Punishment and Social Structure

Last updated

Punishment and Social Structure (1939), a book written by Georg Rusche and Otto Kirchheimer, is the seminal Marxian analysis of punishment as a social institution. [1] It represents the "most sustained and comprehensive account of punishment to have emerged from within the Marxist tradition" and "succeeds in opening up a whole vista of understanding which simply did not exist before it was written" (Garland 1990: 89, 110). It is a central text in radical criminology and an influential work in criminological conflict theory, cited as a foundation text in several major textbooks (Oxford Handbook of Criminology 2007; Newburn 2007; Innes 2003). It offers a broader (macrosociological) level of analysis than many micro-analyses that focus on the atomized and differentiated individual (Jacobs 1977: 91).

Contents

The work is extensively cited by both critical theorists and radical criminologists (Garland and Young 1983: 7, 24), and has influenced seminal works in the sociology of imprisonment, being cited in, for example, modern classics such as James B. Jacobs's Stateville (1977: 91), Michel Foucault's Discipline and Punish (1977:24), and Punishing the Poor (2009: 206) by Loïc Wacquant. The work represented a decisive step forward in the development of the criminological imagination regarding punishment, one that places it in significance "alongside Durkheim's theory of punishment" (Garland 1990: 110). As such, the work has been extensively deployed by eminent criminologists and sociologists as a critical lens to understand and explain contemporary phenomena such as mass imprisonment (Zimring and Hawkins 1993: 33), and there has been a significant revival of critical interest in the work. It is regarded as a "classic", if frequently contested, text in the sociology of punishment and criminology more generally (Melossi 1978: 79, 81).

Background

The origins of the book are complex and controversial. Rusche and Kirchheimer were exiles from Nazi Germany (Rusche had a Jewish mother and considered his origins 'mixed' (Melossi 2003: x); Kirchheimer was Jewish). Rusche fled to the United Kingdom, then to Palestine, and thence back to the United Kingdom, where he was interned as an enemy alien after the outbreak of war. Kirchheimer originally left for Paris.

They were part of a dispersed cohort of émigré German social scientists, many of whom had been associated with the International Institute of Social Research in Frankfurt am Main (also known as the Frankfurt Institute). This Institute, established in 1923, was closed by the German government in 1933, the year of the Nazi takeover. It transferred to Columbia University, New York, and many of the émigré scholars pursued their critical analyses of society there (Horkheimer 1938: ix).

The book Punishment and Social Structure originated in an article suggested by Rusche in 1931, that is, before leaving Germany. The article was ultimately delivered in 1933 and entitled Labour Market and Penal Sanction: Thoughts on the Sociology of Criminal Justice. It was felt by leading American sociologists/criminologists, Thorsten Sellin and Edwin Sutherland, that the pivotal importance of the topic merited more extensive treatment than Rusche's article provided, for all its intrinsic conceptual originality (Melossi 2003: xiii).

At this point, famously, Rusche was 'not available' (Horkheimer 1938: x). The meaning of this euphemistic phrase in the book's preface remains contested. It is beyond dispute that Rusche was a controversial and erratic figure, leaving a trail of intrigue in his wake in his itinerant life after Germany (Melossi 2003: xiv-xx). This is how it came about that Kirchheimer was commissioned to rework and develop Rusche’s text, adding his own analysis, in particular concerning penal policy under fascism, while retaining the bulk of the concepts found in Rusche’s original draft. The reconfigured work became the first book published by the newly constituted Institute.

Central argument

In its barest essentials Rusche and Kirchheimer propound a structuralist analysis of punishment, arguing that modes of punishment are social phenomena shaped by economic drivers (p5 - stand-alone page references relate to the 1968 edition). The concretized forms of punishment actually found correspond, they maintain, to the prevailing means of production. It is here that the Marxian stance of privileging the economic base is evident. This leads to the renowned claim that 'Punishment as such does not exist; only concrete systems of punishment and specific criminal practices exist. The object of our investigation, therefore, is punishment in its specific manifestations' (ibid.).

The books surveys the historic development of these 'specific manifestations', dividing the progression of punishment into three conceptual epochs: the early Middle Ages, which utilized penance and fines; the late Middle Ages, when sanctions became markedly more barbarous, including branding, mutilation, torture and execution; and then the coming of capitalism, where forms of punishment came to perceive the prisoner as a source of human labour, including galley slavery, transportation and penal servitude with hard labour. As the Enlightenment and the Modern period developed, prisons became more prominent.

Overall the authors hold that punishment is a species of class domination. It must be viewed as part of an intricate matrix of social control and 'not an isolated phenomenon subject only to its own special laws. It is an integral part of the whole social system, and shares its aspirations and its defects' (p. 207). It operates to enforce ruling class power. This point was forcefully made by Rusche in his 1933 essay: 'the criminal law and the daily work of the criminal courts are directed almost exclusively against those people whose class background, poverty, neglected education, or demoralization drove them to crime' (Rusche 1933: 11).

The authors argue that such class-skewed punishment provides only 'the illusion of security by covering the symptoms of social disease with a system of legal and moral value judgements' (p. 207). They conclude that although the futility of severe punishment and cruel treatment may be proven 'a thousand times … so long as society is unable to solve its social problems, repression, the easy way out, will always be accepted' (ibid.).

Critical reception

Following its publication in 1939, the book received little critical attention (Garland 1990: 106). In the late 1960s, however, the book's analytical stance and Marxian bent resonated with the developing school of critical criminology and its radical outlook. It generated considerable interest in the economic underpinning to the concept of punishment, and was effectively updated and reapplied in works such as Melossi and Pavarini's The Prison and the Factory (1981). The book has also been subjected to significant criticism, with commentators questioning its reductionist Marxian stance, with its overstatement of the influence of economic factors (Garland 1990: 108), the deterministic nature of the conclusions generated, the teleological problems inherent in the theme of punishment as a 'project' of the ruling class to reinforce its domination, and the book's vulnerability to various historical inexactitudes (Beattie 1986).

These qualifications notwithstanding, Punishment and Social Structure remains at the forefront of theoretical and analytical expositions of how if we are to understand punishment, we must be attentive to the dictates of social class and broader patterns of social domination and control. Its persuasive force lies in providing the clarity of a lens to view how punishment lies within 'much wider strategies for managing the poor and the lower classes' (Garland 1990: 110).

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Edwin Sutherland</span> American criminologist (1883–1950)

Edwin Hardin Sutherland was an American sociologist. He is considered one of the most influential criminologists of the 20th century. He was a sociologist of the symbolic interactionist school of thought and is best known for defining white-collar crime and differential association, a general theory of crime and delinquency. Sutherland earned his Ph.D. in sociology from the University of Chicago in 1913.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Loïc Wacquant</span> French sociologist (born 1960)

Loïc J. D. Wacquant is a French sociologist specializing in urban sociology, urban poverty, racial inequality, the body, social theory and ethnography.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Critical criminology</span> School of criminology

Critical criminology is a perspective in criminology that challenges traditional beliefs about crime and criminal justice, often by taking a conflict perspective such as Marxism, feminism, or critical theory. Critical criminology examines the genesis of crime and the nature of justice in relation to factors such as class and status, Law and the penal system are viewed as founded on social inequality and meant to perpetuate such inequality. Critical criminology also looks for possible biases in criminological research.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Marxist criminology</span> School of criminology

Marxist criminology is one of the schools of criminology. It parallels the work of the structural functionalism school which focuses on what produces stability and continuity in society but, unlike the functionalists, it adopts a predefined political philosophy. As in conflict criminology, it focuses on why things change, identifying the disruptive forces in industrialized societies, and describing how society is divided by power, wealth, prestige, and the perceptions of the world. "The shape and character of the legal system in complex societies can be understood as deriving from the conflicts inherent in the structure of these societies which are stratified economically and politically". It is concerned with the causal relationships between society and crime, i.e. to establish a critical understanding of how the immediate and structural social environment gives rise to crime and criminogenic conditions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Feminist school of criminology</span> School of criminology

The feminist school of criminology is a school of criminology developed in the late 1960s and into the 1970s as a reaction to the general disregard and discrimination of women in the traditional study of crime. It is the view of the feminist school of criminology that a majority of criminological theories were developed through studies on male subjects and focused on male criminality, and that criminologists often would "add women and stir" rather than develop separate theories on female criminality.

Matthew Barnett Robinson is a Criminologist at Appalachian State University (ASU) in Boone, North Carolina.

Jock Young was a British sociologist and an influential criminologist.

The National Deviancy Symposium consisted of a group of British criminologists dissatisfied with orthodox British criminology who met at the University of York in the late 1960s and early 1970s. The group included Paul Rock, David Downes, Laurie Taylor, Stan Cohen, Ian Taylor and Jock Young. Many members later became involved in critical criminology and/or Left realism.

David Downes is a British sociologist and criminologist and is Professor Emeritus of Social Administration at the London School of Economics.

David Garland is Arthur T. Vanderbilt Professor of Law and professor of sociology at New York University, and an honorary professor in Criminology at Edinburgh Law School. He is well known for his historical and sociological studies of penal institutions, for his work on the welfare state, and for his contributions to criminology, social theory, and the study of social control.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Cultural criminology</span> Anthropological view of crime

Cultural criminology is a subfield in the study of crime that focuses on the ways in which the "dynamics of meaning underpin every process in criminal justice, including the definition of crime itself." In other words, cultural criminology seeks to understand crime through the context of culture and cultural processes. Rather than representing a conclusive paradigm per se, this particular form of criminological analysis interweaves a broad range of perspectives that share a sensitivity to “image, meaning, and representation” to evaluate the convergence of cultural and criminal processes.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Otto Kirchheimer</span> German-American legal scholar

Otto Kirchheimer was a German jurist of Jewish ancestry and political scientist of the Frankfurt School whose work essentially covered the state and its constitution.

Radical criminology states that society "functions" in terms of the general interests of the ruling class rather than "society as a whole" and that while the potential for conflict is always present, it is continually neutralised by the power of a ruling class. Radical criminology is related to critical and conflict criminology in its focus on class struggle and its basis in Marxism. Radical criminologists consider crime to be a tool used by the ruling class. Laws are put into place by the elite and are then used to serve their interests at the peril of the lower classes. These laws regulate opposition to the elite and keep them in power.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Criminology</span> Study of crime and criminal actions/behavior

Criminology is the interdisciplinary study of crime and deviant behaviour. Criminology is a multidisciplinary field in both the behavioural and social sciences, which draws primarily upon the research of sociologists, political scientists, economists, legal sociologists, psychologists, philosophers, psychiatrists, social workers, biologists, social anthropologists, scholars of law and jurisprudence, as well as the processes that define administration of justice and the criminal justice system.

Lee E. Ross is an African-American criminologist and author of articles and books that address issues of domestic violence and topics related to race, crime, and justice.

Georg Rusche (1900–1950) was a German political economist and criminologist, co-author with Otto Kirchheimer of Punishment and Social Structure (1939).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Shlomo Giora Shoham</span>

Shlomo Giora Shoham received the Israel Prize in the category of Criminology Research in 2003, one of the first two criminologists to do so along with Menachem Amir.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Public criminology</span> Academic tendency within criminology

Public criminology is an approach to criminology that disseminates criminological research beyond academia to broader audiences, such as criminal justice practitioners and the general public. Public criminology is closely tied with “public sociology”, and draws on a long line of intellectuals engaging in public interventions related to crime and justice. Some forms of public criminology are conducted through methods such as classroom education, academic conferences, public lectures, “news-making criminology”, government hearings, newspapers, radio and television broadcasting and press releases. Advocates of public criminology argue that the energies of criminologists should be directed towards "conducting and disseminating research on crime, law, and deviance in dialogue with affected communities." Public criminologists focus on reshaping the image of the criminal and work with communities to find answers to pressing questions. Proponents of public criminology see it as potentially narrowing "the yawning gap between public perceptions and the best available scientific evidence on issues of public concern", a problem they see as especially pertinent to matters of crime and punishment.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Anarchist criminology</span>

Anarchist criminology is a school of thought in criminology that draws on influences and insights from anarchist theory and practice. Building on insights from anarchist theorists including Pierre-Joseph Proudhon and Peter Kropotkin, anarchist criminologists' approach to the causes of crime emphasises what they argue are the harmful effects of the state. Anarchist criminologists, a number of whom have produced work in the field since the 1970s, have critiqued the political underpinnings of criminology and emphasised the political significance of forms of crime not ordinarily considered to be political. Anarchists propose the abolition of the state; accordingly, anarchist criminologists tend to argue in favour of forms of non-state justice. The principles and arguments of anarchist criminology share certain features with those of Marxist criminology, critical criminology and other schools of thought within the discipline, while also differing in certain respects.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Gregg Barak</span> American criminologist, academic, and author

Gregg Barak is an American criminologist, academic, and author. He is an emeritus professor of criminology and criminal justice at Eastern Michigan University, a former visiting distinguished professor in the College of Justice & Safety at Eastern Kentucky University, and a 2017 Fulbright Scholar in residence at the School of Law, Pontificia Universidade Catholica, Porto Alegre, Brazil. He is most known for his research in the fields of criminology and criminal justice.

References

  1. Melossi, Dario (2013). "Georg Rusche and Otto Kirchheimer: "Punishment and Social Structure"". Social Justice. 40 (1/2 (131-132)): 265–284. ISSN   1043-1578.

Sources

Further reading