Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
LEFT REALISM - Coggle Diagram
LEFT REALISM
TAKING CRIME SERIOUSLY
- central idea behind left realism is the idea that crime is a real problem, and it affects the disadvantaged frogs whom are its main victims
- they cause other sociologists of not taking crime seriously
- MARXISTS:
- concentrated on crimes of the powerful
- left realists argue that whilst this is useful, it ignores W/C crime and its effects
- NEO-MARXISTS:
- Romanticise W/C criminals as modern day robin hoods
- lR point out that in fact W/C criminals mostly victimise other W/C people, not the rich
- LABELLING THEORISTS:
- see w/c criminals ass the victims of discriminatory labelling by social control agents
- LR argue this approach neglects the real victims- w/c peoples who suffer at the hands of criminals
- AEITIOLLOGICAL CRISIS:
- Part of the LR project of taking crime seriously is to recognise that from the 2950s there has been a real increase in crime, especially w/c crime
- YOUNG argues this has led to an aetiological crisis- a crisis in explanation- for theories of crime
- taking crime seriously involves recognising who's most affected by crime
- local victim surveys show disadvantaged groups are at ore risk of becoming victims
- therefore they have a greater fear of crime as it has a greater affect on their lives
?
- See society as an unequal capitalist one, like marxists
- They are reformist- believe in gradual change rather than violent overthrow of capitalism as the way of achieving greater quality
- They believe we need explanations of crime that will lead to practical strategies for reducing it now, rather than waiting for revolution
CAUSES OF CRIME
RELATIVE DEPRIVTAION:
- For Lea & Young, crime has its roots in depravation
- however deprivation itself is not directly responsible for crime itslef
- e.g poverty was high in the 1930s, yet crime rates were low
- Relative deprivation refers to how deprived someone feels in relation to others
- this can lead to crime when people resent others for unfairly having more than them and resort to crime to obtain what they feel they are enttitled to
- Lea and Young argue that the paradox in society is more crime-ridden
- although people are better-off they are now more aware of relative deprivation due to media and advertising
- this raises everyones expectations for material possessions
- those who cat afford them result to crime instead
- Relative deprivation doesnt alone cause crime
- for young its the combination of it with individualism
- individualism is a concern with the self and ones own individual rights, rather than those of a group
- it causes crime by encouraging the pursuit of self-interest at the expense of others
- increasing individualism is causing disintegration of families and communities by undermining the value of selflessness
- this weakens informal controls groups exercise over individuals and increase anti-social behaviour, and crime
SUBCULTURE
- for LR, a subculture is a groups collective solution to the problem of relative deprivation
- different groups produce different subcultural solutions to relative dep
- some may close to crime to close the deprivation gap while others may find religion offers them spiritual comfort
- criminal subcultures still subscribe to that values and goals of mainstream society
- but, opportunities to achieve these goals are legitimately blocked, so they resort to street crime instead
MARGINALISATION
- marginalised groups lack both clear goals and organisations to represent their interests
- groups such as workers have clean goals (e/g better pay and working conditions) and often have organisations to put pressure on employers
- By contrast, young argues unemployed youth are marginalised
- they have no organisation to tepresent them with no clear goals, just a sense of resentment and frustration
- being powerless to use heir means to mporve their position, they express their frustration through criminal means e.g violence and rioting