NEO - MARXIST THEORIES OF CRIME AND DEVIANCE

Neo- Marxism - critical criminology

Combines Marxist and Interactionist approaches - macro (marxist) and micro
(interactionism) views
- Criminality occurs through the social structure
- Those with less power are more likely to be identified as a criminal
- Process of labelling + reasons behind inequality
- Approaches are also called radical criminology
- the approach tarts with marxistideas but says it's far too simplistic as there are
wider cultural factors which lead to recidivism (re-committing crime)

Context - UK in the 1970s

- described as the gloomiest period during WWII
- high unemployment
- winter of discontent 1978/79
- poor economy
- wages didn’t rise and prices did
- britain’s economic crisis

The New Criminology by Taylor, Walton and Young (1973)

● Taylor et al. agree with traditional Marxists that:
➔ Capitalist society is based on exploitation and class conflict and
characterised by inequalities of wealth and power.
➔ The state makes and enforces laws in the interests of the capitalist class
(RC) and criminalises members of the WC
➔ Capitalism should be replaced by a classless society which would reduce
the extent of crime or even rid society of crime entirely.
● However the views of Taylor et al also differ significantly from those of
traditional Marxists.

● Crime is a meaningful action and conscious choice

● WC criminals are like ‘ROBIN HOOD’ figures
● Their view of WC criminals is one of ‘people fighting back’

Anti-determinism
● Taylor et al argue that traditional Marxism is deterministic. They reject theories
that claim crime is caused by external factors such as subcultures
● Instead of being driven to crime by economic necessity, see crime as a
voluntary act - but often politically motivated
● The WC are not puppets of capitalism, but agents of its change
● Taylor et al share with traditional Marxism the goal of a classless socialist
society and social equality, but they also emphasise the importance of
individual liberty and diversity.
 ➔ They argue that individuals should not be labelled deviant just because
they are different, as in capitalist society - instead, they should be free to
live their lives as they wish

Hall ‘Policing of the Crisis’

● When Thatcher was in power, she changed the official definition of
unemployment and removed people who were actively seeking for
employment, and so unemployment statistics dropped significantly- shows how
official statistics are a social construct
● Society’s reaction to certain forms of deviance creates a moral panic
- In the 1970s a moral panic happened inBritain
- ‘Mugging’ incidents were repeatedly reported in1972
- dOES NOT ACTUALLY EXIST AS A CRIME
- Associated ith black males
- Reaction to muggingby trge Btishwas extreme

Crime and the reaction to ity, needs t be fully understood by adding the historical and
societal context to it(social and economic conditions of the UK at the time)
- 1970s a time of economic crisis UK e.g.strikes, discontent and protests
- ‘Black mugger’ scapegoated for the social problems

A fully social theory of deviance

● Taylor et al aim to create a ‘fully social theory of deviance’ - a comprehensive
understanding of crime and deviance that would help to change society for the
better. This theory would have two main sources:
➔ Traditional Marxist views on the unequal distribution of wealth and the
power to enforce the law
➔ Ideas from the interactionism and labelling theory of the meaning of the
deviant act for the actor and society and what effect this has on the
individual.

1. The wider origins of the deviant act - the unequal distribution of wealth and
power in capitalist society
2. The immediate origins of the deviant act - the particular context in which the
individual decides to commit the act
3. The act itself and its meaning for the actor - e.g was it a form of rebellion
against capitalism?
4. The immediate origins of social reaction - the reactions of those around the
deviant e.g. police and community, to discovering the deviance
5. The wider origins of social reaction in the structure of capitalist society -
especially the issue of who has the power to define actions as deviant and why
some acts are treated more harshly than others
6. The effect of labelling on the deviant’s future actions - e.g. why does
labelling lead to deviance amplification in some cases but not others?

Evaluation of Neo-Marxism
 ● Feminists criticise it for being ‘gender-blind’, focusing excessively on male
criminality and at the expense of female criminality.
● Left realists criticise Neo-Marxists in two ways:
1. Firstly, critical criminology romanticises WC criminals as ‘Robin
Hoods’ who are fighting capitalism by redistributing wealth. However in
reality these criminals simply prey on the poor.
2. Secondly Taylor et al do not take such crime seriously and they ignore
its effects on WC victims
● Burke (2005) argues that critical criminology is both too general to explain
crime and too idealistic to be useful in tackling crime.
● However Stuart Hall et al (1978) have applied Taylor et al’s approach to
explain the moral panic over mugging in the 1970s.

Outline and evaluate radical criminological explanations of crime and

deviance in society. [40]

A01s

i. Taylor, Walton and Young (1972) The New Criminology

Hall et al (1978) Policing the Crisis

● Stuart Hall carried out his study Policing the Crisis in which he
investigated black muggings in the UK in the 1970s. He concluded that a
moral panic was deliberately created in order to divide the working class
and encourage people to blame immigrants and black people for
unemployment rather than blame capitalism and the ruling class.
- Reaction to mugging by the British was extreme
- 1970s a time of economic crisis UK e.g. strikes, discontent and
protests
- ‘Black mugger’ scapegoated for the social problems
- Does not actually exist as a crime
- Associated with black males
● Crime and the reaction to it needs to be fully understood by adding the
historical and societal context to it
● Taylor argued that what was missing from Traditional Marxist conflict
theory was an element of labelling theory to understand the meaning of
the label ‘criminal’ to a criminal.
A03 i)
Evaluation of Taylor, Walton and Young
● Feminist criticise Taylor et al’s approach for being ‘gender blind’,
focussing excessively on male criminality and at the expense of female
criminality.
● Left realists make two related points:
- Firstly, this approach romanticises working class criminals as
‘Robin Hoods’ who are fighting capitalism by redistributing wealth
from the rich to the poor. (crime in the working classes is normally
inter-class meaning working class people target working class, so
there is no ‘redistribution’. )
- Secondly, Taylor et al do not take such crime seriously and they
ignore its effects on working class victims. ( Burke argues that this
theory is both too general in explaining and tackling crime,
therefore not useful. )
● This cannot explain MC crime, people who live in the system and work it
for their benefit would not actively try to destroy it

● it is difficult to imagine a political motive underpinning crimes such as

murder, rape, child abuse and domestic violence.
● Also, most victims of working-class crime and black crime are themselves
working class and black respectively rather than the middle-class or
upper-class. Neo-Marxism, therefore, can be dismissed as overly
romantic and as having little credibility.

● Downes and Rock believe that Policing the Crisis fails to show that the
moral panic over ‘mugging’ was caused by the crisis of British capitalism
● Jock Young argues that Stuart Hall’s study is flawed as people at that
time were not actually panicking about ‘mugging’. However, he argues
that it would have been quite rational if the public were concerned
about ‘mugging’ and other types of street crime.

ii. Hall and Jefferson (CCCS)

● Marxist Subcultural theory a specific explanation for the existence of
subcultures amongst the working class
● Each subculture was an expression of resistance against capitalist society
and the class inequalities affecting their lives
● The clothes they wear and the language they use show their disdain of
capitalism and their awareness of their position in it
● Brake (1980) argues that this resistance, however, is best seen as
'magical’; a form of illusion that appears to solve their problems, but in
reality does no such thing
● Each generation of working-class youth face similar problems (dead-end
 jobs, unemployment, and so on), but in different circumstances – society
changes constantly; every generation experiences a very different world,
with the one constant being that the majority will be exploited by the
ruling class
● Each generation expresses its resistance through different choice of
clothes, argot (slang and patterns of speech), music, and so on
● But each will eventually be trapped like their parents before them

A03 ii)
● Jefferson argues that subcultures such as punks and skinheads, dress in a
certain way as a rebellion act against capitalism. However, critics would
argue this is not the case. Their dress code is not a conscious act of
rebellion.
In the long run, it isn’t these behaviours that impact one’s life, it is societal
reactions which can lead to a negative view
● Lemert, an interactionist focuses on societal reactions to deviance
● Primary deviance - how people are labelled and perceived before they
commit an act
- Societal reactions afterwards, determine whether it was deviant
or not
OR
● Functionalism or Cohen
Perhaps use Lemert as a supporting study
iii. Gilroy (1980s) The Myth of Black Criminality (pg. 88)

● Paul Gilroy has been linked to New Criminology and is sometimes

referred to as a ‘Left idealist’ (an idealist is who looks at the whole of
society) for his suggestion that black crime is politically motivated
● He sees black crime as a justified and legitimate response to a white
racist society
● This shows crime as a legacy of the colonial struggle and as an active
response
● Gilroy rejected the view that Blacks’ resorted to crime due to poor
socialisation,
● he said it was a result of ethnic minorities defending themselves against
an unjust society
● Gilroy saw the resultant riots in Toxteth and Southall in 1981 as political
acts – this links well to Taylor et al’s point
 ● The riots did remove of the ‘sus’ laws brought in by 1970s ‘muggings

A03 iii) Lea and Young (ethnicity - left realist)

● Criticises Gilroy for romanticising the working class criminals.
● First generation immigrants were actually very law-abiding citizens and
as such did not resist against the colony of Britain and were less likely to
pass this anti-colonial stance to their kids.
● Most crime is against other people of the same ethnic group and so
cannot be seen as resistance to racism.

iv. Chambliss (1973) The Saints and the Roughnecks

● Observation of 2 high school gangs
● There was a difference in public perception of the boys’ deviant
behaviour
- Saints – white upper middle class
- Roughnecks – lower class backgrounds
● Rate of delinquency was similar

● Saints got away with behaviour due to selective perception and

invisibility
● The ‘selective perception and labelling…means that visible, poor, non
mobile, outspoken ‘tough’ kids will be noticed more by the police. Kids
from middle/upper class backgrounds who have established a
reputation for being bright, disciplined and involved in respectable
activities who have money, will be invisible when they deviate from
sanctioned activities.
● Chambliss discovered that the boys’ social class had much to do with the
public’s perception of them and the ways the public perceived their acts
of deviance. He also hypothesized that a deviant label can become a
self-fulfilling prophecy. The Roughnecks had heard for so long that they
were never going to amount to much that they behaved in accordance
with the negative expectations others had of them.

A03 iv)
● Subcultural theories may disagree with this view and state that it is not
really the public’s perception of the Roughnecks, that led them lead a
life of crime, but it was because of the inequalities in opportunities
 - Cohen looks at delinquent subcultures and how working class
boys feel status frustration about being blocked by deprivation in
terms of gaining legitimate goals.
- This theory argues that the reason there are higher proportions of
WC boys who are deviant is because they form together in groups
to find status, turning the dominant values on their head and
doing the opposite as it's the only way to gain.
- For example, Cohen suggests that they have an alternative status
hierarchy, valuing disrespect for others property and people
above the norms of respect in wider society. This way Cohen
explains why there is deviance like graffiti and vandalism as it is a
form of gaining status illegitimately.

OR
Merton’s strain theory

A01 A03

Taylor, Walton & Young saw crime as a

reaction of the powerless to injustice,
exploitation and alienation