INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY

b. Over emphasize the experiences of criminals and the attempt to "understand" their point of view as either: "Victims" of a labelling process (Interactionism) or "Political catalysts" against bourgeois hegemony (Radical Criminology/Marxist Subcultural theory).

LR is an integrated theory by focusing on 1) macro and 2) micro levels. Synthesizes various elements from past theoretical perspectives into a "new realistic" approach to crime and deviance that seeks to understand:

a. The effect that crime has on its victims (mainly, but not exclusively, the working class). (Radical crim. sees victim as the offender, little focus on the offender’s victim)

b. The social origins of crime, mainly in terms of the cultural background and development of criminals.

Key focus on victims - most violence is intra-class; and intra-racial

Lower class are victims twice: lower class crimes against lower class, upper class crimes against lower class (criticism is that not sufficient focus on white collar crime, but counter argument is that most people fear crimes of lower class)

Focuses not just on formal, i.e. institutional control, but also informal control

Gender relations are also key, with most crime being men committing acts of violence against women.

Key foundations of LR – drawing from Marxism, Merton’s Strain Theory, Subculture theory

1) RELATIVE DEPRIVATION

It is argued that is the well-socialized individual who should be most-likely to turn towards crime as a "solution" to their personal / social problems, primarily because Capitalism produces:

a. Egalitarian ideals (for example, "political equality") and b. Material shortages / deprivations.

Thus, people who are socialized to expect / want material success but who are denied, for whatever reason, this success are more-likely to turn towards crime as a "solution" to this "problem".

2) SUBCULTURES

Crime is seen to be a group/cultural response to something, rather than a simple matter of individual choice (Subculture theory). Crime will occur, for example, when:

a. A social group comes to understand that it is being given a "raw deal" in society.

b. It is easy - through experience - to see the discrepancy between the ideological impetus to consume commodities and the material denial of these socially-valued things.

c. There exists no political channel through which these feelings of discontent can be expressed (in effect, there is no possibility of changing something by political means).

Thus, for crime to occur, there must be:

a. Economic / political discontent. b. The absence of economic / political opportunities for the remedy / expression of this discontent.

3) MARGINALIZATION

Crime is not seen as some form of "revolutionary" endeavour (a challenge to the ruling class' legal right to appropriate surplus value privately). Rather, crime is seen much as Marx himself saw crime - as a reactionary form of behaviour which represented a diversion from the development of real political solutions to the experience of degradation, exploitation and so forth suffered by the working class. LR believes there isn’t necessarily class consciousness (1. awareness of one's own social or economic rank in society. 2. a feeling of identification and solidarity with those belonging to the same social or economic class as oneself.), rather false consciousness (a failure to recognize the instruments of one's oppression or exploitation as one's own creation, as when members of an oppressed class unwittingly adopt views of the oppressor class.).

As evidence to support the above position, Lea and Young argue that:

1. The vast majority of criminals appear to hold conventional social values. Like everyone else in Capitalist society, their socialization stresses such things as: Individualism, Competition, The desire for material success / status

2. Criminal behaviour has no individual political dimension becausemost working-class crime involves the working-class as victims; Black criminality is mainly directed towards other blacks.

3. In relation to Radical Criminology, this is correct when they see crime as a reaction to an unjust society. but they make a crucial mistake: they assume that the reaction to a just cause is necessarily a just one. On the contrary: it is often exactly the opposite. Crime is one form of egoistic response to deprivation. its roots are in justice but its growth often perpetuates injustice.".

1. Subculture:

a. a form of collective response to the particular social situation within which a social group develops. In this respect, whilst there is a tendency for such sub-cultures to be "oppositional" in relation to their basic aims, it is perfectly possible to see them in "independent" sub-cultural terms (since, as I've previously suggested, criminals appear to basically want what everyone else in society has been encouraged to want - wealth, status, power and so forth).

b. The structural position of social groups within Capitalist society is important - hence working-class youths (especially males), for example, are more-likely to develop distinctive sub-cultural styles than middle-class youths

c. A balance has to be struck between: Understanding the subjective interpretations of the participants within a sub-cultural grouping (for example, what they believe their behaviour represents) and, Understanding the objective social conditions that give rise to behaviour that is criminal / deviant.

d. Sub-cultural values, in this respect, are not independent of the culture in which they arise (although these values may, of course, be expressed in ways that are not approved-of). Thus, for Lea and Young, it is precisely because working-class youths, for example, accept the general values of Capitalist society that they indulge in criminal behaviour - the pursuit of desired ends by illegitimate means...(Merton)

2. Relative Deprivation: This involves subjective feelings of "being deprived", the recognition that concepts such as poverty or wealth are subjective social categories that are relative to an individual's perception of what other people possess, what this individual might reasonably expect to possess in terms of the overall standard of living in society, their immediate social grouping and so forth.

Thus, the millionaire in a society of billionaires is, to all intents and purposes, "relatively deprived".

3. Marginalization: For Lea and Young, the preponderance of male, working-class, youths in crime involvement is related to their marginal status in society (insofar as they are both young and relatively poor). The expression of discontent at this marginal status - where it is progressively denied to this group either: Politically or Economically is likely to result in criminal activity - the social expression of social marginalization.

Finally, in relation to the three factors noted above, it is worth noting once again that, for Lea and Young, when some - or all - aspects of the three factors combine, increased criminal activity is likely to result...

The complexity of human behaviour is stressed insofar as New Left Realism tries to show how the structural conditions that act upon the individual limit, constrain and condition their perception about what represents a "rational choice" in any given situation.