marxist roots arose a theory which challenges the way in which today’s society views it’s legal system and the implications it has on it’s working class citizens. The nature and purpose of social conflict theories is to examine the social controls made by the ruling class and imposed on the rest of society.
Marx’s theory of alienated labour is structured around a class-based system. It is vital to acknowledge that Marx’s evaluation of the capitalist system is based focused the Industrial Revolution a century and a half ago, and therefore must be kept somewhat in that context. Within Marx’s simplified capitalist society model, one class of people own and control the raw materials and their means of production. They are referred to as capital, bourgeoisie, or the owning class. The capitalist does not just own the means of production, but also all the items produced. By virtue of their ownership of production property they receive an income and earn a living from the operations of their factories and shops. The owning class owns the productive resources, though they do not usually operate the production means themselves.
The central problem was that 'wholesale improvement in social conditions resulted in not a drop in crime but rather the reverse' (Young 1998, p.159). Critical criminology had a significant impact on academic criminology over two decades ago but still remains important and influential today. "The new criminology had a brief period of decline and is now experiencing a resurgence of interest and influence" (Walton & Young 1998). Critical criminologists raise a number of important questions and see crime as a process related to wider economic and political structures of power. They question the way social control operates and is used. They explain crime as a result of the alienation and powerless of the working class, controlled by capitalism.
The concept of alienation plays a significant role in Marx's early political writing, especially in the Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1848, but it is rarely mentioned in his later works. This implies that while Marx found alienation useful in investigating certain basic aspects of the development of capitalist society, it is less useful in putting forward the predictions of the collapse of capitalism. The aim of this essay is to explain alienation, and show how it fits into the pattern of Marx's thought. It will be concluded that alienation is a useful tool in explaining the affect of capitalism on human existence. In Marx's thought, however, the usefulness of alienation it is limited to explanation. It does not help in
From a criminological perspective several criminologists would agree that many of society’s laws are not neutral. Whilst Marxists recognise that for a society to function efficiently, social order is necessary, “the founders of Marxism thought that crime, same as all other problems of human society, is a direct result of the unjust structure of capitalism” (Marxism and Criminology). Furthermore, Marx argued that one should always ask of the law who benefits from it? And in doing so, one may note that most laws are formulated to protect the interests of the most powerful members in society from those with the least power (Chablis, et al.). It may further be