crime and deviance

1. Functionalism

Durkheim, Anomie + Inevitability of Crime

• Point: Crime = inevitable + necessary.

• Evidence/Explanation: Durkheim - study of modern industrial society. Division of labour → weakened collective conscience + anomie. Too little crime = excessive control. Too much crime = instability.

• Link: Crime = normal feature of society.

• Evaluation: Chambliss - collective conscience = ruling-class ideology.

Boundary Maintenance

• Point: Crime reinforces norms + values.

• Evidence/Explanation: Durkheim - public reaction to serious crimes. Court trials + punishment unite society against offender. Moral boundaries clarified.

• Link: Punishment strengthens social solidarity.

• Evaluation: Becker - moral entrepreneurs create boundaries selectively.

Adaptation + Change

• Point: Deviance promotes social progress.

• Evidence/Explanation: Durkheim - social change begins with deviant ideas. Suffragettes + civil rights activists challenged existing norms.

• Link: Deviance prevents stagnation.

• Evaluation: Smart - many crimes create harm rather than progress.

Safety Valves + Warning Devices

• Point: Deviance reveals social problems.

• Evidence/Explanation: Davis - prostitution reduces pressure on family institution. Cohen - truancy reveals educational failure.

• Link: Deviance signals need for reform.

• Evaluation: Lea + Young - deviance causes community harm.

Criticisms of Functionalism

• Point: Functionalism = teleological.

• Evidence/Explanation: Focus on functions of crime rather than causes of offending. Victims largely ignored.

• Link: Limited explanation of criminal behaviour.

• Evaluation: Merton - structural strain explains crime more effectively.

2. Strain Theory

Merton + American Dream

• Point: Crime = gap between goals + means.

• Evidence/Explanation: Merton - study of American society. American Dream = wealth + success. Working class denied legitimate opportunities.

• Link: Strain encourages deviance.

• Evaluation: Marxists - capitalism intentionally unequal.

Conformity + Innovation

• Point: Innovation = major criminal adaptation.

• Evidence/Explanation: Merton’s adaptation typology. Accept success goals. Reject legal means. Theft + fraud used to gain wealth.

• Link: Explains utilitarian crime.

• Evaluation: Cohen - cannot explain vandalism + joyriding.

Ritualism, Retreatism + Rebellion

• Point: Strain creates different responses.

• Evidence/Explanation: Ritualists = reject goals. Retreatists = drug addicts + vagrants. Rebels = revolutionaries seeking new system.

• Link: Crime only one adaptation.

• Evaluation: Lemert - labels shape deviant identity.

Official Statistics Bias

• Point: Theory based on biased data.

• Evidence/Explanation: Merton relied on official statistics showing high working-class crime rates.

• Link: Crime appears lower-class phenomenon.

• Evaluation: Sutherland - corporate crime ignored.

Institutional Anomie Theory

• Point: Capitalism weakens social institutions.

• Evidence/Explanation: Messner + Rosenfeld - economy dominates family, religion + education. Schools become routes to jobs rather than moral education.

• Link: Crime increases across society.

• Evaluation: Leonard - women experience strain but offend less.

3. Subcultural Theories

Cohen + Status Frustration

• Point: Working-class boys form delinquent subcultures.

• Evidence/Explanation: Cohen - study of working-class boys in middle-class schools. Academic failure → status frustration → inverted values.

• Link: Crime becomes source of status.

• Evaluation: Willis - lads rejected school values from start.

Cloward + Ohlin

• Point: Access to illegitimate opportunities shapes crime.

• Evidence/Explanation: Study of deprived urban areas. Criminal subcultures = organised crime. Conflict subcultures = gangs. Retreatist subcultures = drug users.

• Link: Crime depends on local opportunities.

• Evaluation: Katz + Lyng - thrill seeking more important.

Miller’s Focal Concerns

• Point: Crime reflects working-class culture.

• Evidence/Explanation: Miller - study of lower-class communities. Toughness, smartness + excitement valued.

• Link: Focal concerns encourage deviance.

• Evaluation: Marxists - values shaped by poverty.

Matza + Drift

• Point: Young people drift in + out of crime.

• Evidence/Explanation: Study of juvenile delinquents. Techniques of neutralisation = “they started it”, “no one got hurt”.

• Link: Deviance usually temporary.

• Evaluation: Functionalists - serious offenders show commitment.

Gender Blindness

• Point: Subcultural theories ignore females.

• Evidence/Explanation: Cohen, Miller, Cloward + Ohlin focused almost entirely on male gangs.

• Link: Female deviance unexplained.

• Evaluation: McRobbie + Garber - bedroom culture explains lower female delinquency.

4. Marxism

Criminogenic Capitalism

• Point: Capitalism creates crime.

• Evidence/Explanation: Traditional Marxists - poverty + alienation push working class into crime. Competition + greed encourage corporate crime.

• Link: Crime = product of capitalist system.

• Evaluation: Functionalists - laws reflect shared values.

Chambliss + Selective Law Enforcement

• Point: Law enforced selectively.

• Evidence/Explanation: Seattle study. Crime found across classes. Police focused mainly on working-class offenders.

• Link: Crime appears lower-class problem.

• Evaluation: Right Realists - street crime creates immediate harm.

Box + Snider

• Point: Law protects ruling-class interests.

• Evidence/Explanation: Snider - governments reluctant to regulate business. Box - worker protection laws weakly enforced.

• Link: Legal system favours wealthy.

• Evaluation: Pluralists - pressure groups influence legislation.

Neo-Marxism

• Point: Crime = conscious resistance.

• Evidence/Explanation: Taylor, Walton + Young - The New Criminology. Crime understood through wider social context + offender motives.

• Link: Criminals = active agents.

• Evaluation: Left Realists - crime mainly harms working class.

Stuart Hall

• Point: Media creates moral panics.

• Evidence/Explanation: Policing the Crisis. 1970s mugging panic linked to young Black males during recession.

• Link: Crime used to justify greater control.

• Evaluation: Interactionists - panic not necessarily ruling-class conspiracy.

5. Interactionism + Labelling

Becker

• Point: Crime socially constructed.

• Evidence/Explanation: Study of marijuana users. Deviance created through social reaction + moral entrepreneurs.

• Link: No act inherently deviant.

• Evaluation: Functionalists - some acts universally condemned.

Lemert

• Point: Labelling creates deviant careers.

• Evidence/Explanation: Primary deviance = minor rule breaking. Secondary deviance = label accepted as master status.

• Link: Self-fulfilling prophecy develops.

• Evaluation: Marxists - ignores power behind labelling.

Jock Young

• Point: Social control amplifies deviance.

• Evidence/Explanation: The Drugtakers. Notting Hill hippies labelled + targeted by police. Drug culture strengthened.

• Link: Labelling creates deviant careers.

• Evaluation: Right Realists - offenders choose crime.

Cicourel

• Point: Justice based on stereotypes.

• Evidence/Explanation: Californian juvenile justice study. Police used typifications of working-class boys as “typical delinquents.”

• Link: Official statistics distorted.

• Evaluation: Feminists - stereotypes also gendered.

Braithwaite

• Point: Type of shaming affects reoffending.

• Evidence/Explanation: Comparison of societies using reintegrative vs disintegrative shaming. Reintegrative shaming associated with lower crime.

• Link: Positive labelling reduces offending.

• Evaluation: Left Realists - poverty + inequality still encourage crime.

6. Social Class and Crime

Functionalism/Strain Theory

• Point: Working-class crime = result of blocked opportunities.

• Evidence/Explanation: Merton - American Dream study. Working class denied legitimate routes to success → innovation (theft, fraud).

• Link: Explains high working-class crime rates.

• Evaluation: Marxists - ignores crimes of the wealthy.

Marxism

• Point: Class differences in crime = result of selective enforcement.

• Evidence/Explanation: Chambliss - Seattle study. Police targeted working-class offenders while elite crime overlooked.

• Link: Crime statistics reflect bias.

• Evaluation: Wilson + Kelling - working-class street crime causes greatest community harm.

Interactionism

• Point: Criminal justice system stereotypes working-class people.

• Evidence/Explanation: Cicourel - Californian juvenile justice study. Working-class youths viewed as “typical delinquents.”

• Link: More likely to enter official statistics.

• Evaluation: Lea + Young - working-class crime remains a real problem.

White-Collar + Corporate Crime

• Point: Upper-class crime hidden from statistics.

• Evidence/Explanation: Sutherland - study of large American corporations. Wealthy professionals commit crime through employment. Tombs - corporate crime causes major social harm.

• Link: Crime debate distorted by focus on street crime.

• Evaluation: Strain theorists - profit pressure creates strain for executives.

Left Realism

• Point: Working-class crime = relative deprivation.

• Evidence/Explanation: Lea + Young - study of inner-city communities. Relative deprivation + marginalisation + subculture → offending.

• Link: Inequality encourages crime.

• Evaluation: Feminists - women experience deprivation but offend less.

7. Gender and Crime

Chivalry Thesis

• Point: Female crime underestimated.

• Evidence/Explanation: Pollak - women treated more leniently by male police, judges + magistrates.

• Link: Official statistics underestimate female offending.

• Evaluation: Carlen - women punished for crime + failing femininity.

Sex Role Theory

• Point: Gender socialisation influences crime.

• Evidence/Explanation: Parsons - boys lack expressive role model. Male peer groups encourage toughness + risk-taking.

• Link: Men commit more crime.

• Evaluation: Interactionists - gender socially constructed.

Heidensohn

• Point: Women commit less crime because of social control.

• Evidence/Explanation: Study of patriarchal control. Home, workplace + public space restrict female freedom.

• Link: Fewer criminal opportunities.

• Evaluation: Adler - female independence increasing.

Adler

• Point: Female liberation increases crime.

• Evidence/Explanation: Sisters in Crime. Women entering professional roles gain access to white-collar crime opportunities.

• Link: Crime rates rise with equality.

• Evaluation: Radical feminists - most female crime linked to poverty.

Messerschmidt

• Point: Crime = way of accomplishing masculinity.

• Evidence/Explanation: Study of masculinity. Working-class males lacking status use violence + crime to prove manhood.

• Link: Crime becomes gender performance.

• Evaluation: Winlow - violence also linked to economic survival.

8. Ethnicity and Crime

Stuart Hall

• Point: Ethnic crime statistics socially constructed.

• Evidence/Explanation: Policing the Crisis. Mugging panic linked to young Black males during 1970s recession.

• Link: Crime statistics reflect political agendas.

• Evaluation: Lea + Young - some crime trends were real.

Left Realism

• Point: Ethnic crime linked to disadvantage.

• Evidence/Explanation: Lea + Young - racism → unemployment + poor housing → relative deprivation + marginalisation.

• Link: Structural inequality encourages crime.

• Evaluation: Labelling theorists - official statistics biased.

Institutional Racism

• Point: Criminal justice system institutionally racist.

• Evidence/Explanation: Macpherson Report after Stephen Lawrence case. Metropolitan Police labelled institutionally racist.

• Link: Ethnic minorities overrepresented in system.

• Evaluation: Right Realists - policing follows crime patterns.

Stop + Search

• Point: Police practices distort statistics.

• Evidence/Explanation: Bowling + Phillips - Black people stopped disproportionately. Young, urban populations targeted more heavily.

• Link: Greater police contact = more recorded crime.

• Evaluation: Marxists - targeting serves social control.

Gilroy

• Point: Black criminality = myth.

• Evidence/Explanation: Study of post-colonial Britain. Minority deviance interpreted as resistance to racism.

• Link: Crime reflects oppression.

• Evaluation: Left Realists - ignores harm to minority victims.

9. Victimisation

Victim Proneness

• Point: Some groups more likely to become victims.

• Evidence/Explanation: Von Hentig - elderly, women + vulnerable individuals more victim-prone. Wolfgang - 26% of homicides involved victim precipitation.

• Link: Victimisation follows identifiable patterns.

• Evaluation: Amir - victim-blaming.

Critical Criminology

• Point: Victimisation shaped by power inequalities.

• Evidence/Explanation: Mawby + Walklate - class, gender + ethnicity increase vulnerability.

• Link: Victimisation = structural issue.

• Evaluation: Positivists - ignores practical prevention.

Social Class + Victimisation

• Point: Poor people more likely to become victims.

• Evidence/Explanation: Left Realists - deprived communities suffer higher burglary, assault + arson rates.

• Link: Victimisation unequally distributed.

• Evaluation: Marxists - corporate crime also victimises poor communities.

Gender + Victimisation

• Point: Men + women experience different victimisation patterns.

• Evidence/Explanation: Stanko - women disproportionately affected by domestic violence + sexual assault.

• Link: Victimisation reinforces patriarchy.

• Evaluation: Messerschmidt - male victimisation linked to masculinity pressures.

Ethnicity + Victimisation

• Point: Ethnic minorities face greater risk of hate crime.

• Evidence/Explanation: Bowling - racist victimisation creates fear + repeat victimisation.

• Link: Ethnicity influences victimisation risk.

• Evaluation: Right Realists - age + location also important.

10. Crime and the Media

News Values

• Point: Media distorts crime.

• Evidence/Explanation: Jewkes - news values = dramatisation, violence, personalisation + celebrity focus.

• Link: Public receives exaggerated picture of crime.

• Evaluation: Marxists - media distracts from corporate crime.

Media as Cause of Crime

• Point: Media may encourage offending.

• Evidence/Explanation: Bandura - Bobo Doll experiment. Children copied aggressive behaviour. Young - media promotes relative deprivation.

• Link: Media can stimulate crime.

• Evaluation: Interactionists - audiences actively interpret media.

Fear of Crime

• Point: Media increases fear.

• Evidence/Explanation: Gerbner - cultivation theory. Heavy TV viewers developed “mean world syndrome.”

• Link: Fear exceeds actual risk.

• Evaluation: Left Realists - fear often reflects real dangers.

Postmodernism

• Point: Crime influenced by media images.

• Evidence/Explanation: Baudrillard - hyperreality. Katz + Lyng - edgework motivated by excitement + image.

• Link: Crime committed for spectacle.

• Evaluation: Marxists - poverty remains key cause.

Reiner

• Point: Media supports law and order ideology.

• Evidence/Explanation: Analysis of crime dramas. Police shown as heroic + effective. Criminals portrayed as evil.

• Link: Public support stronger policing.

• Evaluation: Labelling theorists - media can also undermine trust through coverage of police corruption.

11. Moral Panics

Stanley Cohen + Folk Devils

• Point: Media exaggerates minor deviance into major threats.

• Evidence/Explanation: Folk Devils and Moral Panics - Mods + Rockers clashes at seaside resorts. Media exaggerated violence + created folk devils.

• Link: Public panic exceeds actual threat.

• Evaluation: Hall - moral panics serve ruling-class interests.

Deviancy Amplification Spiral

• Point: Social reaction creates more deviance.

• Evidence/Explanation: Cohen - media attention → police crackdown → marginalisation → more deviance → further media attention.

• Link: Control measures increase offending.

• Evaluation: Right Realists - offenders choose crime.

McRobbie + Thornton

• Point: Traditional moral panics less effective today.

• Evidence/Explanation: Study of modern media. Social media + niche audiences challenge dominant narratives.

• Link: Harder to create one folk devil.

• Evaluation: Neo-Marxists - modern panics still influence public opinion.

Pluralism

• Point: Moral panics driven by profit.

• Evidence/Explanation: Competitive media markets use sensational crime stories to increase sales + audiences.

• Link: Commercial motives explain panics.

• Evaluation: Critical criminologists - panics still create harmful consequences.

Left Realism

• Point: Fear of crime often rational.

• Evidence/Explanation: Lea + Young - residents of deprived areas face genuine risks from gangs + violence.

• Link: Not all panics imaginary.

• Evaluation: Interactionists - reactions often disproportionate to actual threat.

12. New Media and Crime

Cybercrime

• Point: Internet creates new forms of crime.

• Evidence/Explanation: Wall - cyber-trespass, cyber-theft, cyber-pornography + cyber-violence.

• Link: Technology expands criminal opportunities.

• Evaluation: Marxists - corporate cybercrime causes greater harm.

Surveillance Society

• Point: Technology increases social control.

• Evidence/Explanation: Greenfield - CCTV, facial recognition + digital tracking monitor behaviour continuously. Similar to Foucault’s Panopticon.

• Link: Individuals regulate behaviour through surveillance.

• Evaluation: Interactionists - surveillance targets marginalised groups.

Synoptic Surveillance

• Point: Public can monitor powerful groups.

• Evidence/Explanation: Mathiesen - smartphones + social media allow citizens to expose police misconduct + corruption.

• Link: Surveillance becomes two-way.

• Evaluation: Neo-Marxists - states retain greater power through censorship.

Cyber-Communities

• Point: Internet creates deviant subcultures.

• Evidence/Explanation: Online forums connect extremists, incels + cybercriminals. Ideas reinforced through echo chambers.

• Link: Online groups facilitate crime.

• Evaluation: Postmodernists - many participants seek excitement rather than crime.

Surveillance Capitalism

• Point: Corporations use data for behavioural control.

• Evidence/Explanation: Zuboff - companies collect personal data to predict + influence consumer behaviour.

• Link: Social control increasingly corporate.

• Evaluation: Right Realists - surveillance improves safety.

13. Globalisation and Crime

McMafia

• Point: Organised crime has become global.

• Evidence/Explanation: Glenny - post-communist criminal networks expanded internationally through drugs, weapons + trafficking.

• Link: Globalisation increases organised crime.

• Evaluation: Left Realists - local gangs still central to crime.

Transnational Crime Flows

• Point: Crime moves easily across borders.

• Evidence/Explanation: Held - global trade + communication facilitate trafficking, arms sales + cybercrime.

• Link: National policing less effective.

• Evaluation: Feminists - ignores gendered exploitation within trafficking.

Global Risk Society

• Point: Globalisation creates worldwide harms.

• Evidence/Explanation: Beck - climate change, financial crises + environmental disasters affect all societies.

• Link: Crime extends beyond traditional offences.

• Evaluation: Right Realists - concept too broad for policing.

Global Criminal Economy

• Point: Crime follows global supply + demand.

• Evidence/Explanation: Castells - developing nations supply drugs + labour. Wealthy nations create demand.

• Link: Global markets sustain crime.

• Evaluation: Marxists - legal financial institutions benefit from criminal money.

Ian Taylor

• Point: Global capitalism increases crime.

• Evidence/Explanation: TNCs relocate jobs abroad. Unemployment + insecurity encourage crime. Elite tax avoidance increases.

• Link: Crime affects all classes.

• Evaluation: Functionalists - globalisation reduces poverty in many regions.

14. Green Crime

Green Criminology

• Point: Environmental harm more important than legality.

• Evidence/Explanation: Lynch + Stretsky - deforestation + pollution harmful even when legal.

• Link: Crime should be defined by harm.

• Evaluation: Right Realists - legal definitions provide objectivity.

South

• Point: Green crime can be primary or secondary.

• Evidence/Explanation: Primary = pollution, deforestation, species loss. Secondary = illegal waste dumping, Rainbow Warrior incident.

• Link: Environmental crime takes different forms.

• Evaluation: Marxists - profit motive drives both types.

Anthropocentric vs Ecocentric

• Point: Environmental crime linked to worldview.

• Evidence/Explanation: White - anthropocentric values prioritise profit. Ecocentric values prioritise ecosystem protection.

• Link: Beliefs influence environmental harm.

• Evaluation: Development economists - poorer nations need economic growth.

Environmental Racism

• Point: Environmental harm disproportionately affects minorities.

• Evidence/Explanation: Bullard - toxic industries concentrated in poor + minority communities.

• Link: Green crime reinforces inequality.

• Evaluation: Pluralists - international agreements improve accountability.

Beck

• Point: Environmental risks are global.

• Evidence/Explanation: Chernobyl + climate change demonstrate risks crossing national borders.

• Link: Green crime requires global responses.

• Evaluation: Marxists - wealthy groups better protected from risks.

15. Human Rights and State Crime

Defining State Crime

• Point: States can conceal their own crimes.

• Evidence/Explanation: Green + Ward - state crime = illegal/deviant acts by state agencies. Schwendinger - human rights violations should define crime.

• Link: State actions judged beyond national law.

• Evaluation: Right Realists - human rights definitions subjective.

Crimes of Obedience

• Point: State crime results from obedience.

• Evidence/Explanation: Kelman + Hamilton - My Lai Massacre. Authorization + routinisation + dehumanisation encouraged atrocities.

• Link: Ordinary people commit state crimes.

• Evaluation: Adorno - authoritarian personality also important.

Stanley Cohen

• Point: States deny wrongdoing.

• Evidence/Explanation: Study of human rights abuses. Spiral of denial = denial of injury, victim + responsibility.

• Link: States maintain legitimacy despite abuses.

• Evaluation: Marxists - states also use direct coercion.

Bauman

• Point: Modern bureaucracy enables state crime.

• Evidence/Explanation: Modernity and the Holocaust. Division of labour + efficiency made genocide possible.

• Link: Modern systems facilitate atrocities.

• Evaluation: Functionalists - Holocaust represented breakdown of society.

State-Corporate Crime

• Point: States + corporations cooperate in harmful activities.

• Evidence/Explanation: Kramer + Michalowski - Iraq War contractors committed abuses while avoiding accountability.

• Link: Profit + state power combine.

• Evaluation: Pluralists - ICC + NGOs increase accountability.

16. Crime Control and Prevention

Situational Crime Prevention

• Point: Crime reduced by increasing risks + reducing rewards.

• Evidence/Explanation: Clarke - Rational Choice Theory. CCTV, steering locks, anti-climb paint make crime less attractive.

• Link: Crime prevented through target hardening.

• Evaluation: Labelling theorists - crime displacement occurs.

Broken Windows Theory

• Point: Minor disorder leads to serious crime.

• Evidence/Explanation: Wilson + Kelling - broken windows, graffiti + litter signal lack of control. Zero-tolerance policing restores order.

• Link: Tackling minor disorder prevents major crime.

• Evaluation: Marxists - policy targets poor communities.

Social + Community Prevention

• Point: Crime prevention should address social causes.

• Evidence/Explanation: Perry Pre-School Project - disadvantaged children given support. By adulthood = fewer arrests + higher employment.

• Link: Early intervention reduces offending.

• Evaluation: Right Realists - expensive + slow results.

Foucault

• Point: Control shifted from punishment to surveillance.

• Evidence/Explanation: Panopticon model. Prisoners behave because they may be watched at any time.

• Link: Individuals internalise control.

• Evaluation: Mathiesen - public can now monitor authorities.

Actuarial Justice

• Point: Modern control focuses on risk management.

• Evidence/Explanation: Feeley + Simon - crime prevention uses statistics + profiling to identify high-risk groups.

• Link: Focus shifts from rehabilitation to prediction.

• Evaluation: Interactionists - profiling creates self-fulfilling prophecy.

17. Punishment

Durkheim

• Point: Punishment reinforces social solidarity.

• Evidence/Explanation: Study of traditional + modern societies. Retributive justice = harsh punishment. Restitutionary justice = restoring social order.

• Link: Punishment strengthens collective conscience.

• Evaluation: Marxists - punishment protects ruling-class interests.

Rusche + Kirchheimer

• Point: Punishment shaped by economic system.

• Evidence/Explanation: Historical study of punishment. Capitalism values time → imprisonment becomes dominant punishment.

• Link: Punishment reflects economic needs.

• Evaluation: Pluralists - human rights limit exploitation.

Foucault

• Point: Punishment became psychological rather than physical.

• Evidence/Explanation: Discipline and Punish. Public executions replaced by surveillance, routines + prison discipline.

• Link: Modern punishment controls behaviour.

• Evaluation: Feminists - ignores women’s experiences.

Garland

• Point: Society developed a culture of control.

• Evidence/Explanation: Study of UK + US criminal justice since 1970s. Penal populism = politicians promise tougher punishments to gain votes.

• Link: Punishment used for political gain.

• Evaluation: Right Realists - imprisonment protects society.

Rehabilitation vs Deterrence

• Point: Debate over purpose of punishment.

• Evidence/Explanation: Rehabilitation = education + therapy. Deterrence = fear of punishment. High recidivism questions effectiveness.

• Link: Purpose of prison remains contested.

• Evaluation: Left Realists - social causes must be addressed.

18. Social Control

Family

• Point: Family provides informal social control.

• Evidence/Explanation: Parsons - primary socialisation teaches norms + values. Children internalise collective conscience.

• Link: Family reduces deviance.

• Evaluation: Oakley - family reinforces patriarchy.

Education

• Point: Schools encourage conformity.

• Evidence/Explanation: Durkheim - education teaches shared values. Hidden curriculum = uniforms, rules, detentions + hierarchy.

• Link: Students learn obedience.

• Evaluation: Bowles + Gintis - schools produce compliant workers.

Religion

• Point: Religion promotes social control.

• Evidence/Explanation: Malinowski - religion provides moral guidance + social order. Divine punishment discourages deviance.

• Link: Religion encourages conformity.

• Evaluation: Marx - religion = “opium of the people”.

Police + Courts

• Point: Formal agencies maintain order.

• Evidence/Explanation: Right Realists - policing + sentencing deter crime + protect communities.

• Link: Formal control supports social stability.

• Evaluation: Cicourel - justice shaped by stereotypes.

Panoptic Surveillance

• Point: Technology increases social control.

• Evidence/Explanation: Foucault - Panopticon. CCTV, facial recognition + algorithms encourage self-regulation.

• Link: Surveillance replaces community monitoring.

• Evaluation: Left Realists - technology cannot replace community policing.

 

Left vs Right Realism

Causes of Crime (Right Realism)

• Point: Crime = individual choice caused by poor socialisation + rational decision-making.

• Evidence/Explanation: Wilson + Herrnstein - biological traits (aggression, impulsivity) increase offending. Murray - underclass created by welfare dependency + absent fathers. Clarke - Rational Choice Theory = offenders weigh costs against rewards before committing crime.

• Link: Crime results from personal failure rather than social inequality.

• Evaluation: Lea + Young - crime caused by structural inequalities, not individual pathology.

Causes of Crime (Left Realism)

• Point: Crime caused by structural disadvantage.

• Evidence/Explanation: Lea + Young - relative deprivation = frustration from comparing yourself to wealthier groups. Marginalisation = lack of political voice. Subcultures develop to cope with exclusion, making crime appear acceptable.

• Link: Crime rooted in inequality rather than individual choice.

• Evaluation: Murray - many deprived people do not commit crime, proving crime remains a personal choice.

Crime Control (Right Realism)

• Point: Crime reduced through deterrence + environmental control.

• Evidence/Explanation: Wilson + Kelling - Broken Windows Theory. Minor disorder encourages serious crime. Clarke - Situational Crime Prevention through CCTV, target hardening + surveillance. Zero-Tolerance Policing tackles all offences immediately.

• Link: Increased risks discourage offending.

• Evaluation: Chambliss - policies target working-class + minority groups while ignoring elite crime.

Crime Control (Left Realism)

• Point: Crime reduced through social reform + community policing.

• Evidence/Explanation: Lea + Young - democratic policing + cooperation between communities and police. Perry Pre-School Project - disadvantaged children given support showed lower offending rates later in life.

• Link: Tackling root causes reduces crime long-term.

• Evaluation: Clarke - solutions are expensive + too slow to address immediate crime problems.

Similarities + Overall Evaluation

• Point: Both theories take crime seriously as a real social problem.

• Evidence/Explanation: Both reject traditional Marxist + Interactionist views that dismiss crime statistics. Both focus on practical policies to reduce street crime.

• Link: Realism prioritises reducing victimisation.

• Evaluation: Becker + Lemert - both theories rely too heavily on official statistics and ignore how labelling processes create the category of “criminal” in the first place.