Critical criminology,social justice,and an alternative view of incarceration

Despite its lack of general popularity, critical criminology continues to offer compelling criticism of the dominant paradigm of criminal justice. In this essay, critical criminology is presented along with its principal assertions, theoretical assumptions, and implications for social reform and criminal justice. The author argues that critical criminology provides a valuable theoretical backdrop for the analysis of incarceration, particularly its emergence as a form of local industry. Other developments pertinent to the political economy are also discussed, especially as they pertain to the shaping of patterns of unemployment and imprisonment.     

Criminogenic Cyber-Capitalism: Paul Virilio, Simulation, and the Global Financial Crisis

This essay is a manifesto expounding the relevance of the critical theory of Paul Virilio to critical criminology. I interpret the global credit crisis as a criminogenic ‘event’, explicable in terms of Virilio’s theory of speed-politics. The trans-national space(s) of globalization are inherently criminogenic. ‘Power crime’ is the criminogenic ‘substance’ of global capitalism. Globalization—intensity, extensity, velocity, and impact—equates with cyber-capitalism, which ensures the operational primacy of simulation. Simulation, the fast moving manipulation of post-reality, causes the ‘disappearance of the real’, which underlines the epistemological crisis that attenuates global economic catastrophe. Simulation equates with the ‘logistics of perception’, which manifests itself through both pure war and speed-politics. Simulation and power crime merge on the level of the criminogenic manipulation of reality, resulting in the ‘accident’ of the global credit crisis. Power crime is the criminogenic medium through which the periodic crises of global capitalism will now occur.     

Cultural Criminology and the Politics of Meaning

Cultural criminology focuses on situational, subcultural, and mediated constructions of meaning around issues of crime and crime control. In this sense cultural criminology is designed for critical engagement with the politics of meaning, and for critical intervention into those politics. Yet the broader enterprise of critical criminology engages with the politics of meaning as well; in confronting the power relations of justice and injustice, critical criminologists of all sorts investigate the social and cultural processes by which situations are defined, groups are categorized, and human consequences are understood. The divergence between cultural criminology and other critical criminologies, then, may be defined less by meaning than by the degree of methodological militancy with which meaning is pursued. In any case, this shared concern with the politics of meaning suggests a number of innovations and interventions that cultural criminologists and other critical criminologists might explore.     

AFTER LABELING AND CONFLICT

Criminology will become somewhat more concerned for values in the future hence shifting slightly from the empirical, scientific end of the spectrum toward the normative, philosophical end. This will result from crises in criminal justice. from the “coming crisis in western sociology.” from the effects of “critical criminology” from changes in social science generally. and from broader circumstances of criminology and criminal justice.     

Reassessing the critical metaphor: An optimistic revisionist view

Even while debates still plague, polarize, and personalize some of the discipline's most crucial issues, critical criminologists have managed to overcome, expand, and push beyond the borders that they and others established a decade ago. Nonetheless, doubt and suspicion remain concerning the future and the legitimacy of the perspective, partly because of its nebulous definition. Here we offer a revisionist interpretation and assessment of the critical perspective by arguing that a crisis, if there ever was one, no longer exists, and that it is past time to dispel the siege mentality. We argue that critical criminology is a metaphor still in its infancy, that it remains on the cutting edge of the discipline, and that its practitioners have learned from and contributed to so-called traditional criminology, leaving both areas stronger. By overcoming the fragmentation within diverse critical criminologies, the potential for unification enhances the endeavors of critical science and social action.     

Intersectionality,Rural Criminology,and Re-imaging the Boundaries of Critical Criminology

One of the significant shortcomings of the criminological canon, including its critical strands—feminist, cultural and green—has been its urbancentric bias. In this theoretical model, rural communities are idealised as conforming to the typical small-scale traditional societies based on cohesive organic forms of solidarity and close density acquaintance networks. This article challenges the myth that rural communities are relatively crime free places of ‘moral virtue’ with no need for a closer scrutiny of rural context, rural places, and rural peoples about crime and other social problems. This challenge is likewise woven into the conceptual and empirical narratives of the other articles in this Special Edition, which we argue constitute an important body of innovative work, not just for reinvigorating debates in rural criminology, but also critical criminology. For without a critical perspective of place, the realities of context are too easily overlooked. A new criminology of crime and place will help keep both critical criminology and rural criminology firmly anchored in both the sociological and the criminological imagination. We argue that intersectionality, a framework that resists privileging any particular social structural category of analysis, but is cognisant of the power effects of colonialism, class, race and gender, can provide the theoretical scaffolding to further develop such a project.     

The peripheral core of law and criminology: On postmodern social theory and conceptual integration

Despite significant challenges to some of the ideological underpinnings of the postmodern critique, critical theory building in law and criminology increasingly is subjected to the wholesale advances of this growing, albeit heterodox, school of thought. One greatly underexamined component of postmodern research is a provisional treatment of how its various formulations might suggest alternative approaches to understanding criminal justicians, their research, and their practice. Accordingly this essay assesses core themes (both sociological and epistemological) informing the regard of this perspective for theory construction in law and criminology. Several topics are considered: the social structure of society, role formation, human agency, discourse construction, knowledge or sense making, and social change. Building on Milovanovic's conceptual distinctions between the modernist and the postmodernist projects, the author concludes by speculating on what a model of postmodern conceptual synthesis might encompass, and on how this vision of reality promotes a more humanistic justice than the conventional forms of theoretical integration.     

Critical Criminology Meets Radical Constructivism

Critical criminology and radical constructivism are frequently regarded as an impossible pair—or, at least, as a rather schizophrenic one. This is so, notably, because radical constructivism rests on the (paradoxical) abandonment of what Jean-François Lyotard named méta-récits. It rests on the refusal to distinguish between the phenomenal and the symbolic, and thus implies the complete vanishing of the classical difference between ontology and epistemology. This would consequently deprive criminology (or, more generally, the social sciences) of any anchoring point enabling a critical utterance. The present contribution’s thesis is that, on the contrary, radical constructivism can catalyze critical criminology. Among the possible contributions of a radically constructivist sociology of criminalization, this paper focuses on: its call for a reworking of the concept of social control, which avoids problems related to its contemporary usage; its focus on power and force, in a way which avoids Foucaultian perspectives’ aporetic elements, and problematizes every instance of legitimized authoritarian practices.     

From ‘crime’ to social harm?

Debates around the relationships between criminology and social harm are long-standing. This article sets out some of the key features of current debates between, on the one hand, those who would retain a commitment to ‘crime’ and criminology and those, on the other hand who would abandon criminology for a social harm perspective. To this end, the article begins by highlighting several criticisms of criminology, criticisms raised in particular by a diverse group of critical criminologists over the past 30 to 40 years. While these are hardly new, the rehearsal of these is an important starting point for a discussion of the potential of the development of an alternative discipline. The paper then proposes a number of reasons why a disciplinary approach organised around a notion of social harm may prove to be more productive than has criminology hitherto: that is, may have the potential for greater theoretical coherence and imagination, and for more political progress.     

Intersectional Criminology: Interrogating Identity and Power in Criminological Research and Theory

Intersectional criminology is a theoretical approach that necessitates a critical reflection on the impact of interconnected identities and statuses of individuals and groups in relation to their experiences with crime, the social control of crime, and any crime-related issues. This approach is grounded in intersectionality, a concept developed from the tenets of women of color feminist theory and activism. To demonstrate how intersectionality is useful in criminology, this article reviews a sampling of feminist and critical research conducted on Black girls’ and women’s experiences with crime, victimization, and criminal legal system processes. This research demonstrates the interlaced social impacts of race, gender, femininity/masculinity ideals, sexuality, and socioeconomic class. This article also provides a basis for widely deploying an intersectional approach throughout the field of criminology across all social identities and statuses.     

Critical Criminology, Existential Humanism, and Social Justice: Exploring the Contours of Conceptual Integration

The relationship between critical criminology and social justice has been well documented, but efforts to provide a unified theory of social justice that cuts across and embodies the various strains of critical criminological thought have not been systematically researched. One useful approach for engaging in such a project comes from existential humanism, which draws attention to a number of life themes (e.g., the struggle to be free, being and becoming, redemption) and is compatible with critical criminology's commitment to radical social change. This article provisionally explores the boundaries of theoretical synthesis, mindful of those complex (and thorny) issues upon which successful conceptual integration depends, including definitions, assumptions, domains of inquiry, and modes of integration. This discussion concludes with an outline of the implications of a commentary for the future of critical criminology and for sustainable, meaningful praxis. This revised version was published online in July 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Thinking Critically About Rural Crime: The Influence of William J. Chambliss

William J. Chambliss (Bill) is well-known for his path-breaking theories of lawmaking and for his innovative research on state-organized crime. However, the fact that his study of the original vagrancy laws marked the birth of rural critical criminology has gone unrecognized by criminologists. The main objective of this article is twofold: (1) to show how Bill helped shape contemporary rural critical criminology and (2) to provide suggestions for further critical theoretical and empirical work on rural crime and social control.     

In partial defense of socialist realism

While left realist discourse emerged out of the specific politics of policing in England and Wales, its relative importance for progressive criminology generally has been the subject of much debate. On the one hand, the advocates of left realism have consistently argued that the local crime survey provides an empirical basis for understanding crime patterns and for developing progressive crime control policy. Critics of left realism, on the other hand, have argued that for a variety of reasons, the progressive quality of realist criminology is dubious at best, and reactionary at worst. This paper explores both sides of this debate and argues that while left realism has the potential of making a considerable contribution to the struggle for social justice, that contribution must rest on empirical observation. The paper suggests that while much of the foundation work for left realist literature is grounded in local crime survey data, recent policy recommendations emerging in this literature are not. It is argued that while the local crime survey has potential, there are a number of theoretical and methodological concerns raised by this technology which appear to have remained unexplored within the current debates.The paper begins by challenging Young's conception of the aetiological crisis facing criminology, and argues that the crisis is a definitional one. Ian Taylor's critique of left realism generally, and the Islington Crime Survey (ICS) specifically, is then closely examined in order to assess its validity. It is argued that by imputing his own purposes to the ICS, Taylor's critique is misplaced while the progressive potential that local crime survey technology offers for criminology, both academically and practically, remains unnoticed by him. The section concludes by arguing that a more thoughtful consideration of this line of inquiry leads to the conclusion that while such a technology is of utility, in order for that potential to be realized there are a number of methodological considerations which must be examined.These methodological considerations are then explored. It is argued that if left realism is to distinguish itself from a more conventional approach, local crime surveys must consider the measurement of all moments within the process of crime construction, eliminating the conservative bias inherent in conventional surveys, eliminating the sexist bias inherent in conventional surveys, coping with the sampling error produced by cost effective sampling designs, local versus national surveys, the use of proxy interviews, and the use of in-person interviews as opposed to telephone interviews.The paper concludes by arguing that while modest, the contribution of left realist surveys to the development of progressive criminology and the struggle for social justice is an important one which, if nurtured in a thoughtful way, has the potential for contributing to the demise of the state's monopoly on crime and policing knowledge.     

Teaching critical crimimology and critical justice studies in Canada

This paper explores four problems in relation to teaching critical criminology. First, it argues that use of the label critical criminology is misleading because it sometimes creates the impression that antagonistic theoretical perspectives are similar. Second, it profiles the student audience for criminology courses in Canada, arguing that students in different programmes and with different social backgrounds present instructors with different teaching problems. Third, it reviews some of the more recent criminology and criminal justice texts and suggests that some may not be suitable for students taking their first course in criminology or criminal justice. Fourth, it reviews a particular teaching strategy to deal with various teaching situations and suggests that an interactive, comparative teaching model might be the best method when teaching controversial perspectives. Revision of paper presented to Learned Society Meetings, Quebec City, June, 1989.     

The Coverage of American Indians and Alaskan Natives in Criminal Justice and Criminology Introductory Textbooks

This paper examines the coverage of American Indians and Alaskan Natives (AI/AN) in the most widely read introductory criminal justice and criminology books published between 2004 and 2010. The current research extends upon Young’s (J Crim Justice Educ 1:111–116, 1990) assessment of AI/ANs in criminal justice and criminology introductory textbooks, where he found no mention of AI/ANs. The replication of Young (J Crim Justice Educ 1:111–116, 1990) is especially important because AI/ANs continue to face a wide array of social issues (i.e. substance abuse and poverty), which leads to an overrepresentation of AI/ANs in the criminal justice system. To accomplish this, a content analysis was conducted on thirty-one introductory criminal justice and criminology textbooks to determine whether AI/ANs have received more academic coverage in current textbooks. The findings reveal that introductory criminal justice and criminology textbooks still under represent AI/ANs despite experiencing crime, victimization, and justice related problems.     

The failure of postmodern criminology

Postmodernism has recently washed up on the shores of criminology, and is the subject of considerable theoretical debate. This essay critically assesses some of the most trenchant and relevant components of the theoretical bases for postmodernism, and sketches out their applicability to criminology. It argues that postmodernism can be of little assistance to intellectuals committed to critique and fundamental social change. While postmodernists look down so severely at ‘old-fashioned’ ‘meta-narratives’ like Marxism, it is now they who are falling off the contemporary agenda, because they are dated and theoretically flawed. My main argument is that the theoretical imporverishment of postmodernism creates an obstacle to the development of a truly critical criminology. One of the current challenges of critical criminology is to amplify the critique of postmodern criminology and to reorient the trajectory of critical criminology away from the postmodern detour. The essay explores the historical context of the emergence of postmodernism, the modernist/ postmodernist era, deconstructionism, ‘meta-narratives’, idealism, form and content, fragmentation/pluralism/relativism, absence of progressive praxis, conservatism and Marxism.     

Transformative Feminist Criminology: A Critical Re-thinking of a Discipline

This essay makes the case for a transformative critical feminist criminology, one that explicitly theorizes gender, one that requires a commitment to social justice, and one that must increasingly be global in scope. Key to this re-thinking of a mature field is the need to expand beyond traditional positivist notions of “science,” to embrace core elements of a feminist approach to methodology, notably the epistemological insights gleaned from a new way of thinking about research, methods, and the relationship between the knower and the known. Other key features of contemporary feminist criminology include an explicit commitment to intersectionality, an understanding of the unique positionality of women in the male dominated fields of policing and corrections, a focus on masculinity and the gender gap in serious crime, a critical assessment of corporate media and the demonization of girls and women of color, and a recognition of the importance of girls’ studies as well as women’s studies to the development of a global, critical feminist criminology.     

THE ROLE OF TURNING POINTS IN ESTABLISHING BASELINE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN PEOPLE IN DEVELOPMENTAL AND LIFE‐COURSE CRIMINOLOGY

Turning points, between‐person differences, and within‐person changes have all been linked to desistance from crime. Nevertheless, the means through which between‐person differences are frequently captured in life‐course criminology makes them intertwined with, and perhaps confounded by, turning points in life. We propose that a new way of capturing the between‐person effect—the baseline between‐person difference—could benefit theoretically informed tests of developmental and life‐course issues in criminology. Because they occur at one time point immediately preceding a turning point in life, we demonstrate that baseline between‐person differences establish meaningful theoretical connections to behavior and the way people change over time. By using panel data from the Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative, we estimate models capturing within‐person change and baseline between‐person differences in social bonds (family support) and differential association (peer criminality) at the time of release from prison. The results demonstrate that baseline levels of family support protect people from postrelease substance use but not from crime. Baseline between‐person differences and within‐person changes in peer criminality, however, are robustly related to crime and substance use. Collectively, baseline between‐person differences seem critical for behavior and within‐person change over time, and the results carry implications for reentry‐based policy as well as for theory testing in developmental criminology more broadly.     

Criminology and Human-Animal Violence Research: The Contribution and the Challenge

Using theories concerning human-animal abuse links this paper assesses the role(s) that criminology can play in understanding human-animal relationships. That this is not a one-way process of knowledge transferral is acknowledged with analysis of the contribution that human-animal studies can offer in return. Following a brief outline of human-animal abuse theses the contributions that criminology can play in furthering understandings of, and informing responses to, this phenomenon are discussed. A critique of mainstream approaches towards human-animal abuse links, namely, their conceptualization of animals as tools, is then outlined. The argument that anthropocentric approaches to the study of interhuman violence actually reinforce the forms of oppression which create and maintain such forms of violence in the first place, is then developed. The author concludes that the incorporation of human-animal relationships into criminology offers something in return, i.e. an opportunity to re-think the modernist foundations upon which (traditional) criminology is built.     

Left Out? The coverage of critical perspectives in introductory criminology textbooks, 1990–1999

DeKeseredy and Schwartz have criticized introductory criminology textbooks published in the United States for their ‘poor treatment’ of critical/radical perspectives. This paper subjects this criticism to empirical analysis by studying the coverage of critical perspectives in 34 introductory criminology textbooks published from 1990 to 1999. Specifically, I examine how the coverage of critical perspectives in the textbooks is influenced by: 1) the theoretical orientations of the texts; 2) the positions of the texts on debate over conflict and consensus theories of law; and 3) the positions of the texts on the evidence supporting critical perspectives. This analysis shows that critical/radical perspectives in general, but in particular recent developments in critical criminology (including critical feminism, left realism, peacemaking criminology and postmodern criminology) are often ‘left out’ of contemporary criminology textbooks.