Transcript Chapter_13_-_Conflict

Conflict Criminology
• Social paradigms
– Consensus – general consensus on values
• Role of State to mediate conflicts
– Conflict – disagreement on values
• State represents interests of the elite
• Elite define what is appropriate behavior to further their selfinterests
• Powerless are more likely to be defined as criminals
Early Conflict Theories
Cultural conflict – Sellin
• Conduct norms: how people are supposed to act under certain
circumstances
– Conduct norms often become laws
• In simple, homogenous societies these laws may actually reflect a
social consensus
• In complex, heterogeneous societies there may be disagreement and no
consensus
– Border regions
– Colonization
Group conflict – Vold
• People form groups with others of like interest
• Groups continuously try to improve their standing
– Achieve a kind of stasis known as “social order”
• Groups may come into conflict when their interests and purposes
intersect
– Try to use the C.J. system to promote their standing
• When groups are in conflict, member loyalty to their group increases
• Lawmaking, lawbreaking and law enforcement reflects competition
between groups for control of the State’s police power
– Crime becomes by definition the behavior of “minority power
groups” that do not have enough clout to defend their interests
Conflict Theories in a Time of
Conflict
Civil Rights Movement
--The Vietnam War
Criminalization - Turk
•
•
•
•
Authorities try to maintain a “consensus-coercion” balance
– Try to keep power relationships from shifting too much either way
Cultural and social norms
– Cultural norm: laws as written
– Social norms: laws as enforced
Variables affecting likelihood of conflict:
– Cultural or social norms of authorities and subjects differ
– Subjects have a language/philosophy to defend their behavior
– Level of organization and sophistication of authorities/subjects:
• Conflict more likely when subjects are organized (individuals less
likely to back down)
• Conflict more likely when either group is less sophisticated (less able
to subtly work around the conflict)
Factors affecting criminalization of behavior
– Degree of agreement within the authorities (police, prosecutors, courts)
– Relative power of enforcers and resisters
“Social reality of crime” - Quinney
• Crime is conduct that conflicts with the interests of influential
“segments” of society
• These segments may or may not be organized or able to protect their
interests
• “Segments” have different behaviors and normative systems
• People more likely to be labeled “criminal” if their “segment” does
not influence the criminal law
• Segments communicate their “conceptions of crime” throughout
society (e.g., by the media)
– These communications shape our attitudes about what crime is or
ought to be
– Example - consumers argue that corporate executives are “the real
criminals”
Analysis of the CJ System –
Chambliss and Seidman
• Power of the state - two formulations
– Consensus: A value-neutral framework where conflicts can be
peacefully resolved
– Conflict: Power of the state IS the prize in perpetual conflict
within society
• Lawmaking characterized by warring interest groups
• The higher a group’s economic and political position, the more likely
its views will be reflected in the law
– Appellate courts - primarily oriented to wealthy rather than the
poor
– Law enforcement focuses its efforts on the weak and powerless
Unified Conflict Theory of Crime
• In complex societies people’s values and interests
will conflict
• People act in patterns that they think benefit them
and which they think are right or excusable
• Group values and power affect:
– What acts become defined as crimes
– Extent to which group members will become
violators
• CJ agencies more likely to listen to the powerful
• CJ agencies more likely to process easier cases,
thus more likely to sanction the powerless
• Official crime rates for groups and individuals will
reflect the above
Testing conflict theory
• Most studies compare race and equity of CJ decisions
• Sentencing - usually find a disparity
– Is it bias? Controlling for factors such as seriousness of
offense or prior record often eliminates the difference
– Less affluent are less able to mount an effective defense
(retain better counsel, post bail)
• More policing in minority areas; more arrests
– Minority areas may have more street crime
– Greater need or demand for police services
– Greater likelihood of arresting members of minority
groups