| Abstract: | It has been said that critical criminology is in a state of crisis The author contends that the theoretical roots of this crisis lie in the failure of critical criminology to come to terms with the interactionist tradition from within which it developed. He shows how the traditional critical-Marxist critiques of interactionism have failed to comprehend the substance of this approach. Such substance is rooted in the social philosophy of pragmatism, especially in the thought of Mead, and in the reality of 20th-century social relationships The author proposes that the renewed critical criminology should be based in a grounded labeling theory which is able to foster consideration of both practical and discursive forms of interaction. |
