Using material from item B and elsewhere assess the usefulness of Marxist approaches in explaining crime Marxism is a conflict theory established by Karl Marx. Marxists believe that the capitalist system is just a way in which the ruling classes (the bourgeoisie) control and exploit the workers (the proletariat), and it focuses on the unequal conflict between these two sectors of society. Marxists believe that the capitalist system is criminogenic – which means that by its nature it inevitably causes crime. As item B states, Marxists see crime in the capitalist system as ‘a tool of the ruling class’ where they can control the working class and crime is an unavoidable result because of the oppression the working class are subject to. They also believe that laws are enforced mostly to benefit the interests of the ruling class.
However, could there be an actual connection between Marxism and criminology? Critical criminologists believe that the upper classes always decide what a crime is and how it will be punished. They use the justice system to control the lower classes and prevent them from gaining power. They feel that many justice systems are unfair for that reason. That's why critical criminologists concentrate on different areas like postmodern structures and capitalism and their effects or relationships with crime and justice systems.
GOVERNMENT AND CRIME AND SECURITY TOPIC- Crime and Security Towards a More Productive Trinidad and Tobago. Criminality is a social ill that is profoundly present in Trinidad and Tobago’s society. When examining the productivity of a nation, one can be of the view that crime has a direct as well as an indirect correlation with the levels of productivity within a country. While the government cannot be blamed for crime, they can play a chief role in its resolution. There are numerous procedures the government can implement to reduce crime and by doing this, increase the levels of productivity within the nation.
Within these societies people would fight for ownership of land. Eventually the feudalistic society will give way to what Karl Marx called capitalism, where a society is driven by money. Karl Marx was a famous sociologist and well known for his studies on social class. His name is where we get the term Marxism from. He looked to overthrow the capitalist system in favour of the structuralist approach (Perry, 2009).
Some examples of such would be, illegally lobbying or bribing government leaders to gain passage of certain laws, or tax codes. Another form of class conflict may include, a lock out aimed at destroying a labor union, and this is called “open conflict”, or “hidden conflict”, which could be a slowdown in production protesting the wages being paid. According to Karl Marx however, class conflict and struggle are inevitable dissentions that occur because of the economic organization of most societies (Johnson, 2000). Marx also believed that class is defined by the ownership of property and such ownership vests a person with the power to exclude others from the property and to use it for personal purposes. In relation to property, there are three classes of society, they include, the bourgeoisie or the people who own the means of production such as factory and machinery buildings, and whose income is profit, landowners whose income is rent, and the proletariat who own their labor and sell it for a wage.
In recent times, there is a growing concern of wealth inequality in America. This has really drawn criticism and challenge to capitalism as the model of socio-economic structure. Debates surrounding this issue are often traditionally addressed through two models: communism and capitalism. Karl Marx, in his work, “The Communist Manifesto,” criticizes capitalism for it’s preaching of individualism and competition, which leads to the exploitation of the working class thus resulting in further antagonization between socio-economic classes. Marx ends his criticism by offering up the complete abandonment of capitalist system in favor of a communistic system in which socio-economic autonomy is in the hands of the state.
So one thing we know for sure is that poverty, crime and violence is nothing new in America. How can we end poverty, crime and violence with a government that is built on using it’s powers and wealth to keep the poor, poor? While creating an environment for the wealthy to get richer off the less fortunate. Poverty in America is old and new (Lauer, R. H, Lauer, J. C., et al. 2008, pg 161).
Rather than focusing on social situations, the criminal and deviant act, the interactionists focused on the reaction to the act and its effects on the deviant individual. One main possible criticisms of interactionist theory is that to some extent ignores and privatisation and its effect on crime. Can negative labelling be the only reason that crime is predominantly more in working class area than in middle class ones? The “new criminology” was a radical development of traditional Marxist theory (Young, Walton and Taylor) they attempted to combine the process of labelling with Marxist explanations of social inequality to explain crime. A criticism of both the original interactionists and the new criminology came from the “New Left Realists”
It will outline as well as discuss the way in which mass media engage in moral panics. It will analyse Stan Cohen’s study on moral panics, and also including other studies done by famous theorists such as Stuart Hall supporting the idea of ‘moral panics’. According to Marxist what is classified as deviant and criminal behaviour is behaviour that the rich and powerful classify according to their own norms and values. They believe social agents such as the mass media are used by the wealthy and powerful in social to their own advantage. The powerful such as the police have the power to decide what gets reported to the public and use the mass media to enhance control by creating fear within society.
Conflict theory in criminal justice is that the law is used to maintain the power of the dominate group in society and to control the behavior of the individuals who threaten that power (Walker, Cassia, & Miriam, 2012, p. 22).” Conflict theorists believe that laws were designed so the punishments were harsher for typical crimes committed by the lower class. An example of this is street crimes, even minor financial ones are routinely punished quite severely, while large scale financial and business crimes are treated much more leniently. Theft of a television might receive a longer sentence than stealing millions through illegal business practices. Another example when it pertains to juveniles comes from “William Chambliss, in a classic essay “The Saints and the Roughnecks,” which compared the outcomes for two groups of adolescent misbehavers. The first, a lower class group of boys, was hounded by the local police and labeled by teachers as delinquents and future criminals, while the upper-middle class boys were equally deviant, but their actions were written off as youthful indiscretions and learning experiences (Greek, 2005).” “The consensus model assumes that as people gather together to form a society, its members will naturally come