Radical criminology

Last updated

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. [1] [2] [3] 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. [4] These laws regulate opposition to the elite and keep them in power.

Contents

Given its nature, radical criminology is not well funded by governments and is generally not supported by government policies. [1] Some argue that the radical criminological perspective has waned in influence, particularly with an aging population. Concerns about its credibility and utility persist, and there is ongoing debate about whether radical criminology still exists. [5]

Origins

Radical criminology is based on a variant of Marxism called Instrumental Marxism. It rose in popularity in the US in the 1960s amid the Civil Rights and Anti-War movements. The protests of students and minorities caused sociologists and criminologists to look to situational explanations of social and political unrest in America. [6] Radical criminology's popularisation coincided with the rise of conflict and critical perspectives. All three share a common basis in Marxist ideals. In 1990 the Division of Critical Criminology was recognised by the American Society of Criminology, which solidified radical criminology as a legit theory. [6] The band Rage Against the Machine as an example of the radical perspective. [5]

Approaches

Radical criminology posits that the current criminal justice system seeks only to serve the interests of the ruling class and thus perpetuates inequality in society. The justice system creates white collar, high class jobs while alienating oppressed minorities from the job market. The justice system’s fixation on repeat offenders and punishment reflects an adherence to individual blame theories that alleviate the blame on those in power. This is seen through the focus on street crime rather than white collar crime. [7]

Definitions of crime

Radical criminologists reject the legalistic definition of crime for one centered in the violations of human rights. This includes the crimes committed by the ruling class such as pollution and exploitation that are not typically considered crimes. Radical criminologists also reject all individualistic theories of crime such as biological and psychological in favor of analyzing the social conditions that cause individuals to be labeled as criminals. Radical criminologists see mainstream theories of crime and deviance as serving to uphold the status quo of capitalism. The only way to solve the crime problem is to overthrow the capitalism system from which the conflict originates.

Radical criminologists are abolitionist in that they seek to end all state criminal justice systems that cause the suffering of the oppressed. [7]

Views on property crimes

Radical criminologists believe that traditional criminology puts too much emphasis on the violence of property crime. Property crime is a symptom of a system that exploits the lower classes and puts the well-being of the property of the upper class above the needs of the lower class. Therefore it is not truly a crime, but only a reaction to an unjust society. Under capitalism, all crimes committed by the lower class are necessary for their survival. [7]

Views on illegal immigration

Radical criminologists reject the ideas of national sovereignty and border security. These exist because of the state's oppression and should be challenged. [7] Therefore, no immigration should be illegal.

Role of criminologists

Radical criminologists believe that criminology should be public, that is, should exist and have an impact outside of academia. The role then, of radical criminologists is to educate the public of the dangers of capitalism, while actively campaigning for its demise. [8]

Main concepts

Strain theory

In terms of the social hierarchy criteria, strain theory is generally accepted to have clear class developments and is generally consistent with radical theory. [9] Radical theory is solely based upon the view that criminal law is a tool in which the wealthy compel the poor into repeated mannerisms and behaviour that preserve the stereotype in which they are seen as felons and delinquents. [10] The general component of strain theory states that the allocation of rewards does not promote obedience, and that rewards are challenging and uncommon for those with little formal education and few economic resources. [11]

In its entirety, particular strains or pressures, according to strain theories, enhance the chance of crime. Negative emotions such as dissatisfaction and rage are triggered by these tensions. These feelings put pressure on people to take action, and one option is to commit a crime. Crime can be employed to alleviate bad feelings, seek retribution against the cause of the strain or connected targets, or relieve or escape from stress. [11] It is theorised that crime is more likely to arise in socioeconomic structures where rewards and resources are limited, and those who do not obtain their fair share of society’s goods and services are more likely to partake in criminal activity. [9]

When criminologists argue that social organisation has unidirectional consequences that are unrelated to history, their claims have materialist connotations that are in line with Marxist methodology. [9] This structuralist strategy can be applied to the strain theory position on crime causation, as shown by Robert Merton’s research [12] (an American sociologist), in which he describes how crime is produced in two stages. The first stage implies that ethics play a role in crime frequency, [9] which contradicts the systemic reasoning for radical criminality. The second aspect of the argument is that anti-social behaviour and the rejection of such traditional ideas are indicators of crime causation as well. [9]

According to this theory, social control can be sustained in three ways; conformity is encouraged as individuals have common views and values; conformity can be purchased by providing people with socially beneficial benefits and rewards; and conformity can be maintained using intimidation. Intimidation is very counterproductive and should only be used after the other options have failed.[ citation needed ]

This theory also argues that criminality is more likely to arise in socioeconomic structures where benefits and resources are limited. [12]

Cultural deviance

Cultural theory fits the least well with radical expectations, and unlike strain theory’s elements, cultural theories make no effort to view cultural principles as a solution to structural constraints. The cultural stance that an individual commits a crime because they have internalised pro-criminal values is widely accepted. [13] This concept reflects the societal idea that a major component of lower-class rebellious behaviour is a practical attempt to attain states, environments, or values that a prices within the actors’ most important milieu. Wolfgang and Ferracuti also contend that the open use of force or aggression is seen as a representation of fundamental principles that are distinct from the mainstream/core society. [9]

The basic values that cultural scholars point to for the purpose of criminal causation have been defined in a variety of ways: cultural emphasis on resilience, trouble, and enthusiasm to subcultural desires for short term gratification and risk taking. There are also claims that lower-class people have impulsive, decadent, vicious, and negativistic value inclinations. [14]

The general inference that cultural theorists make is that people commit crimes because their society demands it; people commit crimes because they have accepted that it is the right thing to do in accordance to their role in society. [9]

Social control

Control propositions and theories of societal disorganisation have been suggested as contributing to criminology’s theoretical problem. [9] Lower-class crime is explained by macrosociological versions of domination and institutional disorganisation ideologies, which, with the inclusion of socially theoretical changes, will be entirely consistent with radical expectations.

Under this theory, it is believed that whilst social controls are sufficient, strong social relations can develop. [15] Social controls are characterised as real or possible incentives and penalties that result from adherence to the norms. This means that obedience is bought, and the personality must be rewarded for it. But, since rewards are not necessarily plentiful, people may be coerced into conforming by intimidating them with payback. [16] According to the theory, punishments have an inverse association in terms of success, since when rewards decline, further punitive steps are needed to maintain compliance. [9]

The theory also outlines the idea that conformity starts with the fair presumption that people are more likely to conform if they have anything to achieve. [16] When conformity is no longer seen as rewarding, there are less “stakes of conformity," [17] a higher risk of individuals breaking out on their own, and a higher likelihood of those individuals engaging in illegal behaviour.

Basically, the social control theory is a mix of both strain theory and the cultural deviance theory. [16]

Conflict criminology vs radical criminology

The difference between conflict criminology and radical criminology derives from the fact that throughout the 1970s, numerous American radical criminologists deemed themselves conflict criminologists. [18] The misunderstanding arises because the two ideas share philosophical roots in Karl Marx’s works, in which radical criminology has long been presented as a component of conflict theory. [18]

There is currently a very obvious distinction between the two in regards to American criminology. The reliance of conventional criminology on scientific theories of the origins of criminal behaviour and the calculation of crime recorded in the Uniform Crime Reports is challenged by radical criminologists. [19] The state’s interest in coercion is assisted by focusing on traditional criminals and individual responsibility, which leads to sentences designed to prevent people from choosing violence. Individual quilt often serves to deflect focus away from systemic models of causation, allowing people in positions of authority to avoid taking accountability. According to radicals, criminologists, the general population, and politicians, rely on violence in the streets, causing people in power to execute even more violent activity with no risk of retaliation. [20]

But, according to conflict criminology, crime in patriarchal societies cannot be fully respected without acknowledging that such societies are dominated by a wealthy minority whose continued authority demands the financial misuse of others, and that such societies’ ideas, structures, and activities are structured and maintained to keep such communities marginalised, impoverished, and exploited. [18]

Different perspectives

United Kingdom

When the National Deviancy Conference (NDC) was created in July 1968 as a secession from the Third National Conference of Teaching and Research on Criminology at the University of Cambridge, it marked the beginning of radical criminology in the United Kingdom. [21]

Radical criminology and its administrative equivalent arose from positivism in the United Kingdom. [22] As radical thinking pushed forth new claims to the field, the underpinnings of traditional administrative criminology were widely disputed. [23]

The distinctions between external and internal history are reflected in the developments in British criminology throughout the late 1960s and early 1970s. The material, political, and social reality in which the discipline lives, in a sense, is the main driver of developments in criminology. [22] The most pressing material issue was an increase in crime, which was accompanied by an increase in the jail population, reoffences, and lower police clearance rates. The development of the New Left in the late 1960s and early 1970s provided the political framework for the rise of radical criminology in both the United Kingdom and the United States. [24]

United States

Following the decade of the 1960s, radical American criminology, like Britain's, became a dominant force. A sequence of shocks shocked the world's most rich and powerful country from its relative laziness. It was tested by the Vietnam War, in which a country of peasants was on the verge of defeating the South Vietnamese and the US militarily. Young Americans became more radicalised as a result of the conflict. This is because young men were subject to the draft, which forced them to make a moral decision. [25]

The criminal justice system, in Reiman's opinion, "acts like a distorting carnival mirror," [26] giving people a skewed perception of crime rather than a completely false one. Much of the harm done by the “well-to-do” [25] is not classified as a crime, and even when it is, it is not actively punished. The main concept in American criminology is that economic pressures in society are particularly harsh on the poor because of their extreme need and relative inaccessibility to opportunities for legitimate economic prosperity, [25] which greatly intensifies the burdens towards crime that arise at all tiers of our social structure. As a result, poor individuals commit a larger percentage of the crimes that people dread than their population as a whole, validating the strain theory.

Cover issue no. 1 of "Radical Criminology: A Manifesto Journal" Cover issue 1 Radical Criminology- A manifesto.jpg
Cover issue no. 1 of "Radical Criminology: A Manifesto Journal"

Development

Recently a group of anarchists and abolitionists associated with the Critical Criminology Working Group in the Criminology Department at Kwantlen Polytechnic University have advocated an activist, explicitly anti-capitalist and anti-statist radical criminology. In 2012 they launched the journal "Radical Criminology." An outline of a contemporary radical criminology and a call to action was issued in the journal's "Radical Criminology: A Manifesto." [27]

Criticism

Critiques of radical criminology come from both traditional criminologists who reject the failings of capitalism, and from other conflict criminologists who follow different interpretations of Marxist thought. Given its anti-capitalist stance, radical criminology is rejected by proponents of capitalism and those who reject the Marxist theories upon which radical criminology is based. [28] Still others who may agree with some of the core beliefs of radical criminology find it is too impractical and idealistic.

Radical criminology fails to take into account the many varied causes and reasons for crime. Therefore, it also can't explain the relatively low crime rates in some capitalist countries when compared to others. If class conflict was the only cause of crime than all capitalist countries should have relatively the same crime rates. Additionally, countries that have successfully overthrown their capitalist structures should have eliminated crime, yet crime in socialist countries does not often differ from that of capitalist countries. With such an advanced economy, social class is not always tied so clearly to owning the means of production, and definitions of who belongs to which classes are too often ambiguous. [29]

Some find issues with radical criminology's definition, or lack thereof, of crime. Since they reject the consensus perspective of crime, definitions of crime then vary from person to person, and are based on value judgments rather than a set of standards. [28]

Further reading

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Corporate crime</span> Crimes committed either by a corporation or its representatives

In criminology, corporate crime refers to crimes committed either by a corporation, or by individuals acting on behalf of a corporation or other business entity. For the worst corporate crimes, corporations may face judicial dissolution, sometimes called the "corporate death penalty", which is a legal procedure in which a corporation is forced to dissolve or cease to exist.

<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.

In the United States, the relationship between race and crime has been a topic of public controversy and scholarly debate for more than a century. Crime rates vary significantly between racial groups, however, academic research indicates that the over-representation of some racial minorities in the criminal justice system can in part be explained by socioeconomic factors, such as poverty, exposure to poor neighborhoods, poor access to public and early education, and exposure to harmful chemicals and pollution. Racial housing segregation has also been linked to racial disparities in crime rates, as blacks have historically and to the present been prevented from moving into prosperous low-crime areas through actions of the government and private actors. Various explanations within criminology have been proposed for racial disparities in crime rates, including conflict theory, strain theory, general strain theory, social disorganization theory, macrostructural opportunity theory, social control theory, and subcultural theory.

<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">Conflict criminology</span> School of criminology

Largely based on the writings of Karl Marx, conflict criminology holds that crime in capitalist societies cannot be adequately understood without a recognition that such societies are dominated by a wealthy elite whose continuing dominance requires the economic exploitation of others, and that the ideas, institutions and practices of such societies are designed and managed in order to ensure that such groups remain marginalised, oppressed and vulnerable. Members of marginalised and oppressed groups may sometimes turn to crime in order to gain the material wealth that apparently brings equality in capitalist societies, or simply in order to survive. Conflict criminology derives its name from the fact that theorists within the area believe that there is no consensual social contract between state and citizen.

<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">Right realism</span>

Right realism, in criminology, also known as New Right Realism, Neo-Classicism, Neo-Positivism, or Neo-Conservatism, is the ideological polar opposite of left realism. It considers the phenomenon of crime from the perspective of political conservatism and asserts that it takes a more realistic view of the causes of crime and deviance, and identifies the best mechanisms for its control. Unlike the other schools of criminology, there is less emphasis on developing theories of causality in relation to crime and deviance. The school employs a rationalist, direct and scientific approach to policy-making for the prevention and control of crime. Some politicians who ascribe to the perspective may address aspects of crime policy in ideological terms by referring to freedom, justice, and responsibility. For example, they may be asserting that individual freedom should only be limited by a duty not to use force against others. This, however, does not reflect the genuine quality in the theoretical and academic work and the real contribution made to the nature of criminal behaviour by criminologists of the school.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Integrative criminology</span> Interdisciplinary paradigm

Integrative criminology reacts against single theory or methodology approaches, and adopts an interdisciplinary paradigm for the study of criminology and penology. Integration is not new. It informed the groundbreaking work of Merton (1938), Sutherland (1947), and Cohen (1955), but it has become a more positive school over the last twenty years.

<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.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Strain theory (sociology)</span> Theory that social structures within society may pressure citizens to commit crime

Strain theory is a theoretical perspective in Sociology and Criminology that aims to explain the relationship between social structure, social values or goals, and crime. Strain theory was originally introduced by Robert King Merton (1938), and argues that society's dominant cultural values and social structure causes strain, which may encourage citizens to commit crimes. Following on the work of Émile Durkheim's theory of anomie, strain theory has been advanced by Robert King Merton (1938), Albert K. Cohen (1955), Richard Cloward, Lloyd Ohlin (1960), Neil Smelser (1963), Robert Agnew (1992), Steven Messner, Richard Rosenfeld (1994) and Jie Zhang (2012).

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.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Deviance (sociology)</span> Action or behavior that violates social norms

Deviance or the sociology of deviance explores the actions and/or behaviors that violate social norms across formally enacted rules as well as informal violations of social norms. Although deviance may have a negative connotation, the violation of social norms is not always a negative action; positive deviation exists in some situations. Although a norm is violated, a behavior can still be classified as positive or acceptable.

<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.

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. 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". 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. It offers a broader (macrosociological) level of analysis than many micro-analyses that focus on the atomized and differentiated individual.

<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.

Green criminology is a branch of criminology that involves the study of harms and crimes against the environment broadly conceived, including the study of environmental law and policy, the study of corporate crimes against the environment, and environmental justice from a criminological perspective.

<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. 1 2 Mike Maguire; Rodney Morgan; Robert Reiner (2007). The Oxford handbook of criminology (4, Illustrated ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN   978-0-19-920543-1 . Retrieved 22 February 2010.
  2. ↑ Johnson, E. H. (1978). "Radical Criminology and Marxism: A Fallible Relationship". Criminal Justice Review. 3: 53–63. doi:10.1177/073401687800300107. S2CID   145195080.
  3. ↑ "Radical Criminology: Theoretical Origins" (PDF). Retrieved 22 February 2010.
  4. ↑ crit (2010-04-15). "Radical Criminology". Critical Criminology. Retrieved 2019-04-28.
  5. 1 2 Finley, Laura L. "The lyrics of Rage Against the Machine: A study in radical criminology." Journal of Criminal Justice and Popular Culture 9.3 (2002): 150-166.
  6. 1 2 Cardarelli, Albert; Hicks, Steven (Fall 1993). "Radicalism in Law and Criminology: A Retrospective View of Critical Legal Studies and Radical Criminology". Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology. 84 (3): 502. doi:10.2307/1143962. JSTOR   1143962.
  7. 1 2 3 4 Shantz, Jeff (2012-10-29). "Radical Criminology - A Manifesto". Radical Criminology (1): 7–17. ISSN   1929-7912.
  8. ↑ On public criminology. Shantz, Jeff,, Piché, Justin,, Sanders, Carrie B.,, Eisler, Lauren,, Kwantlen Polytechnic University. Critical Criminology Working Group. Surrey, BC. 2014. ISBN   9780692311417. OCLC   923022753.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link) CS1 maint: others (link)
  9. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Groves, W. Byron; Sampson, Robert J. (August 1987). "Traditional Contributions to Radical Criminology". Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency. 24 (3): 181–214. doi:10.1177/0022427887024003002. ISSN   0022-4278. S2CID   145433295.
  10. ↑ "Radical theory | sociology". Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved 2021-05-17.
  11. 1 2 "Strain Theories". obo. Retrieved 2021-05-17.
  12. 1 2 Burton, Velmer S.; Cullen, Francis T. (1992-01-01). "The Empirical Status of Strain Theory". Journal of Crime and Justice. 15 (2): 1–30. doi:10.1080/0735648X.1992.9721462. ISSN   0735-648X.
  13. ↑ MATSUEDA, ROSS L. (1997-11-01). "'Cultural Deviance Theory':: The Remarkable Persistence of a Flawed Term". Theoretical Criminology. 1 (4): 429–452. doi:10.1177/1362480697001004002. ISSN   1362-4806. S2CID   146481881.
  14. ↑ "What is social class". udel.edu. Retrieved 2021-05-17.
  15. ↑ "Reading: Theoretical Perspectives on Deviance | Sociology". courses.lumenlearning.com. Retrieved 2021-05-17.
  16. 1 2 3 "Cultural Deviance Theory". my.ilstu.edu. Retrieved 2021-05-17.
  17. ↑ Hirschi, Travis (2017-07-28). Causes of Delinquency. doi:10.4324/9781315081649. ISBN   9781315081649.
  18. 1 2 3 Bernard, Thomas J. (1981). "The Distinction between Conflict and Radical Criminology". The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology. 72 (1): 362–379. doi:10.2307/1142914. JSTOR   1142914.
  19. ↑ "Radical Criminology", Encyclopedia of Criminology and Criminal Justice, New York, NY: Springer New York, 2014, p. 4273, doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-5690-2_100569, ISBN   978-1-4614-5689-6 , retrieved 2021-05-17
  20. ↑ crit (2010-04-15). "Radical Criminology". Critical Criminology. Retrieved 2021-05-17.
  21. ↑ YOUNG, JOCK, London (1988-03-01). "Radical Criminology in Britain: The Emergence of a Competing Paradigm". The British Journal of Criminology. 28 (2): 159–183. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.bjc.a047723. ISSN   0007-0955.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  22. 1 2 Young, Jock (1988). "Radical Criminology in Britain: The Emergence of a Competing Paradigm". The British Journal of Criminology. 28 (2): 159–183. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.bjc.a047723. ISSN   1464-3529.
  23. ↑ Pavlich, George (2001). "Critical Genres and Radical Criminology in Britain". The British Journal of Criminology. 41 (1): 150–167. doi:10.1093/bjc/41.1.150. ISSN   0007-0955. JSTOR   23638899.
  24. ↑ Taylor, Ian; Inciardi, James A. (1982). "Radical Criminology: The Coming Crises". Canadian Journal of Sociology / Cahiers canadiens de sociologie. 7 (1): 79. doi:10.2307/3340551. JSTOR   3340551.
  25. 1 2 3 PLATT, TONY (1974). "Prospects for a Radical Criminology in the United States". Crime and Social Justice (1): 2–10. ISSN   0094-7571. JSTOR   29765882.
  26. ↑ Reiman, Jeffrey; Leighton, Paul (2015-10-16). The Rich Get Richer and the Poor Get Prison: A Reader (2-downloads) (0 ed.). Routledge. doi:10.4324/9781315662848. ISBN   978-1-315-66284-8. S2CID   56108075.
  27. ↑ Shantz, Jeff (2012-10-29). "Radical Criminology - A Manifesto". Radical Criminology (1): 7–17. ISSN   1929-7912.
  28. 1 2 Bernard, Thomas J. (1981). "The Distinction between Conflict and Radical Criminology". The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology. 72 (1): 362–379. doi:10.2307/1142914. ISSN   0091-4169. JSTOR   1142914.
  29. ↑ Sparks, Richard F. (January 1980). "A Critique of Marxist Criminology". Crime and Justice. 2: 159–210. doi:10.1086/449069. ISSN   0192-3234. S2CID   144634601.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.