Marxists Crime and Deviance.

These communities give rise to criminals as they knew the areas, they knew the communities and they had the opportunity. Marxism states that poverty can put the powerless at greater risk of becoming a victim of a crime. 90% of crime reported to the police, only 40% is recorded, due to the discretionary powers of the police given by the upper classes to protect the upper

In comparison Merton’s theory put forward a entirely different rationalisation of the causes of crime, and juxtaposing major ideals about who commits these crimes, Marxists points out that absence of egalitarianism of opportunity is at the centre of the capitalist system and Merton contends that not all individuals who lack genuine opportunities look to crime to do so. (Eglin and Hester, 2013).

Marxists argue that capitalist society actually generate crime because it encourages greed and crime is a response to the inequalities in wealth.

One way in which Marxism is a useful theory for explaining the causes of crime is the concept of capitalism, criminogenic capitalism. Criminogenic capitalism is based on the exploitation of the working class- using them for a means to an end. Crime is not confined to the working class, greed and self interest cause white collar crimes such as tax evasion and

The abolitionist perspective has had a hard time with conservatives and the Left, but is more focused on emancipation from the status quo (Sheerer, 1986). Conservative political thought rejects abolitionist thought at its core. Conservatives have a tendency to welcome a centralized state authority, and so, the notion of decentralization through abolitionism is not well received (Sheerer, 1986). Left realists welcome traditional classifications of crime (Tabibi, 2015b). The focus here is on crimes associated with the middle class. Left realists rely on existing criminal justice procedures to fight street crime (Sheerer, 1986). The Left also provides a counter to abolition and has a tendency towards leftist moral crusades (Sheerer, 1986). Groups associated with the Left, such as the women’s movement and the environmental movement, have begun to see the benefits of operating within the criminal justice system (Sheerer, 1986). These groups have found leverage in the criminal justice system, which has helped them achieve some goals. Penal laws are being used to establish general principles that are favourable to the cause of the individual groups (Sheerer, 1986). Mathiesen (1874) would argue that these groups are no longer able to function as alternatives because they are operating from within the system, and are using

In, “Who is Winning the Losing War against Crime?” Jeffrey Reiman, a philosopher out of Washington, D.C., expands on a different viewpoint in which to look at Marx’s political theory. Rather than the typical way to viewing it by addressing how it would affect our economic system, he turns it around to focus on it could be used to evaluate current social problems, particularly crime. Reiman’s belief was that we as people are not seeing the real story of crime due to these false ideologies floating around, same as Marx’s belief that the pursuit of happiness contained an ideology that favored the result of capitalism, which he saw as very deteriorating. In this reading, Reiman’s main argument is to adjust our view on crime. Instead of believing there is a direct correlation between crime and human nature, which is fed to the public by researchers, Reiman puts forth an effort to make us see the criminal system as unjust and corrupt in a way. “For example, a number of researchers approach criminal behavior by exploring the role that human nature plays in criminal activity. Reiman attempts to reframe and recast the problem. The unjust and inept criminal system is not, he argues, the result of failure to recognize the contribution human nature makes to criminal behavior. The real truth, he contends, is that powerful groups in society have a vested interest in perpetuating an inept, unjust criminal system. This is what Reiman calls the Pyrrhic defeat theory, the hypothesis that the

These two theories also attempt to explain how inequality and power are important and key to understanding crime. Marxist criminology ; For Bonger theory, expresses rejection of the social instinct of altruism and placing one’s own interests above those of other people. Bonger theory contended that egoism was a product of the social environment

However, the hateful actions of the KKK and other white supremacist groups echoed the prior structural humiliation and oppression of slavery and even today, there are many modern constructs that continue to undermine African Americans. Though we view the oppression described within Malcolm X as more odious than that shown within Finding Forrester, both films depict the societal undermining and vilification of a disenfranchised group—the basis for structural humiliation (LeClair, 2016). This type of systematic undermining may lead to crime as an economic necessity and may explain some forms of street crime (LeClair, 2016). Incarceration and the penal system, as depicted in Murder in the First, can also heavily weigh on individuals who commit crimes. Once someone is ensnared in the correctional system, studies have demonstrated that they are far more likely to reoffend and become incarcerated again in the future (Durose, Cooper & Snyder, 2014).

Working Class Crime is Best Understood as the Product of the Social Background of the Offender

Secondly, Marxists argue that is it the connected ability of the powerful to manipulate values of society which is why corporate crimes are rendered invisible. Academics find it difficult to analyze corporate crime because large scale survey data is not available so researchers have to rely on non-objective crime statistics collected by ‘impartial’ government agencies such as StatsCan or the Home Office which usually yield tiny samples (Snider, 2005; pg 186). Corporations do not want sociologist investigating their business practises, unlike traditional offenders they have the ability to resist such incursions. On the other hand, the justice department for the most part

When considering society's contributions to crime and criminality I draw support in part from the Marxist theory on crime. Based on Karl Marx’s Communist Manifesto and work by Frederick Engels the Marxist theory of crime outlines that “laws” are tools of the ruling class, which criminalized “poverty” and promote class struggle. While I have nothing against a capitalist system, American society relies so much on it and it’s resulting class inequality defines the majority of social interaction and thus is a cause of crime. The effect this has is prevalent in the prosecution of white collar criminals who are 0.3% or inmate in federal prison, compared to those the 46.3% incarcerate for drug offense ("BOP Statistics: Inmate Offenses," 2016). Though there has

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 structure of this societal hierarchy places a few individuals in the higher ranks of society with the majority within the lower ranks, the proverbial winners as compared to the losers. This theory bases crime upon the various class struggles to obtain wealth within an unequal economic environment. The lower class struggles to obtain the same level of material wealth held by those of the higher classes creating an extremely competitive environment leading to individuals taking advantage of the weaker members of society to further their own level of wealth. The radical theory defines crime as the deprivation of basic human rights, as individuals compete for a portion of societal wealth in an unequally distributed market they become overly competitive with one another leading to what is described as senseless violence.

In this journal Cowling explores the many ways in which Marxism has been used to analyze crime. He has presented a summary of the reasonable opportunities in using Marxism to construct awareness of his criminological theory.

In accordance with Marxist theory, it is the views of the powerful that dominate, as they have the ability to make their views prevail. It would then appear that what constitutes a crime is open to debate; moreover, the criminals who we choose to despise, are they no more than mere victims of our own perceptions. Our own social conditioning? To see why this is, we must look to the very basis of society and how it decides what is right or wrong.