Stengths & Weaknesses of Realist Criminologies

If you order your essay from our custom writing service you will receive a perfectly written assignment on Stengths & Weaknesses of Realist Criminologies. What we need from you is to provide us with your detailed paper instructions for our experienced writers to follow all of your specific writing requirements. Specify your order details, state the exact number of pages required and our custom writing professionals will deliver the best quality Stengths & Weaknesses of Realist Criminologies paper right on time.

Out staff of freelance writers includes over 120 experts proficient in Stengths & Weaknesses of Realist Criminologies, therefore you can rest assured that your assignment will be handled by only top rated specialists. Order your Stengths & Weaknesses of Realist Criminologies paper at affordable prices !

The key theorists of realist criminologies provide what, in their view, are pragmatic assessments of those crimes at the centre of public concern, that is, street crime, violence and burglary. They appear to be less concerned with theorising about defining crime or the power of criminalisation and more interested in actual crime control and containment.

Realist criminologies emerged in the 170s and 180s at a time when public concern about crime was a key electoral issue on both sides of the Atlantic. Where previously liberal and reformist arguments and theories had been advanced about, for instance, crime being a social construct, a result of poverty and unemployment or a problem of moral panics, realist theories were firmly planted in the reality of crime, and the human suffering and personal disaster caused by crime.

This essay will explore realist criminologies, outlining the various theories of left and right realism. It will describe the causes of crime, and how best to contain or control it, from each viewpoint, ending with a critique of both.

For right realists, the problem of crime is focused on offenders, and begins with the underclass, or lower classes, "those people occupied" as Wilson points out, "with the daily struggle for survival" (Wilson, Theory Guide, p 48), whose behaviour and decision to commit crime is down to choice, influenced solely by the perceived rewards of criminal or non-criminal behaviour, and who are insufficiently deterred from their criminal actions by an ineffective criminal justice system.

Write my Essay on Stengths & Weaknesses of Realist Criminologies

Different theorists have different ideas and perspectives which inform the right realist theory. Some, like Charles Murray, perceive the problem as one of declining moral standards brought about by the permissiveness of the 160s. These are characterised by family breakdowns, illegitimacy, and inadequate child rearing by inadequate single mothers. In "The Underclass" he writes that "the key to the underclass is where a large proportion of an entire community lacks fathers…… more common in poor communities than rich ones". He provides statistics on the correlation between the rise in illegitimate births of 140% in "lower class communities" during the 180s with a 4% increase in crime during much of the same period. He further makes the point that the most frequent offenders are males in the second half of their teens, and that the most dangerous places in England are those types of neighbourhoods where the underclass is taking over (Criminological Perspectives, p. 10 and 1).

Murray believes a lack of proper role models for young men means they are turning to crime.

In Crime and Human Nature, Wilson and Herrnstein contend that "the key factors in criminality are personality traits such as impulsiveness and lack of concern for others …… which are (often) found in discordant families" (Theory Guide, p 48). This ties in with Wilson's earlier work where he states that criminals are "lower class people" who are rationally calculating and without conscience" (Theory Guide, p 48).

In 14, Hernnsteiin and Murray, in The Bell Curve, theorised that blacks and Latinos (who they believe commit most of the violent crime in the US) are disproportionately poor because of low IQ, and that genetics and low intelligence are the explanation for individual deviant behaviour, because of lack of foresight and inability to distinguish between right and wrong (Theory Guide, p 4).

Left realists take the view that crime is due to social causes. Theorists such as Lea and Young see crime as a serious social political problem, and a reflection of the inner city's social reality. They believe it disproportionately affects those on the margins of society, who are both offenders and victims. They point to relative deprivation as the cause of crime "an excess of expectation over opportunities of fulfilling them" (Lea and Young, Criminological Perspectives, p 148). When people are denied access to the means of gaining success, they become marginalised and can turn to deviant criminal behaviour.

In fact, from Currie's point of view, our current market culture promotes standards of economic status and consumption which increasing numbers of people cannot legitimately meet (Currie, Criminological Perspectives, p 74). Since the end of the Second World War, both the US and the UK have seen Keynesian interventions in the economy. The Welfare State, mass media and mass secondary education have encouraged expectations amongst the working class which are often unrealistic, and unemployment and poverty are now perceived by a whole generation as a failure of society instead of just a fact of life. In addition, capitalist ideologies in the media of equal opportunity have led to promotion of a "have-it-all" lifestyle. For instance, a certain car, cigarette, activity any of these can appear to guarantee a fun and successful lifestyle. However, unemployment or survival on social benefits or low wages have meant that this lifestyle is out of reach for many. Education was and is presented as the gateway to career success, and more people have become more educated. However, economic recession and cutbacks in state spending, whether on economic or ideological grounds, have meant that the gap between expectations and opportunities is widening. All of the above has led to discontent, as working class people have begun to feel unjustly dealt with, and become marginalised, both socially and politically. This, in turn, has led to some "taking matters into their own hands", and turning to crime to somehow balance the injustice.

Right realists, such as Wilson and Clarke take the view that causal theories are either impractical or unproven. Reducing the opportunities for crime and swift and appropriate punishment to the offender is the answer. Clarke's theory maintains that since criminals make a rational choice to commit a crime, it is possible to eradicate a multitude of crimes through "situational opportunity preventive measures" such as reducing physical opportunities to commit crime and increasing the risks of being caught (Clarke, Criminological perspectives, p 64).

Wilson believes that seeking social causes for crime such as deprivation, unemployment or poverty is misguided, because improved social conditions in the 150s and 160s did not prevent a corresponding increase in crime. Punishment is therefore a worthy objective of the criminal justice system.

It is important to recognise that the political backdrop to right realism's emergence was that of right wing governments during the 180s who attempted to generate market incentives in the work sphere, and who conducted law and order campaigns on behalf of the silent majority, holding the offenders responsible and punishment the solution. Right realism is often referred to as "New Right" criminology, part of the "law and order" ideology which came to be characterised by such phrases as "back to basics" and "the silent majority". This was a reaction to several unsuccessful attempts to control crime on the part of previous liberal governments, who had looked to social causation for crime, and had instituted several policies in the hope of alleviating these causes.

Left realist criminology was a product of and a reaction to this "law and order climate". Although initially a critique of left wing and liberal commentaries which down-played the problem of crime, suggesting media instigated moral panics and irrational fears of crime, left realists perceived that inequality and injustice were issues that were ignored by the "New Right". They believed that right realist ideas such as situational crime prevention and deterrence were only ever going to be surface "fix-its" and not the ultimate solutions.

Left realist initiatives are driven by the premise of a social cause of crime. Lea and Young maintain that the high rate of burglaries, sexual and racial attacks is part of "real" problems facing working-class neighbourhoods. Fear of crime is valid, because there is real crime happening. It isn't just a moral panic caused by the release of violent crime statistics or overreaction of the mass media. It is increasingly important, therefore, that new theories about the real causes of crime be established, and then intervention at every level of society is necessary in order to build a better one. According to Young, this would involve greater local democracy and control of the police, better community facilities, housing estates that tenants can be proud of, reduction in unfair income inequalities. Crime control would come from education, training and employment. Left realists support concepts like restorative justice, which again would be at a local level, and the impact of crime would be realised for both the offender and the victim. Real social crime prevention requires a new society based on the principles of social solidarity and contributive justice, and this is dependent on society's capacity for social action. (Currie, Social Crime Prevention Strategies in a Market Society, p.80).

Left realism appears to be a middle road between new right and left idealist criminologies. Like the new right, it realistically accepts that crime is widespread, but does not accept that there is no point in looking at social causation; like left idealism, it accepts that crime is symptomatic of relations of class and gender, but refuses to romanticise the offender or view the offender as victim. It is a socially inclusive criminology. In its attempts to provide a theory to control crime, it takes into account societal factors such as victim, offender, police, justice system, communities.

In addition, Young and Lea's relative deprivation theory links strongly to sociological positivism's view of crime as a product of dysfunctions in social, economic and political conditions, (Theory Guide, p 6). The work of Durkheim is apparent, in Young and Currie's arguments for a new and just society, as Durkheim considered the law to be society's conscience "The degree of (crime's) occurrence and acceptance indicates the level of flexibility within that society" (Durkheim, Theory Guide, p 5). There are also elements of Merton's "anomie" theory, which suggests that society encourages individualism and unlimited aspirations, but there is a closed opportunity structure (Theory Guide, p 7).

There are several challenges to be made to left realist criminology, however, and one of them is its assumption of a consensus about the definition of crime. All of Chapter 1 of "The Problem of Crime" proposes that there are several contested definitions. And although it is supported by the Marxist theory of crime as an expression of social inequality, Angela Davis challenges its acceptance of state-generated legal definitions of crime, especially in relation to race (street crime = black youth)(Theory Guide, p. 5). Left idealism views crime as a concept activated to justify the coercive practices of the state and therefore challenges left realism's proposal that the state can be a willing partner in the improvement of society in order to control crime. Muncie and McLaughlin make the point that left realism appears to steer clear of analysing power, especially as it relates to state or corporate crime, and focuses on working class victimology (The Problem of Crime, p. 57). The concept of a working class is problematic, anyway. Real crime doesn't only happen in poor neighbourhoods, and there aren't only poor people living in poorer neighbourhoods. Who exactly, then, are the working class?

Critical criminologists question whether left realism's notions of a new and just society are in fact realistic at all. In view of the history of the state under capitalism, is it realistic to expect the police to be accountable to a marginal working class. Finally, left realism leaves itself open to criticism about whether it is realistic to expect a capitalist society to change its structure to correct social inequalities. In view of the impact of crimes of the powerful and even transnational crime, and the vested interests of those in charge of the social order, this does not appear to be a realistic objective.

Looking at right realist criminology, there are a number of strengths in evidence firstly, its belief in the freedom of the individual to make personal choices about a course of action; secondly, it acknowledges that crime is widespread; thirdly, some of the proposals for crime control are grounded in a "can-do" belief. Clarke's situational prevention ideas have a common-sense attitude to them, and some of Wilson's ideas about deterrence have and will continue to strike a chord in a population weary of a an ineffective justice system increasingly constrained by professional legal judgements, judicial discretions, and sentencing policies.

There are a number of weaknesses and inconsistencies, however. Firstly, its acceptance of the official definitions and statistics of crime, and the absence of any mention of crimes of the powerful, although it might be expected that a right-leaning ideology would inevitably dismiss any notions that the actions of the powerful could be criminogenic. In addition, right realists appear to have fashioned a kind of contradictory, but multi-faceted theory of crime causation Adding sociological and individual positivism (Murray's theory of poor upbringing and Wilson and Herrnstein's biological theories of IQ and genetics) to classical theory (Wilson and Herrnstein's theory of rational choice), right realism proposes crime as a moral decision of the individual, but one that can be affected by environment, biology, psychology or other factors. As noted above, there are contradictions in a number of the theories proposed, not the least of which is the almost universal rejection of sociological positivism, yet with facets of some of the theories possessing exactly that.

There does not appear to be a clear idea of what right realist theory is, apart from a right wing diatribe about society's ills being caused by the undeserving "lower classes". Many of the theorists, notably Wilson, appear to ignore due process, and are prepared to do away with accepted processes of the courts. Also, there is a lack of any kind of attention to social equality or social justice, and its denial that criminal behaviour has any relationship to society is a serious weakness. "The family is blamed as if autonomous from the economy" (Young, Left Realist Criminology). Single mothers and broken homes are a part of our capitalist market society, not something that happens to us.

Finally, right realism's main weakness is that it appears to disregard the fact that we live in a capitalist society, which tends to promote inequality and class conflict. From a Marxist criminology point of view, crime is not caused by moral or biological defects, but by fundamental defects in the social order (Theory Guide, p ).

Clarke, RVG (180) Situational Crime Prevention, Theory and Practice, (reprinted in Criminological Perspectives, nd edition, 00)

Currie, E (11) International Defleopments in Crime and Social Policy, (reprinted in Criminological Perspectives, nd edition, 00)

Lea, J and Young, J (184) What is to be edone about Law and Order?, (reprinted in Criminological Perspectives, nd edition, 00)

McLaughlin, E and Muncie, J (00), Theory Guide 1, The Causes of Crime, The Open University 00

Murray, C (10) The Emerging Underclass (reprinted in Criminological Perspectives, nd edition, 00)

Wilson, JQ (18) Thinking about Crime, extract reprinted in Theory Guide 1, The Causes of Crime, The Open University, 00

Wilson, JQ and Herrnstein, RJ (186), Crime and Human NatureI, extract reprinted in TheoryGuide, The Open University, 00

Please note that this sample paper on Stengths & Weaknesses of Realist Criminologies is for your review only. In order to eliminate any of the plagiarism issues, it is highly recommended that you do not use it for you own writing purposes. In case you experience difficulties with writing a well structured and accurately composed paper on Stengths & Weaknesses of Realist Criminologies, we are here to assist you. Your persuasive essay on Stengths & Weaknesses of Realist Criminologies will be written from scratch, so you do not have to worry about its originality.

Order your authentic assignment and you will be amazed at how easy it is to complete a quality custom paper within the shortest time possible!