scly4 crime and deviance revision cards 2014 1. the specification at a glance 2 different theories...
TRANSCRIPT
SCLY4 Crime and Deviance
Revision Cards 2014
1
The specification at a glance
2
Different theories of crime, deviance,social orderand social control.• Consensus theories vs
Conflict theories• Functionalism• Ecological• Subcultural• New Right/Control• Marxism• Neo-Marxism• Labelling
The social distribution of crime and deviance:• Age• Ethnicity• Gender,• Locality• Social class
Globalisation and crime in contemporary society;• the mass media and
crime• Globalisation and crime• Green crime• Human rights and state
crimes.
Crime control, prevention and punishment,victims, and the role of the criminal justice systemand other agencies• Policing and the courts• Crime prevention• Punishment (inc.
Prisons)• Victimology
The sociological study of suicide• Studies of suicide• Theoretical and
methodological implications
The connections between sociological theory andmethods and the study of crime and deviance.• Measuring crime (stats
etc)• Methods in Context
Contents1. Theories of Crime and Deviance2. Gender and crime3. Age and Crime4. Ethnicity and Crime5. Social class and crime6. Area and Crime7. Mass Media and Crime8. Globalisation and Crime9. Policing and Courts10. Crime Prevention11. Punishment12. Victimology13. Suicide14. Measuring crime (usefulness of statistics) 3
Consensus Theories Conflict Theories
Functionalist
Subcultural
Ecological
New Right/Control Theory
Marxist
Neo-Marxist
Feminist
Anti-Racist Sociology
Labelling
• Harmony • Social control and socialisation• Community• Shared values• Police/courts/media fulfil a
positive function• Trust crime statistics• Blame ‘criminal’
• Conflict• Social control and ideology• Police/courts/media serve the
powerful• Crime is socially constructed/
distrust statistics• Blame ‘society’
1. Theories of Crime and Deviance
4
For each theory ask….
• What influences our definition of deviance/crime?
• What is the cause of crime and deviance?
• Who are likely to commit crime and deviance?
• What is social order based upon?
5
CONSENSUS THEORIES
6
7
CONSENSUS THEORIES – at a glance
Functionalism
Subcultural Ecological New Right/Control
Functions of deviance• Shared values• Test boundaries• Punishment
unifies• Social rules =
clear
Anomie
Strengthen community
Strain theory
Alternative values
Delinquency
Status frustration
Self-esteem/rebellion
Illegitimate Opportunity Structure
Focal concerns
Urban areas
Lack of community
Disorganisation
Zone of transition
Informal social control
Differential association
Sink estates
Tipping
Nocturnal economy
Underclass
Moral decay
Welfare dependency
‘broken windows’
Families without fatherhood
Community decline
Cost-benefit analysis
Attachments/bonds
Communitarianism
Poor socialisation
8
Studies Evaluation
Functionalist Durkheim Functions of deviance• Reinforces solidarity/commitment to
shared values• Punishment unifies community• Social rules = clear• Singles out undesirables• Boundaries reinforces/tested =
changeDysfunctions• Crime is threat to social order• Anomie – normlessness = deviance Causes of crime• Anomie from rapid social change• Boundaries unclear/uncertaintySocial order & social control• Consensus = shared values = order• Social control = socialisation =
cohesion = integration = community• Institutions restrict deviant behaviour
Merton• Strain theory (goals and means)• Anomie = strain between
goals/means• American Dream = pressure• 5 responses to anomie (eg,
innovation)
Durkheim• What is the right amount of crime? (not
scientific)• Would victims find crime beneficial?• Does not explain why certain commit
crime (and what crimes they choose to do)
• Assume that laws reflect the interests of all in society (ignores power/ideology)
• Tends to ‘blame’ the deviant Merton• How can ‘anomie’ be measured? (not
scientific)• Where do goals/means come from? (he
ignores role of capitalism)• Ignores subcultures driving the choice of
individuals• Doesn’t explain crimes that are not
driven by ‘economic goal’
General• Ignore conflict in society (and power)• Values are manipulated by the ruling class• Laws are biased and serve the powerful• Ignores crimes of the powerful• Ignores group nature of crime• Ignores selective policing/bias in the
criminal justice system• Ignore how the media can create crime
9
Studies Evaluation
Subcultural(Functionalist)
Albert Cohen• 1950s USA – juvenile delinquency• Working class youths – socialised into
‘alternative’ norms and values• Caused by status frustration &
blocked opportunities = sense of failure
• Rejection of mainstream values• No monetary gain crime – vandalism
and fighting• Gained status & rebellion
Cloward & Ohlin• Illegitimate opportunity structure• Career ladder – opportunities/status• 3 structures (criminal/conflict
/retreatist)• Criminal subculture – working class
areas/networks/role models etc
Miller• Lower class values – socialisation into
these ‘focal concerns’• Focal concerns –
smartness/toughness/ excitement/fatalism etc
• A source of status/self-esteem
• Most working class boys do not commit crime
• They ignore female deviance
• Ignore middle class subcultures
• Ignore crimes of the powerful
• Most youths grow out of it
• Assume working class youth are raised in a vacuum and cut off from wider society/values
• They ignore labelling/biased policing
• Deterministic – ignore free will
• Accept crime statistics as true
• Matza notes how subcultural membership is transitory
10
Studies Evaluation
Ecological • Urban areas = high crime rate• City centre = less cohesion/ommunity• Normlessness = anomie• Social control is limited (informal)
Shaw & McKay• Neighbourhoods/zones• Zones have distinct cultures/values• Zone of transition = ‘twilight zone’ – inner
city (cheap rented housing, poverty, high immigration, transitory population) = No bonds…crime!
• Social disorganisation = no sense of community – unstable..no controls
• Subculture = cultural transmission• Shaped by people around them
(differential association – Sutherland)
Marshall• Sink estates in UK = crime
Baldwin & Bottoms• Tipping – problem families onto certain
estates• Morris – Found similar results when problem
families concentrated in area (diff. assoc.)• Skogan (USA) – noted public space and
disorder there..decline of neighbourhood
Hobbs• Nocturnal economy – city centres-
pubs/clubs..expansion..more chance of criminal activity there
• Which comes first? (crime or social disorganisation)?
• Most people in these areas do not commit crime
• Ignores white collar crime by wealthy people in suburbs
• It may be that in urban areas there is a high concentration of young, deprived people…rather than area
• Most youth crime is transitory..not permanent/fixed
• Maybe urban areas are policed more and crime figures reflect the fact they are over-policed
• Some areas are treated as ‘problem areas’ by councils/police
• Ignores ‘gentrification’ of cities in recent years, ie) Yuppie flats etc
• Ignores strong sense of community on working class estates
11
Studies Evaluation
New Right/ Control Theory
- Underclass theory
- Rational choice theory
- Control theory
• Fears of moral decay• Desire for greater control of people
who harm normal society• Critical of welfare state
Murray• Underclass reject mainstream norms
and values• Dependency culture• Rise of single parents – lack of
discipline/no father figure/ poor socialisation/instability
• Families without fatherhood (Dennis)• Communities damaged – no bonds -
‘good people’ move away
Wilson (Broken Windows)• Communities need informal soc. Cont.
to reglate deviance• Cost-benefit analysis = less chance of
getting caught/no fear punishment
Etzioni• Government is disempowering
communities
Hirschi• Low attachments = high crime• Bonds
(attachment/commitment/belief/ involvement
• Family = vital for socialisation
• Marxists are critical as the right use this theory to justify inequality
• Contradiction – belief in selfish interests and community
• Most working class citizen are moral even though struggling in poverty
• Ignores middle class crime• Ignores how the powerful
manipulate society to control poor• Attack on single parents• Ethnocentricism – bias
12
Norman Dennis - ‘Families without Fatherhood’ (1993)Trends
• 30 years = family changes = weakened • Decline of the traditional family• Rise in cohabitation and decline of marriage
Issue• Family/community used to be a form of social control• They used to restrict the extremes behaviour of youth• People today struggle with ‘inner policeman’
Crime related to:1. Changing role of women = fathers now marginal2. Fathers leaving families = no role model/discipline3. Cohabitation = no moral fabric…values/morals are relative
Farrington & West - 1990Findings• Study – Cambridge – Longitudinal study (1953-1990)• 1/3 of 411 boys = offenders by age 25
Delinquency linked to:• Types of family linked to crime• Poor parenting • Fathers had criminal records• Poverty & single parenthood
CONFLICT THEORIES
13
14
CONFLICT THEORIES – at a glance
Traditional Marxism
Neo-Marxism Labelling
• Criminogenic capitalism
• Laws serve ruling class
• Ideological role of law/social control
• White collar crime
• Selective law enforcement
• Crisis of hegemony
• Symbolic resistance
• CCCS (Marxist Subcultural theory)
• Fully social theory of deviance
• Selective policing
15
Studies Evaluation
TraditionalMarxist Theories
• Society shaped by economic base• Capitalist class exploit working class• Society is based on conflict – inequality and
power central to crime an deviance• Laws serve the powerful – ideological
Law serves ruling class• R/C control laws• Law enforcement benefits R/C• Chambliss – protect private property –
business interest = profits (tax loopholes/Vagrancy laws)
• Snider – serve business – state avoids tighter laws on pollution/Safety etc
Law as ideology & social control• Althusser – Ideological State App.• Law (and crime) is defined by R/C• Crime is seen as blood on streets & w/c
White collar crime• Crimes of the powerful (see next slide)
Criminogenic Capitalism• Crime is normal under capitalism =
greed/competition (Gordon)• Poverty is created by capitalism =
frustration/alienation
Selective Law enforcement• Reiman – w/c crime most pursued• Gordon – selective policing feeds stereotype
and divides w/c
• Not all laws are just serving R/C – many benefit workers
• Laws reflect value consensus
• Too deterministic – ignores power of SFP
• High crime rates in socialist countries
• Ignore the importance of values/culture and socialisation in criminality
• Ignores individual motivation
• Ignores gender/ethnic inequality
• Not all w/c people commit crime
• Left-Realists not how this focuses too much on crimes of the powerful
• Laws can act against the R/C
16
White-Collar Crime
What is it?
• Middle class crime – by people of ‘high social status/ respectability’ (Sutherland)
• Corporate crimes (business)• White collar (employees)
Types
• Employee theft• Fraud• Computer crime• Tax fraud• Crimes against consumers• Crimes against employees
Level of harm
• 20 times more harmful than street crime (Snider)
• Harm from faulty goods/safety infringements/pollution etc
• Fraud – far greater than burglary, mugging, theft (millions) (Levi)
Why hard to detect/police?(Croall)
• Invisibility• Hard to isolate blame• No direct victim• Law is ambiguous/grey area• Consumers don’t report – trivial• Policed by inspections (not
police) – warnings/fines..not conviction!
• Technical knowledge/complex ahead of police skill set
METHODS ISSUEWhite collar crime is very hard to investigate due to its invisible nature!
17
Studies Evaluation
Neo-Marxist Theories (1)
New Criminology (1973)
Taylor, Walton & Young (1973)• Blended Marxism and Labelling• See Trad. Marxism as deterministic• Working class have choice• Fully social theory of deviance
which looks at structure and individual
• Marxist Subcultural Theory (see next slide)
Ethnicity & Crime studies• Gilroy – ‘black youth crime’ in 1970s
= political response to racism/oppression
• Selective policing – racist• Hall - 1970s economic crisis = and a
crisis of hegemony = scapegoating of black youths for problems = moral panic ‘mugging scare’
(see ethnicity and crime slide also)
• Ignore female criminality
• Romanticises w/c criminal as a Robin Hood ‘stealing from the rich’ (but left realists note their main victims are also working class/the poor)
• They ignore the ‘seriousness’ of these crimes on w/c victims
• Now described as ‘Left Idealism’ as it was over-optimistic about the oppressed and their ability to exploit the ‘crisis of hegemony’ and find a true class consciousness
Wider origins of act, immediate origins of act, the act itself, immediate origins of societal reaction, wider origins of societal reaction, effects of labelling
Look back at your notes on GRAMSCI• Hegemony• Humanistic Marxism• Voluntarism
18
Subcultural Theories – Brief comparison
Functionalist Marxist Labelling• CCCS (Birmingham Uni 1970s)• Youth subcultures linked within
a wider structural context• Crisis in hegemony = working
class youths see through R/C hegemony
• Working class youths find ‘magical solutions’ to their oppression…resistance through rituals (Stuart Hall/Dick Hebdige)
• Symbolic resistance expressed through subcultures
• Stealing signs and distorting their meaning (subcultural bricolage)
Cohen • Skinheads – ultra w/c symbols
as a response to destruction of working class communities in 60s
Hebdige• Punk – nihilistic/shock collaging
of symbols and distorted meanings
Hall• Rastas/Rudies – challenges to
racist Babylon
19
Studies Evaluation
Neo-Marxist Theories (2)
Also see ‘Realism’ cards later on with focus on crime policy/solutions
New Left Realism (1984)
• British Crime Survey 1983 = poor and marginal = main victims of crime (not the rich/powerful – “sack Robin Hood!”
• UK riots 1981 • Crime = a REAL problem• Main criminals = working class/Afro-
Caribbean youths
Lea & Young – 3 factors
Relative deprivation• Feel deprived compared to others• Advertising/consumerism = pressure• Lack of means to reach goals =
frustration• Growth of ‘self-interest which
undermine family values/communitySubculture• Collective solutions to a group’s
problems• Anti-mainstream values/culture as
rejected by wider society• Develop a way of life = street crimeMarginality• Groups – lack power – no voice• Violence = political action• Hostility with police/authority
• Too much focus on w/c crime – ignores white collar crime and its level of harm
• Over reliance on statistical data
• Seem to have too much faith in the police as ‘neutral’
• What’s so new? – Merton/Cohen
• What’s so left? – anti-w/c
• Underplay the role of the media in influencing police
• Ignores the labelling process and its effect..need to use more qualitative data to explore motives
• Deterministic = not everyone who experience relative poverty = criminal
• Too much focus on ‘urban’ crime in inner cities = makes it seem a greater problem
20
Right Realism Left Realism
Comparing ‘Realist Theories’ of Crime & Deviance
21
Studies Evaluation
LabellingTheories (1)
Note how these differ to ‘structural theories’ as they focus on interaction/social constructionism
• Distrust official stats on crime
• Police not neutral• Use qualitative
methods (ethnographic)
• Committed sociology
• Society ‘creates’ deviance – social constructionism
They do not discuss economic matters (capitalism)
• Origins – Chicago School ‘symbolic interactionism’ and later phenomenology
• Thinkers – Becker/Goffman/Cicourel/Lemert
Deviance as relative• Normal/deviant are defined by society – not
fixed• Becker ‘deviant behaviour is behaviour so
labelled’• Who controls definitions? (not the underdog)
Social construction of deviance• Becker – society applies this label to certain
groups..defines their actions as deviant = create outsiders
• Labels = stereotypes• Selective policing of W/C, youths, males• Greater surveillance of powerless groups• ‘seek and ye shall find’
• Becker – M/C negotiate with police more• Lambert – policing w/c estates in UK• Cicourel – stereotyping in courtrooms• Kalven & Zaesel – chivalry thesis (females)
Effects of labelling• Self concept shaped (Cooley) = SFP• Primary & secondary deviance (Lemert)• Stigmatisation & societal reaction = increases• Label = master status (Becker) = identity• Rejection = outsider = join deviant subculture• Goffman ‘deviant career’ – learn culture –
deeper• Young – hippy marijuana users – drug use more
important after police sensitisation and negative societal reaction to hippies…defined as ‘junkies’
• Over romantic – ‘too committed’ and see criminal as not so bad
• Too much focus on exotic and bizarre deviance (drugs use etc)
• Ignores origins of deviant acts
• There is absolute deviance
• Labelling is too deterministic – simplistic – one direction
• Deviants can adopt identity without being labelled
• Where do the stereotypes come from and why do the police use some and not others
• Out of date –police today are trained to not be prejudiced
• They ignore economic power and the nature of capitalism in deviance
• Ignore women in researchCooley‘looking glass self’
22
Studies Evaluation
LabellingTheories (2)
Deviance Amplification• This is how efforts to control/limit deviance =
create more deviance• Look back at Lemert – secondary deviance
grows after sensitisation & societal reaction
Stan Cohen – Folk Devils & Moral Panics (1972)• Role of media in ‘amplifying’ deviance• Newspaper reporting of ‘mods and rockers’
fighting and how it created more deviance• Youths (folk devils) and media promoted a
(moral panic) surrounding them…needed a solution!
• Media exaggerated the problem = public concern (sensitisation & societal reaction)
• Moral entrepreneurs – magistrates/police/local council wanted to ‘stamp it out’ = more concern
• More arrests and convictions• Demonising mods/rockers (folk devils) =
marginalisation = affected their identity/self concept - ‘fighting was normalised’
• Media = key role in causing public fear/concern about certain groups (immigrants/single mums etc)
Rule creation• Becker - Laws = relative = serve interests of
minority - conservative• Moral entrepreneurs – campaign to change law
to serve their interests/values• Use of media to stir ‘moral crusades’ to
influence the public’s view and law makers• The underdog has very little say in the process –
driven by powerful minority, eg) Marijuana Tax Act 1937 – Reefer Madness campaign
Includes:• What is globalisation?• The extent of the global crime economy• Globalisation and :risk consciousness, capitalism and
organisation• Green crime• Human rights and state crimes
7. Globalisation and Crime
23
Think about:
Power, harm and interconnectednessCrimes of the powerful
• Nation states/large corporations power
• Cause major harm• Hidden crime• Unpunished crime
Zemiology
• Beyond traditional criminology
• How crime is defined• The study of harm
Crimes without frontiers
• Beyond national boundaries
• Global connections = more opportunities
24
How to focus on this topic..• Globalisation is a ‘game-changer’ for the study of crime
• Globalisation = new forms of crime/new opportunities
• Global crime = a challenge for ‘nation-states’ and law making/jurisdiction (hard to police)
• Global crimes by powerful groups = able to define laws (to serve selves), able to hide crimes, able to escape punishment
• Global crimes = high level of harm/damage (to environment or to citizens)
You can use these as strands to return to again and again in your analysis of them.
These revision cards try to focus on these strands for you.
25
The extent of Global crimeWhat is globalisation?• The increasing interconnectedness of
societies
• ‘the widening, deepening and speeding up of world wide interconnectedness’ (Held)
• causes: global media, cheap travel, ICT, migration, business links
• Crime across national borders
The level of Global crime• Manuel Castells – global crime
economy = £1 trillion per year
• Arms trafficking• Trafficking nuclear materials• People smuggling/illegal immigrants• Prostitution/slavery• Sex tourism• Cyber crimes (fraud/pornography)• Terrorism• Green crime• Drugs trade• Money laundering
Global risk consciousness (Beck)
• Fears of harm/need protection• Media exaggeration/moral panics• Immigration worries (welfare/jobs)• Led to tighter border controls• 9/11 terrorism and consequences
Capitalism and crime
• Ian Taylor – greater inequality = crime• Businesses (TNCs) switch to low-
wage countries = poverty = insecurity + frustration = poor people turn to crime
• New crim. Opportunities for rich and powerful = insider trading/tax avoidance/moving funds
• Capitalist employers using foreign labour + breaching laws
Demand (rich west) + Supply (3rd world)
26
New patterns of criminal organisationGLOCAL organisation
• Hobbs & Dunningham
• Global economic changes = local crime organisation
• Individuals with contacts form a ‘hub’• Loose-knit networks – NOT hierarchy
(different to subcultures and traditional ‘mafia’ style gangs)
• Key root = local context• But has global connections• Each locality will affect the nature of
the criminal organisation (global crime filtered through a local lens)
• Example – old industry shut because of global competition = nocturnal economy in Sunderland – bouncers/body capital
Evaluation• Not clear if these hubs are ‘new’• Older structures may still run alongside
McMafia
• Glenny
• Organisations emerging after fall of communism in 1989
• Deregulation of global markets• Communism falls = free market
except for natural resources, ie) oil• Russian govt controlled these and
kept prices low (communist officials bought these for next to nothing)
• They sold them abroad = high price• Became very rich/powerful –
oligarchs• Ex-KGB/former convicts formed
mafias - used to protect this new wealthy class, ie) Chechen Mafia
• Not like Italian mafia – kin/hierarchy• These mafias were purely economic/
driven by greed• Chechen Mafia became a brand –
ruthless/protection rackets• Exported brand elsewhere• Built links around the world
27
Green Crime1. Global risk society and
environment
• Crime against the environment• Planet is a single eco-system (goes
beyond national boundaries)• Examples: air pollution, water
pollution, nuclear disasters• Mainly ‘man-made’ risks today• Beck – manufactured risks are
damaging humanity (made by industry/transport etc)..go beyond national boudaries
2. Green Criminology
Traditional criminology• Harm to the environment may be
defined as ‘legal’ though• Traditional criminology is tied to
‘criminal law’ and green crime ignored
• Situ & Emmons – see env. Crime as ‘an unauthorised act or omission that violates the law’ – a definition that is limited by the law and who control it
Green criminology (Rob White)• Focus on harm rather than law• Some of worst harm = not illegal• This is transgressive criminology
that moves beyond traditional criminology
• Different countries have diff. laws• Looks at crimes of the powerful – like
Marxists note invisible/escape punish.
2 views of harm• Anthropocentric view – human view –
man can exploit envt. (businesses)• Ecocentric view – humans and envt.
are linked…envt. needs protecting from global capitalism
3.Types of Green Crime (Nigel South)
Primary crimesDirect result of destroying Earth’s resources:(a) crimes of air pollution(b) crimes of deforestation(c) crimes of species decline/animal rights(d) crime of water pollution
Secondary crimesResult from flouting the rules to prevent disasters:(a) State violence against opp. Groups eg) French Govt – Greenpeace ship attack(b) Hazardous waste and organised crime eg) business dispose of waste illegally, ship waste to 3rd world/role of ‘ecomafia’ Italy
28
Examples of ‘Green’ crimes/studies Evaluation
Bhopal disaster • 1984 - India – Union Carbide• Leaking cyanide – safety failure• 30 tons of gas = 20’000 deaths and
120’000 continue suffering
Air pollution – from industry/transport
Deforestation – Amazon for beef cattle
Water Pollution – 25 million die each yr from contaminated water (toxic waste and untreated sewage)
Day – those who oppose governments supporting nuclear power/arms are seen as ‘enemies of the state’ (Greenpeace)
Walters– ‘ocean floor has been a radioactive rubbish dump for decades’
Bridgland – 2004 Tsunami = barrels of radioactive waste dumped by European countries washed up by Somalia
Rosoff – notes how cheap disposing of toxic waste in 3rd World coiuntries
• recognises importance of global issues
• shows where law is lacking where harm is concerned
• reveals how the powerful define laws and hide crimes
• hard to define the boundaries of ‘green criminology’
• definitions are value-laden with moral criteria used
The extent of ‘state crime’What are state crimes?
• Crimes of the powerful - ‘state organised crime’ (Chambliss)
• Green & Ward ‘illegal or deviant activities perpetrated by, or with complicity of, state agencies’
• The state is able to define what is criminal
Examples – genocide, torture, imprisonment without trial, assassination
McLaughlin – 4 categories of state crime• Political crimes• Crime by security/police forces• Economic crimes• Social/cultural crimes
The extent of state crime
Michalowski & Kramer argue that these crimes are s0 serious because:
• The state has a monopoly on violence – potential to cause much harm
• It can conceal it’s crimes and avoid punishment
• It is hard to police the actions of these states (by other states)
• It makes laws and can use them to control/persecute their enemies
29
The extent of ‘state crime’Example of state crimes?
• Cambodia (1975-8) – Pol Pot’s Khmer Rouge government killed 2 million people
• Nazi Germany – persecution of Jews, the Final Solution
• Guantanamo Bay – US using excessive methods with terror ‘suspects’
• Iraq – Saddam Hussein attacking the Kurds in Northern Iraq
• Vietnam – My Lai massacre of 400 civilians by US troops during Vietnam war
• Hiroshima/Nagasaki – Atomic bombs dropped by US on Japanese cities in WW2
The Violation of Human Rights
• Natural Rights/Civil Rights • Protection from state
Schwendinger & Schwendinger• Crime = level of violation of human
rights (harm/zemiology)• States denying basic human rights
• Crimes include: racism, sexism, homophobia, economic exploitation
Evaluation• Cohen – not objective/easy to
explore ‘economic exploitation’• There is limited agreement on what
is classed as a human right
30
How states crimes become possibleStates ‘hiding’ their crimes• Cohen – state crimes are being
explored more within criminology and notes how states try to hide/ legitimate their crimes
Denial• 3 stages – didn’t happen/its not what
it seems/its justified
Neutralisation theory• Applies Matza’s model for justifying
deviant behaviour
• Techniques : denial of victim, denial of injury, denial of responsibility, condemning the condemners, appeal to higher loyalty
State crime as acceptable• How normal people perform evil acts
on behalf of states
Kelman & Hamilton – 3 factors that create ‘crimes of obedience’:
• Authorisation – given permission = duty to obey
• Routinisation – role/detached• Dehumanisation – enemy seen as
sub-human (linked to propaganda)
Dehumanisation and modernisation• Science and technology help states
to commit these crimes (Bauman)• They dehumanise and turn mass
murder in a routine/admin task31Negotiation/social construction
Globalisation & Crime (bring together)
32
Examine Globalisation
& CrimeGREEN CRIME• Global risk
consciousness• Green criminology +
harm• Types of green crime• Examples• Evaluation
STATE CRIME
Risk consciousness
Organisations• Glocal• McMafia
Global capitalism
• What are state crimes?• The level of harm• Examples• Violations of human rights• How states conceal crimes (denial)• How states make such crime acceptable
GLOBAL CRIME
Levels/types(Castells)
Evaluation• Issue of defining crime• Objectivity/values• Political flavour
(committed sociology)