Ethnicity Explanations Flashcards
Why do ethnic minorities APPEAR to commit more crime?
There are REAL ETHNIC DIFFERENCES in offending (Left Realism- Lea and Young)
Ethnic differences are SOCIALLY CONSTRUCTED (Labelling theory, Neo-Marxists and Critical Criminology> Gilroy, Hall et al)
Neighbourhood factors (FitzGerald et al)
Higher likelihood of getting caught (Sharp and Budd)
What is crime a product of according to Lea and Young?
Relative deprivation, subcultures and marginalisation: racism has led to the economic exclusion and marginalisation of EMs
How does the media promote relative deprivation?
Consumerism sets goals that are unattainable for disadvantaged groups
What do Lea and Young say about police racism?
It has led to the unjustified criminalisation of some BUT it can’t fully explain ethnic differences in offending
Why?
Even if the police start to act in racist ways the differences are too significant in the statistics
AND
It means the police would have to be selectively racist vs black people but not asians to cause differences
How can Lea and Young’s argument be criticised?
Demographic factors: EM’s overrepresented in areas that are likely to be stopped and searched regardless of ethnicity so ‘ethnic’ differences might not be real
Arrest rates may be lower for Asians just because police stereotype them differently to black people (black people dangerous, asian people as passive)
Also, 9/11 might have changed stereotypes of Asians as dangerous now
What does Gilroy, a labelling theorist, argue about black criminality?
It’s a myth created by racist stereotypes
in reality black groups are no more criminal and statistics are a product of labelling
What does EM ‘crime’ have its roots in?
British imperialism: anti-colonialist struggles have taught black people how to resist oppression e.g. through riots and demonstration
In UK same forms of struggle against racism but this was criminalised by the state
Therefore, EM ‘crime’ is a form of political resistance
What did Hall et al, a neo-marxist, say led to EM’s being used as a scapegoat?
1970s, high unemployment and rising protests> moral panic created over black muggers (despite low evidence of it happening) to distract from the crisis in capitalism (‘Policing the Crisis’)
If the RC didn’t do this, then they’d have had to use force against the protesters to keep control BUT force has to be seen as legitimate or it will be met with resistance
How can Gilroy be criticised?
Lea and Young: 1st gen immigrants were law abiding so it is unlikely they passed on their anti-colonial struggle traditions
Most crime is intra-ethnic (within the same ethnic group) so it’s not a struggle against white oppression
Gilroy romanticises street crime as revolutionary: petty theft isn’t political resistance
How can Hall et al be criticised?
Downes and Rock: inconsistent in claiming black street crime wasn’t rising because it was due to unemployment, also there is no evidence on how the capitalist crisis led to a moral panic or show that the public were panicking about black muggers at all
Left Realists: inner-city residents worrying about mugging is realistic not panicky
What did FitzGerald et al find?
street robbery rates were highest in very poor areas and where affluent people came into contact with deprived youth
Young black people were more likely to live in these areas and be caught
How can FitzGerald et al be criticised?
White people who lived in these areas were also more likely to commit street crime> class not ethnicity
Why are EM’s more likely to be caught according to Sharp and Budd?
Black offenders more likely that white to have been arrested because they are more likely to be involved in crimes like robbery where victims can identify them
AND
more likely to be excluded and associate with known criminals> higher ‘visibility’ to authorities
