Neo-Marxist perspective on crime Flashcards
What is neo-marxism?
Neo-Marxism emerged as a critique and update of traditional Marxist thought, seeking to address the limitations of classical Marxism in understanding modern, more complex societies.
How Neo-Marxism Expands on Traditional Marxism
Traditional Marxism is too deterministic seeing people as passive products of a social system - Neo-Marxism emphasizes human agency.
Culture and ideology play a more important role in maintaining class inequalities than purely economic factors.
Neo-Marxists argue that revolution may not happen solely through class struggle but through changing cultural and ideological conditions.
What are the similarities between Marxism and Neo-Marxisms view on crime?
Capitalism is the root cause of criminal behaviour
—> This is due to the exploitation and class conflict that capitalism creates. By understanding this we can better understand criminal behaviour.
The state creates and enforces laws for the benefit of the ruling class.
—> They both believe that the law is created and enforced for the benefit of the ruling class under the guise of being equal for all.
Removal capitalism would dramatically reduce crime.
—> Finally, although they both agree that the removal of capitalism would reduce crime, they disagree on how much Marxists believed that overthrowing the capitalist system would eradicate crime, whereas the Neo Marxists believed that there would be a dramatic reduction in crime, but not eradication.
What are the differences between Marxism and Neo-Marxisms view on crime?
Crime is voluntarist.
Criminals are not passive puppets of capitalism.
1/2. This means that criminals make a conscious choice to commit crime, rather than being passive puppets of capitalism. As Marxist suggests, this explains why not all working-class people commit crime.
Crime is a politically motivated
- Neo Marxism sees utilitarian crime as a political act. They see crime as a way of redressing inequalities in wealth, and view criminals as Robin Hood figures misdirecting their political protests into criminal activity. This approach was adopted by Gilroy in his study of black crime in the 1970s, in which he saw black crime as a form of resistance to racism and police harassment.
TAYLOR ET AL (1973) – “NEW CRIMINOLOGY”
Taylor et al. argue that Marxism is deterministic, as they see workers as driven to commit crime out of economic necessity. They reject this view, along with theories that claim crime is caused by other external factors i.e. anomie, subcultures, or by biological or psychological factors.
One key aspect of Neo-Marxist theory is that they emphasise that crime is a VOLUNTARY and CONCIOUS choice by the individual. Whilst Marxists claim people commit crime because of forces outside of their control.
Crime often has a political motive – i.e. Redistributing wealth from rich to poor.
Criminals are not passive puppets; their actions are a deliberate choice striving for change.
CRIME IS THE WORKING-CLASS PEOPLE FIGHTING BACK!!
What is the fully social theory of deviance?
The fully social theory of crime believes that in order to understand why people commit crime, you need to look at six different aspects of the crime. This is not a flowchart but more a Venn diagram, that when all aspects are explored and taken into account, it should provide an explanation for the crime.
Describe the Venn diagram of the fully social theory of deviance:
The first aspect to look at is the structural origins of the crime. Structural relationships and inequalities within capitalist society determine the origins of deviance. For example, capitalism creates poverty, which is a cause of crime. The criminologist Therefore, first needs to understand what is happening in society and the structural causes of it in order to understand the criminal act.
Secondly, the criminologist must consider the particular circumstances surrounding the decision of an individual to commit an act of deviance. Identifying possible reasons that led to the decision show the awareness of the voluntarism of criminal behaviour, and why not everyone commits crime.
Thirdly, to understand the causes of the act, it is necessary to consider the act itself. The Act can symbolise the structural cause of the crime, and the meaning places on it by the criminal.
The criminologist should then consider in what ways and for what reasons other members of society react to the deviance. How society reacts to the ACT depends upon the ideology that exists around that crime, and the context and location of the crime.
How does wider society react, such as those with the power to define deviant acts or label criminals – mass media, or police. Why are some acts treated more harshly than others
Lastly, criminologists need to look at the outcome of the social reaction. What happens to the deviants once they have been labelled as such?
What was found using Halls Policing crisis
- Economic recession
- This means that this was a period of high unemployment and lower living conditions, as well as social unrest with conflict in Northern Ireland growth in student militancy, and in the Black Power movement, and trade unions being viewed by the government as a threat to infrastructure.
- This could be seen as a reaction to the poverty caused by the economic recession with criminals trying to make ends meet, but lacking in legitimate means to do so.
- that the media pick up on the street robberies, creating a moral panic by exaggerating the number of muggings using the 129% increased statistic rather than the raw number of 60. The government responded to this and the public outcry by putting more police in areas with increasing crime rates. This led to a higher number of arrests, which reinforced the media message
- the origins of this reaction can be seen in the need for the government to have a scapegoat to take attention away from the crisis of capitalism
- The end consequence of all of this is that the public’s attention is firmly focused on the problem of black criminality, rather than the deeper problems of the capitalist system which both causes crime in the first place.
What are the criticisms of Neo-Marxism?
Most of its research was focused only on male criminality, so it is criticised by the feminists.
It is argued that this theory romanticises crime, making it appear like ‘robin hood’. However, most crime is on the working class and not on the rich.
Not all crime is politically motivated e.g. domestic violence and rape.
Burke (2005) argues that this approach is too general to explain crime, and too idealistic to be used to tackle crime.
Example question of Neo-Marxism
Marxism see capitalist Society of divided along social class lines. The Ruling Class own the means of production and use the power to exploit the working class in the pursuit of profit, often resulting in workers living in poverty. This relationship then determines the shape of the superstructure - that is, all the other institutions that make up society, including the state, the law and the criminal justice system. Capitalism it is also intensely competitive, with companies and individuals motivated to seek profit.
Applying material from the item, analyse two ways in which Marxists see class and crime as related. [10]
One way that Marxists see crime and class as related is through selective law making. The item states that the ruling class own the means of production which gives them influence over the superstructure, which includes The criminal justice system and the legal system. This means that the ruling class are able to make laws to their own benefit but also to maintain a false class consciousness within the working class. This shows how the class and crime are related as it is the ruling class who are able to determine what is and isn’t a crime, through selective law making
