Marxism and crime Flashcards
what are the 3 ways that marxists use capitalism to explain crime
criminogenic capitalism
the state and law making
ideological functions of crime and law
define criminogenic capitalism
crime is inevitable in capitalism (Bonger)
why do w/c turn to crime in capitalist societies
means to survival
utilitarian crimes like theft allows them to acquire goods that they can’t afford
alienation and lack of control leads to anger and frustration leading to crimes like violence and vandalism
what crimes do m/c commit in capitalist societies
corporate crime
white-collar crime
why do m/c commit crime in capitalist societies
dog-eat-dog system
driven by greed and self-interest
define relativistic view of crime
focuses on conflict of interests in society when determining what is classed as a deviant act
m/c write laws
why does state and law making benefit m/c
ruling class prevent introduction of laws that threaten them
eg: laws against homeless squatting but no laws against the rich owning lots of houses
Snider(1993) capitalist state is reluctant to pass laws that regulate the activities of businesses or threaten their profitability
explain selective enforcement
powerless people like w/c and ethnic minorities are criminalised but police and courts ignore crimes of powerful people
AO2 for selective enforcement
Carson found that only 3/200 companies who broke safety laws were prosecuted
despite the large number of deaths of work due to negligence, there’s only been 1 successful prosecution of corporate homicide in 8 years#
corporate crimes are punished less severely with fines instead of jail
explain ideological functions of crime and law
performs function for capitalism
laws appear to benefit w/c (health and safety laws and minimum wage laws)
creates false class consciousness
how does the ideological state apparatus divide the w/c
crime appears to be a w/c class phenomenon due to selective enforcement
divides w/c and they blame criminals for their problems
media also portrays crime as a w/c phenomenon to distract people from capitalism
define ideological state apparatus
when w/c are unaware of their exploitation
define repressive state apparatus
coercive power like police and the army
Althusser argues that w/c are controlled through promotion of norms and values through fear of punishment
AO3 for marxists explanation of how capitalism causes crime
-ignores relationship between crime and non-class inequalities like gender and ethnicity
-not all capitalist societies have high crime eg: homicide rate in japan and switzerland is 1/5 of the rates in USA
-marxism suggests capitalism causes crime and doesn’t acknowledge the individual choice
-ignores how soemetimes corporate crime is punished
-too deterministic assumes all w/c commit crime
define occupational crime
crimes committed by employees for their own personal gain, against the organisation they work for
eg: stealing from the company
define corporate crime
crimes committed by employees for their organisation in pursuit of its goals
eg: deliberately mis-selling products to increase profits
tax evasion
problems with punishing crimes of powerful people
many harms might not break the criminal law and are seen a breach of regulation
Pearce and Tombs (2003) suggested to widen the definition of corporate crime to include breach of civil and administrative law
how do white-collar and corporate crime cause harm
physical harm (death, injury, illness)
environmental (pollution)#
economic (against consumes, workers, taxpayers and the government)
explain the five types of corporate crime
financial: tax evasion, bribery, money laudering
crime against consumers: selling unfit goods/false labelling
crime against employees: sexual and racial discrimination, violations of wage laws, rights to join a union
crime against the environment: illegal pollution of air/water/land
state corporate crime: war on terror eg: torture of detainees during american occupation of Iraq
Examples of state corporate crime
financial: barclays fraud charge
crime against consumers: horse meat scandal
crime against employees: nike paid 7.6mil to end race discrimination
crime against environment: thames water scandal they were fined as sewage leaks harmed wildlife and people
state corporate crime: Iraq war, torture of the detainees during american occupation of Iraq
explain why corporate crimes are invisible
media: doesn’t cover corporate crime
lack of political will: politicians are more likely to focus on street crime
crimes are often complex: law enforcement is understaffed and lack the expertise to investigate corporate crime
de-labelling: corporate crime is filtered out of the process of criminalisation and described a s a civil dispute
under-reporting: victims are society as a whole and not one specific person
explanations of corporate crime
strain theory
labelling theory
differential association theory
strain theory as an explanation of corporate crime
innovation > corporations accept societal goal and achieve it illegitimately through corporate crime
Clinard and Yeager (1980) found companies were willing to break law when facing financial hardship
labelling theory as an explanation of corporate crime
businesses have the power to avoid being labelled as criminal
de-labelling > they can afford expensive lawyers and accountants to help them cover up their crimes
differential association theory as an explanation of corporate crime
if a company’s culture justifies committing crimes to achieve goals then the employees are socialised into this
companies may have deviant subcultures eg: promoting competition
Sykes and Matza (1957) people deviate more easily if they can justify behaviour to neutralise moral objections to deviance
eg: white collar criminals say they were following orders or blame victims (read the small print)
AO3 for explanations of corporate crime
DAS: law abiding companies are more profitable eg: Braithwaite (1984) pharmaceutical companies followed drug regulations to access lucrative markets
strain theory: can’t explain non-profit crimes like police brutality
over-predicts business crime > all companies experiencing strain don’t commit crime and some companies without strain do commit crime
labelling theory: since financial crisis of 2008 corporate crime is visible and is being labelled
explain Neo-marxist view
w/c are aware of exploitation and use crime to fight against the system
sees crimes like theft as understandable
‘Robin Hood’ view > steal from rich to give to the poor
crime is proletariat revenge
explain neo-marxist anti-determinism
voluntaristic view: people consciously commit crime
AO2: black panthers 1960s america > crime is part of their activism
1/10 of their goals is: ‘We want an end to robbery by the capitalists of our black community.’
explain neo-marxists full theory of deviance
1- the wider social origins of the deviant act (eg how c and d is linked to unequal distribution of wealth)
2 - the immediate origins of the deviant act (the social or economic situation that lead to the c and d act)
3 - the meanings of the actions for the actor
4 - the immediate origins of societal reaction (how family and community react)
5 - the wider origins of societal reaction ( how society and those with power label other)
6 - the impact on the individual (relationship between labelling and the deviant)
A02 for a fully social theory of deviance
Stuart Hall (1978) applied this approach to black muggers:
- there was a ‘crisis of capitalism’ ( a recession)
- there was a lot of unemployed black people who didn’t want to do ‘white man’s hit work’ and entered the informal economy (which involved crime)
- m/c sought to divide w/c to prevent anti-capitalist activism and did this by turning white workers against black workers
- lead to moral panic about black street crime which lead to a crackdown by police
- this was one way that revolution or radical political change was prevented
A03 for neo-marxists
- feminists criticise it for being ‘gender blind’ and focusing on male crime at the expense of female criminality
-left realists criticise it for romanticising w/c as robin hoods when in reality most w/c criminals commit crime against other w/c people
-Burke (2005) says its too idealistic and impractical
- theory explains political crime but can’t explain crimes like dv and rape which aren’t political
- only a small portion of crime is politically-motivated or part of anti-capitalism; theorists attach this motive to all crime which is inaccurate
- left realists point out that most victims are w/c so marxists should give solutions instead of just understanding crim
