Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Topic 6- Explaining the differences in offending - Coggle Diagram
Topic 6- Explaining the differences in offending
Left Realism
Lea and Young argue that the ethnic differences in statistics reflect real differences in the levels of offending. They argue that racism has led to the marginalisation and economic exclusion of ethnic minority groups who face higher levels of unemployment and poverty.
The medias emphasis on consumerism promotes a sense of relative deprivation by setting materialistic goals that many members of ethnic groups cant achieve legitimately. One response is through the formation of delinquent subcultures. This produced utilitarian crime such as theft as a means of coping with relative deprivation
Because these groups are marginalised they have no organisation to represent them meaning their frustration is liable to cause non utilitarian crime such as violent offences
They acknowledge that the police often act in racist ways and this results in criminalisation of these groups however doesn't argue that discriminatory policing fully explains the differences. They argue that we cant explain the differences in terms of police racism eg black people have considerably higher rate of criminalisation than Asian people the police would have to be selective of their racism
They concluded that the stats represent real differences in levels of offending between ethnic groups and is caused by relative deprivation and marginalisation
Evaluation
They can be criticised for their view on police racism. EG arrest rates for Asian people may be lower than for black people not because they are less likely to offend but because the police stereotype the 2 groups differently. Asian people as passive and black people as dangerous
Neo Marxism
Neo Marxists argue that the differences in statistics don't reflect reality. These differences are the outcome of a process of social construction that stereotypes minority ethnic groups as more criminal
Gilroy
Argues that the idea of black criminality is a myth created by racist stereotypes of African Caribbean and Asian people. In reality these groups are no more criminal then other groups. However as a result of police acting on these racist stereotypes, minority ethnic groups become to be more criminalised and therefore appear on official stats.
Minority ethnic group crime can be seen as a political resistance against a racist society and its resistance has its early roots. He hold a similar view to the critical criminologists which argues that WC crime is a political act of resistance to capitalism
Evaluation
Most crime is intra ethnic meaning victims and criminal are from the same background so cant be seen as an anti colonial struggle against racism. Lea and young argue that Gilroy romaticises street crime as somehow revolutionary when in their view its nothing like that
Asian crime rates are similar to or lower than for white. If Gilroy was right then the police are only racist towards Black people not Asians which seems unlikely
Hall et al
Argues that the ruling class are normally able to rule the subordinate class through consent however in times of crisis this becomes more difficult. In early 1970s high inflation and rising unemployment were provoking widespread unrest. When oppression began to grow the ruling class may need to use force to maintain control however this needs to be seen as legitamite
The 1970s also saw a emergence of a media driven moral panic about mugging. In reality it was just a new name for robbery and violence and there was no evidence that this had increased. This was soon associated by the media as Black youth crime.
The myth of the black mugger served as a scapegoat to distract attention from the true cause of problems such as unemployment which is seen as a capitalist crisis. The black mugger came to symbolise the disintegration of the social order. By presenting black youths as a threat to the fabric of society the moral panic served to divide the working class on racial grounds as well as winning popular consent for more rules to be used as suppression
Evaluation
Downes and Rock argue that Hall et al are inconsistent in claiming that black street crime was not rising but that it was also rising because of unemployment
Left realists argue that inner city residents fears about mugging are not panicky but realistic
More Recent Approaches
Neighbourhood
FitzGerald et al examine the role of neighbourhood factors in explain the apparently greater involvement of black youths in street robbery. They found that rates were highest in poorer areas and also were deprived people came into contact with more affluent people. Young people were more likely to live in these areas and be poor
However white people affected by these factors were also more likely to commit street crimes. However black people may be more likely to live in poor areas because of racial discrimation in the housing and job market.
Getting Caught
Some groups run a greater risk of getting caught. Sharp and Budd found that black offenders were more likely than white offenders to have been arrested. Reasons include that they were more likely to commit a crimes where victims can identify them, or to have been associated with known criminals. These factors raise their visibility to authorities