Criminology and animality: stupidity and the anthropological machine

Although a relatively small, yet growing group of scholars have been lamenting the exclusion of nonhuman animals from the scope of criminology for over thirty years now, animals have been historically present in criminological theorizing, legal practices, and research. However, this presence has not been of the form advocated for by scholars who variously identify themselves as non-speciesist criminologists, green criminologists, or ecological criminologists, who have been arguing largely for recognition of harms perpetrated against animals, or ‘zoological crime’. Instead, the longer history of animals in criminology is as offenders or as prototypes of criminality. In this article, we are concerned with the production – vis-à-vis the anthropological machine – of the ‘stupid’ animal and subhuman within criminology and criminal justice. Guided by the political philosophy of Giorgio Agamben, we trace the animal through criminological thought from the premodern period to Lombroso to contemporary criminological scholarship illustrating how the animal has been (ab)used to shore up the classifications between humans, between humans and animals, and the intelligent and the stupid. We also examine how historically through criminal trials of animals and the feebleminded, criminal justice has played an active role in buttressing these classifications and acting on these classifications to produce bare life, that is, life without form or value.     

Peacemaking Criminology

This is an overview of the work of criminologists that informs how people build trust, safe and social security in the face of violent social differences. The article begins with a story of how the term “peacemaking” came to “criminology.” A theory of peacemaking emerging from this beginning is then stated, including a review of criminological literature that informs the theory. The theory is grounded in a paradigmatic departure from criminology’s tradition—the study of crime and criminality—to proposing instead of studying what replaces human separation with cooperation and mutual trust. This paradigm implies that stories of dispute handling are its most authoritative data, especially stories people tell about their own relations. It also implies new ways of evaluating the fruits of adopting a peacemaking paradigm for learning and living.     

Swedish quantitative criminology in the 1990s: A brief overview

Quantitative criminology research published in Sweden in the 1990s is reviewed and put in the context of major Swedish traditions in quantitative criminological research. Sweden has a strong tradition in sophisticated longitudinal and ecological research which continues into the 1990s. Other traditionally prominent areas of Swedish quantitative research include studies of crime trends, violence, and youth criminality. Traditionally Swedish quantitative criminology has been dominated by studies using official statistics and criminal records as data. In the 1990s there has been a significant upswing in survey studies, motivated partly by an increased interest in questions of etiology and crime prevention. More fundamental research on the causes of crime, including new longitudinal studies, and more evaluations of crime prevention initiatives are needed.     

Women's criminality,criminal women,criminalized women? Questions in and for a feminist perspective

Although the notion of taking gender into account in social analyses has been around for some time, for the large partit has not been taken seriously by criminologists. In this article, Laberge shows how the neglect of women's criminality has been to the detriment of criminological inquiry. Through an examination of the questions usually asked about women in contact with the penal system, the author takes us beyond an ‘additive’ approach to explaining crime. Reorganizing these questions, she outlines a number of analytical distinctions that will transform our understanding of criminalized women, specifically, and criminological inquiry, generally.     

The importance of recidivism research in understanding criminal behavior

Robert Martinson believes that a new epoch in criminology research has arrived, “the essence of which is a change in the dependent variable from recidivism to crime rate (combined with cost).” However, no study or evaluation should be discounted simply because it measures recidivism as a parameter of criminality. If adhered to, the Martinson thesis could retard scientific inquiry and clog the normal processes of data generation and theory construction. The new epoch of criminology research will involve the construction and testing of higher-order theories derived from more basic facts and empirical generalizations.     

“Delinquent Boys”: Toward a New Understanding of “Deviant” and Transgressive Behavior in Gay Men

Cultural criminology suggests that crime, deviance, and transgression are often subcultural in nature. For this reason, cultural criminologists often focus on the simultaneous forces of cultural inclusion and social exclusion when explaining criminal, deviant, or transgressive behaviors. This is a particularly useful bricolage for examining contemporary gay deviance and transgression—behaviors that are perhaps closely linked to (if not directly caused by) the past isolation, marginalization and/or oppression of homosexuals by Western heteronormative societies. It is also useful for understanding behaviors that are the result of marginalization and oppression from other sources, namely, the gay community itself. Using subcultural theories of deviance—such as those favored by cultural criminologists—this article explores a perspective that can be used for exploring certain forms of gay deviance and transgression. First, some of the more ostensible criminological theories that satisfy a prima facie criminological inquiry will be presented and critiqued: labeling and stigma, and resistance to heteronormativity. To these will be added a new and potentially productive way of thinking that takes into consideration rule-breaking as a form of resistance to homonormative norms, values and rules.     

COERCION,SOCIAL SUPPORT,AND CRIME: AN EMERGING THEORETICAL CONSENSUS*

Two themes, coercion and social support, have emerged over the past two decades in criminology that can be used to build a new integrated theory of crime. The authors provide a review of recent theoretical developments in criminology to demonstrate that two interconnected themes provide the basis for a new consensus in theory and crime policy. With some important exceptions, coercion causes crime and social support prevents crime. The authors develop a theory of differential social support and coercion that integrates concepts from a broad range of criminological theories. Implications of this integrated theory for public policy are explored.     

THE UNREPENTANT HORSE‐SLASHER: MORAL INSANITY AND THE ORIGINS OF CRIMINOLOGICAL THOUGHT*

This paper raises questions about the origins, definition and nature of criminological knowledge by seeking to identify the earliest examples of scientific criminological thought. Pushing the story further back in time than previous studies of criminological history, it proposes a way to think about criminology before criminologists—that is, efforts to study crime scientifically before the emergence of specifically criminological discourses and before the formation of the professional specialization of criminologist. The roots of scientific criminological thought lie in late 18th‐ and early 19th‐century discourses on the phenomenon of moral insanity, or uncontrollable, remorseless criminal behavior. Examination of these texts reveals both the origins of criminological knowledge and the birth of idea that crime can be studied scientifically.     

Crime,criminology and human rights: Towards an understanding of state criminality

This paper explores issues related to the analysis of a type of criminality frequently ignored in criminological literature: crimes of the state. It explores the potential of critical criminology to deal with state criminality via investigation of such issues as state interventions, overlapping activities of criminal versus non-criminal organizations and the distinction between individual and state actors. The paper specifically examines state criminality via analysis of the activities of the CIA and FBI in the United States. These activities include methods of surveillance, wiretapping, mail tampering, and the use of agents provocateurs. It also examines issues related to relativity in the definition of terrorism and the use of terrorism by the state. It is argued that, unless criminologists begin to address these issues, criminologists may find themselves in the awkward position of aiding the criminalization of non-criminal peoples around the world.     

Academic criminology: A need for change

An exploratory examination of criminology curricula, scholarly books, professional journals and reports is presented to substantiate the neglect of women in the works of most mainstream criminologists. Recent publications by Leonard (1982) and Schur (1984) suggest that this male view of criminology has distorted our definitions of crime and our responses to victims of male crime. These authors also indicate that the failure to include women in intellectual pursuits of the discipline has resulted in inadequate theories that do not explain women’s behavior and research based on false assumptions about the roles of men and women. While there have been numerous efforts to remedy this neglect of women during the last two decades (e.g., Bowker, 1977, 1980; Cullen, 1983; Reid, 1981, 1982), academic criminology continues to present a predominantly male perspective. In order to hasten the integration of women into the criminological curricula, theories, and research projects, this paper suggests changes in program policies that could be implemented by the leadership in professional associations (American Society of Criminology and Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences) that would encourage research in the area of women and crime as well as enhance the prestige and credibility of scholarship in this area of criminology.     

<Emphasis Type="Italic">Cultural Criminology: An Invitation</Emphasis>… to What?

Since the mid 1990s, a strand of criminology emerged that is concerned with the co-constitution of crime and culture under the general rubric of ‘cultural criminology’. In the titles Cultural Criminology Unleashed and Cultural Criminology: An Invitation, criminologists spearheading this brand of criminology make claims for its originality and its status as a subversive alternative to conventional criminological approaches to studies of crime and deviance. The basis for the ‘new’ cultural criminology is its ostensible ability to account for the culture and subcultures of crime, the criminalization of cultural and subcultural activities, and the politics of criminalization. This paper offers a comparison of cultural criminology to 1960s and 1970s labeling theory to assess whether or not cultural criminology has developed a grammar of critique capable of resolving fundamental contradictions that haunt critical criminology and contesting contemporary administrative criminology. Points of comparison are made through ontological categories of power and criminal identity and a consideration of the epistemological categories of the respective bodies of literature.     

EARNEST A. HOOTON AND THE BIOLOGICAL TRADITION IN AMERICAN CRIMINOLOGY*

Biological explanations shaped criminology at its inception, and today they are reemerging with fresh vigor and increased potential. But many criminologists do not understand how biological theories developed, what they contributed to criminology generally and where they went astray. This paper focuses on the work of Earnest A. Hooton, whose criminological studies, published in 1939, met with decidedly mixed reviews but were nonetheless discussed for decades in criminological textbooks. Information about a now half‐forgotten and misunderstood figure like Hooton, in addition to being useful in and of itself, contributes to the history of criminology as a discipline—a project essential to the field's ultimate maturity. It helps build a history of criminological knowledge.     

The crime of the century? The case for the Holocaust

With the twentieth century now ended the Holocaust is surelya leading contender for the title of ``The Crime of the Century.'Although a massive literature exists on the Holocaust, very littleof this literature has been produced by criminologists. Somereasons for this relative neglect are identified and a case ismade for the claim that criminology can contribute to anunderstanding of the Holocaust and that the Holocaust cancontribute to the development of a more profound criminology. Thispaper draws upon an integrative criminological approach toconstruct a framework for understanding the Holocaust. This multi-disciplinary framework links philosophical, sociolegal,sociological, behavioral and criminological dimensions todiscriminate between unique and non-unique aspects of the Holocaustas a case of genocide and as crime. The paper closes with someobservations on the relevance of the Holocaust for challengesconfronting a twenty-first century criminology.     

Newsmaking criminology: Reflections of the media,intellectuals, and crime

Although academicians in criminology and criminal justice have come to appreciate the importance of the media in constructing ideological images of crime and punishment, apparently they have not considered how to use mass communications for the purposes of informing, interpreting, and altering those images to reflect more realistically the social, political, and economic conditions of crime and social control. Beginning with an analysis of the relationships among the developing political economy of the mass media, intellectuals, and conceptions of crime and justice, this essay introduces a criminological practice that can take advantage of the available opportunities in the production of crime news. I call this practice “newsmaking criminology.” It refers to the conscious efforts of criminologists and others to participate in the presentation of “newsworthy” items about crime and justice.     

Technology, Criminology and Crime Science

Developments in technology have changed the environment of crime, which, in some of its new forms, poses a serious threat to society. At the same time the technologies of crime control are being transformed. If criminology is to respond adequately to this changed environment, it must make radical changes in its mission, its theories and its methodologies, the collective result of which would be to make the discipline more directly relevant to crime control and prevention. This would enhance the effectiveness of these activities and would also open up new and exciting career opportunities for criminologists. If criminology does not change, it will become eclipsed by crime science and will find it increasingly hard to survive – even in the protected environment of universities.     

Private Military Contractors,Crime, and the Terrain of Unaccountability

Criminological research has traditionally attempted to explain the etiological factors of crime and then suggest appropriate controls. More often than not, the foci of this kind of work have remained on “street crime.” Since the 1990s, however, some scholars have turned their attention to the causal factors of corporate crime, state crime, crimes of globalization, supranational crimes, and their various permutations and interconnections. Clearly missing from this literature is the growing phenomenon of private military contractors (PMCs) and the crimogenic culture of and atmosphere within which they operate. Specifically, while the use of PMCs is rapidly growing, the increasing propensity for PMC's crimogenic culture and the unregulated nature of what has become a global industry is rarely studied by social scientists. Further, few criminologists have examined this area of research by applying criminological theory to explain the growth and emergence of PMCs. Our goal is to help fill this gap. Through the process of theory building and refinement we identify factors that facilitate the criminogenic environment within which PMCs operate. Additionally, without attempting to expand explanatory and causal mechanisms, policies aimed at reducing PMC criminality and social justice for their victims cannot be developed. As such, we draw from theoretical developments in state and state‐corporate crime, social disorganization, and anomie literature to shed light on key factors associated with PMCs, namely, the crimogenic atmosphere within which they operate.     

Toward a Victimology of State Crime

State crimes have been studied by criminologists for nearly three decades. While far from stagnant, research and theory in this area of criminology have not developed at the pace one may have expected a decade ago. In an attempt to rejuvenate the study of state crime, we first identify and review the various types of victims and victimizers of state crime identified in the criminological literature. By employing a previously created typology of state crime, we discuss how individuals and groups of individuals can be identified as state crime victims in both domestic and international contexts. We then highlight the common themes involved in the victimizations, and offer six inductively generated propositions intended to facilitate future developments in the victimology of state crime. This revised version was published online in July 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Disappearing act: The representation of corporate crime research in criminological literature

Following the labeling, conflict, and radical movements of the 1960s and 1970s and the attention these perspectives directed toward crimes committed by the powerful, it became commonplace for most criminologists to assume that corporate and white-collar crime received adequate attention in criminological and criminal justice literature. At the same time, corporate and white-collar crime researchers continued to assert that the behaviors they studied remain underrepresented in criminological literature, especially relative to the level of harm these behaviors cause. This article examines these two competing assumptions concerning the prevalence of corporate and white-collar crime literature during the later 1990s by: (1) analyzing the contents of several major criminological and criminal justice journals over a five-year time period; and (2) analyzing the coverage, placement, and integration of white-collar and corporate crime discussions in criminology and criminal justice textbooks. In addition, twenty-one Ph.D. granting criminology departments were polled to determine whether they offered regular and required courses on corporate and white-collar crime. Representativeness was determined through comparisons of the number of journal articles and the number of textbook pages published on white-collar and corporate crime indicators relative to the number of articles and pages published on several other criminological issues. Indicators of and the determination of representativeness are related to indicators of the seriousness (financial costs and level of violence) and impact of corporate and white-collar crime on society compared to the seriousness and impact of street crimes.     

On an entrepreneurial criminology of mass political violence

This article examines an entrepreneurial criminology of mass political violencewithin the broader set of criminological communications on this theme, and identifies some troubling dimensions of the criminological closures on which the enterprise rests. The criminological enterprise over mass political violence testifies to ambitions of external expansion at the expense of other social scientific analyses, that are represented as ill-qualified for the study of this particular object, while evacuating from its conception of criminology intellectual traditions averse to the promotion of criminalization as a means to constitute and respond to troubling events. The normative values advanced in enterprising calls seem to have led to a failure to submit certain assumptions to rigorous intellectual (and political) critique. The result is an analytic conservatism that, perhaps unwittingly, reinforces dominant assumptions about crime, as well as an uncritical adoption of liberal internationalism and western cultural dominance.     

BEYOND ADOLESCENCE‐LIMITED CRIMINOLOGY: CHOOSING OUR FUTURE—THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CRIMINOLOGY 2010 SUTHERLAND ADDRESS*

For over a half century, criminology has been dominated by a paradigm—adolescence‐limited criminology (ALC)—that has privileged the use of self‐report surveys of adolescents to test sociological theories of criminal behavior and has embraced the view that “nothing works” to control crime. Although ALC has created knowledge, opposed injustice, and advanced scholars’ careers, it has outlived its utility. The time has come for criminologists to choose a different future. Thus, a new paradigm is needed that is rooted in life‐course criminology, brings criminologists closer to offenders and to the crime event, prioritizes the organization of knowledge, and produces scientific knowledge that is capable of improving offenders’ lives and reducing crime.