A particular Marxist view of the relationship between crime and social class is known as criminogenic capitalism. For Marxists, crime is inevitable in capitalism because capitalism is criminogenic. Capitalism is based on the exploitation of the working class – that is, on using them as a means to and end (profit), whatever the human cost of doing so. It is therefore particularly damaging to the working class and this may give rise to crime. Firstly Marxists believe that poverty may mean that crime is the only way the working class can survive therefore this results in the form of a relationship between crime and social class.
Outline and assess Marxist theories of crime. Marxist theories of crime are based on conflict. They claim that society is divided by capitalism and there is a conflict between the upper-classes and the working-classes. They suggest that social inequality is a cause of crime saying that the law is made by the upper class (bourgeoisie) to benefit the ruling class and is harsh towards the working class. Marxist writers such as Chambliss suggest that the majority of the working-classes are exploited by the owners of big businesses and the government.
Crime is often the result of offering society-demeaning work with little sense of creativity. Laws that are passed on reflect the wishes and ideologies of the ruling classes. Thus for Marxists punishment for a crime may depend and vary according to the social class of the perpetrator. Modern Marxists point to education and the media as socialising agencies, which delude the working class into conforming to a social order, which works against its real interests. From a Marxist point of view laws are made by the state, which represent the interests of the ruling class.
The concept of a classless society has been elaborated by Karl Marx, the father of Marxist philosophy which is the basis of the Communist ideology. As a member of a contemporary society under a democracy, my beliefs are rooted on a society made up of different classes. In order to get to a higher class of society, one has to work with sweat, and even blood. This idea has caused many revolutions because some who do not want the present structure of society want it to be restructured to suit the need of every individual. This essay is an attempt to discuss a classless society and to establish whether a classless society is attainable and sustainable in this century.
Society as a whole is more and more splitting up into two great hostile camps, into two great classes directly facing each other: Bourgeoisie and Proletariat” (Marx and Engels 1848). Social class, therefore, is based upon economic criteria and conflict occurs between those who own the means of production (bourgeoisie) and the wage-labourers (proletariat). As well as having economic control over the proletariat, the bourgeoisie also have the power to determine the superstructure; the ruling class can distort perceptions of the world and hide the true nature of social relationships and the exploitation of the proletariat and, above all, promote bourgeoisie interests. Marx defines production as workers selling their labour for wages in order to exchange money for commodities that will meet their most basic needs. As Marx
In what ways can Fight Club be read as a Marxist critique of corporate capitalism and consumer culture? Fight Club has been argued to be a Marxist critique of the exploitation received by the proletariat from the bourgeoisie in terms of corporate capitalism and consumer culture in a capitalist society. It highlights the methods of control used by those in power in order to maintain a passive working class who, instead of resenting the bourgeoisie, rebels against there own class, creating a divided working class who are alienated from each other, which preserves the status quo. During the film, those in a position of power, for example, the narrator’s boss, are symbolically representative of the media, government and business corporations. In one shot, the narrator’s boss is only shown from the neck down, signifying that all people in positions of power share the same values and highlights that a capitalist society is not personal, instead only interested in money and profit.
Comparing Functionalism and Marxism on Crime and Deviance This assignment will compare and contrast Functionalism and Marxism on crime and deviance. The functionalist view of crime is that it is a threat to social order. Someone who commits a crime or a deviant act has gone against the norms and values of society. Functionalist’s believe in the nurture side of the nature versus nurture debate. Some people are socialised into crime, some functionalists, however such as Emile Durkheim see crime as being normal and an integral part of all healthy societies.
It is also considered to be the conflict model. Marx believed that the behaviour of individuals shaped society but he also believed that the economic system defined people’s place within society; which allowed Marx to consider there were two types of social classes which were the: bourgeoisie/capitalists and proletariat. The bourgeoisie/capitalists is a small powerful group who own factories as well as other places of employment. Whereas the proletariat is a much larger, poorer group who technically employed by the bourgeoisie. Karl’s view was that both the bourgeoisie and proletariat would forever be in conflict with one another.
Marxism is a structuarlist ideology which means that they paying attention to social institutions and structures over individuals, and it was Karl Marxs (1945) who came up with it. The belief that society is divided into the bourgeoisie, who own the "means of production", and the proletariat, who do the work, also known as upper class and working class. The bourgeoisie or capitalist class exploit the workers, and arrange society to keep the workers down. Most of the profit from the work that the working class do is kept by the bourgeoisie. Now, when we know the definitions, we can look at the Marxism view of education.
We can divide realist approaches along political lines: - Right Realists - Share the New Right or neo-conservative political outlook. - Left Realists - Are socialists and favour quite different policies of reducing crime. Right Realism - They see crime, especially street crime, as a real and growing problem that destroys communities, undermines social cohesion and threatens society’s work ethic. - Right realist views on crime correspond closely with those of neo-conservative governments during the 1970s and 1980s. The Causes of Crime - Right realists reject the idea put forward by Marxists and others that structural or economic factors such as poverty and inequality are the cause for crime.