2.2 youthful urban collaborations Flashcards
what demographic is there a fearful preoccuaption with in history of urban governance
-threats posed by groups of young working class males BAME
in early 20th century who tried to conceptualsie these threats of criminal collaborations
and why?
- chicago school
- for the purposes of systematic empirical investigation in terms of the street gang
what was the criticism of british sociologists about the american concept of the gang?
didn’t explain the group behaviour of young people in british cities who were more likely to pariticpate in less structured sub cultures
when were american concepts of the gang more relevant in britain and regarding what characteristics
early 21st century
- characteristics of youthful criminal collaboration now more relevant in britain
- or criminal collaboration in uk had become americanised
the refutation of this american to british convergence thesis by those arguing criminal collaboration remains highly dependent on what?
on the context in different cities within countries let alone between them
what is stan cohen a sociologist of
deviance and social control
stan cohen quote ‘prevalence of….
as researchers avert their gaze from crimes of… to focus on fears of…
- prevalence of palms up, eyes down criminology
- as researchers avert their gaze from crimes of the powerful to focus on fears of the powerful about threat from below
epidemological research (self report studies epecialy) estimate how many offences known to authorities are committed collaboratively in joint enterprise crime?
50%
fraser and hobbs 2017 use concepts of the gang, the firm etc to interpret this joint enterprise along with the allied focus on urban contexts of this joint enterprise BETRAYS what preoccupation?
political and economic preoccupation with the threat from the urban working class,
- especially its cohort of males from perceived outside groups
frasher and hobbs 2017 core argument is that those criminal collaboratiosn that are regarded as ‘urban’ are regarded so because of WHOS FEAR
because of more profound fear amongst the authorities of threats posed by the urban working class to social order
fraud and white collar crimes are often what type of offence
collaborative
fraud and white collar crime have not historically been regarded as what?
which is synonymous with..
- not historically regarded as central to crime control in cities
- effectively synonymous with policing the working class
what are metaphors of communal transgression
- the gang
- the mob
- the firm
- the organisation
metaphors for communal transgression carry implicit essences of what 3 intents?
- consolidated
- concentrated
- undiluted deviant intent
when presented as collectivities criminals compound the threats posed by actions of individual deviants and the resultant categories become WHAT by law enforcement and the media
become EASILY OBJECTIFIED by law enforcement agencies and valorised by mass media
what two types of crime are generlaly exempt from being presented in terms of collectivities
fraud
white collar crime
which group is overwhelmingly regarded as suitable for plural as opposed to individual consideration
urban working class
what group evades definition and narrow categorisation but are central to criminological cannnon?
youthful urban collaborations
what group remains a niche field of inquiry but increasing insalience due to growing interest of authorities in organsied crime?
adult crimininal collaborations
policing the working class city reflects struggles over what 3 things?
-access to resources
- opportunities amongst upwardly mobile populations
- left behind residual populations of the street
what does phil cohen 1981 capture the progression of the split that occurred within what population in london? because they became upwardly mobile
working class populations in london
- became upwardly mobile
- began to demand greater protection of their property and
- right to move freely around neighbourhoods
when did the character of conflict with state police alter
what does it reflect
from mid 19th century to early 20th century
reflecting this upward mobility and consequent fragmentation of the working class reaction to constabularies
what were the new police called with resentment
blue locusts
by early 20th century conflict became focussed more specificlaly amongst
the police and the residaul street population
who in particular in the residual street population were the focus of the police
- costermongers
- barrow boys
- hustlers
- other street entrepreneurs
what did the more specific conflict with residual street populations rather than entire communiites introduce as a crucial dimesnion to respectable fears
age
what was the policing focus in the signal work of shaw and mcckay?
focus of policing on juvenile members of street populations and their joint enterprises
fraser and hobbs 2017 suggest the preoccupation with juvenile gangs in public policy further betrays the real underlying concern with perceived threat of working class street populations to social order in major cities rather than the actuality of what?
the actuality of
- what enables different kinds of crimes in cities
- who gets involved
- with what harmful consequences
the fearful social reaction to crime has shifted away from juvenile gangs and beocme more concerned with ?
joint enterprise amognst adults involved in organised crime
when were public policy reactions to criminal enterprises in amercian cities
during prohibition era
what is organised crime epitomised by the influence of whos governance in chicago 1920-302
al capones mob in 1920 and 1930s
what preoccuption with adult collaborations has continued rather than focusing on conditions
with agency rather than the conditions
major criticsm of chicago school work is its AVERSION to studying what which creates the conditions for crime and insecurity?
political and economic choices of powerful state and commercial actors
why are chicago school criticised for a lack of
what did they have a limited recogntiion of whch created the conditons for street crime
lack of reflexivity about the values implicit in their own methodological choices
limited recognition of the role of powerful state and corporate actors