Schumpeter's critique of Marx: A reappraisal

Abstract. The paper provides an account of Marx's position of Schumpeter's three categories: capitalism, socialism and democracy. Marx's conception of capitalism is established as more wide-ranging than sometimes thought, covering any form of society where commodities predominate, and implying a polarized class structure independent of considerations of manual or lowly labour. It is not therefore essentially a political conception, nor does its application turn on the question of private ownership. Socialism, for Marx, involves the abolition of commodities and therefore of money and the wages system. Accordingly, his conception of socialism is not one of state ownership or nationalization, as Schumpeter claims. His commitment to democracy arises from the nature of socialist society and sets him apart from vanguardist political theory. It is therefore more deeply-rooted than Schumpeter suggests.     

THE INTERACTION OF ANTISOCIAL PROPENSITY AND LIFE‐COURSE VARYING PREDICTORS OF DELINQUENT BEHAVIOR: DIFFERENCES BY METHOD OF ESTIMATION AND IMPLICATIONS FOR THEORY*

Recent criminological research has explored the extent to which stable propensity and life‐course perspectives may be integrated to provide a more comprehensive explanation of variation in individual criminal offending. One line of these integrative efforts focuses on the ways that stable individual characteristics may interact with, or modify, the effects of life‐course varying social factors. Given their consistency with the long‐standing view that person–environment interactions contribute to variation in human social behavior, these theoretical integration attempts have great intuitive appeal. However, a review of past criminological research suggests that conceptual and empirical complexities have, so far, somewhat dampened the development of a coherent theoretical understanding of the nature of interaction effects between stable individual antisocial propensity and time‐varying social variables. In this study, we outline and empirically assess several of the sometimes conflicting hypotheses regarding the ways that antisocial propensity moderates the influence of time‐varying social factors on delinquent offending. Unlike some prior studies, however, we explicitly measure the interactive effects of stable antisocial propensity and time‐varying measures of selected social variables on changes in delinquent offending. In addition, drawing on recent research that suggests that the relative ubiquity of interaction effects in past studies may be partly from the poorly suited application of linear statistical models to delinquency data, we alternatively test our interaction hypotheses using least‐squares and tobit estimation frameworks. Our findings suggest that method of estimation matters, with interaction effects appearing readily in the former but not in the latter. The implications of these findings for future conceptual and empirical work on stable propensity/time‐varying social variable interaction effects are discussed.     

TREATMENT OF DELINQUENT YOUTH:

This article examines the relative influences of the juvenile probation officer's perceptions of self and work on his or her opinions of delinquency and decisions made about juveniles. Self-administered questionnaires were completed by 255 juvenile probation officers. Results indicate that the officer who is treatment-service oriented is less likely to label juvenile acts delinquent than the officer who responds to lawyer role models. Officers who make rehabilitative recommendations are less likely to label acts delinquent than those who do not. The independent variables accounted for a rural of 21.3% of the variance in the dependent variable, the officer's perception of treatment.     

YOUNG GUNS: EXAMINING ALTERNATIVE EXPLANATIONS OF JUVENILE FIREARM HOMICIDE RATES*

In recent years, youth firearm homicide has become a topic of great public concern in the United States. However, few macrolevel studies have examined intercity variation in juvenile firearm homicide. In the current study, we address this gap in the literature by examining whether intercity variation in firearm‐related homicide rates among black and white juveniles is explained by three prominent structural factors: concentrated disadvantage, racial inequality, and the youth illicit drug market activity. Our findings suggest partial support for the concentrated disadvantage and juvenile drug market explanations of homicide. However, contrary to expectations, these relationships are only significant in models for white juveniles.