SCLY4 Crime and Deviance

Revision Cards 2014

1

The specification at a glance

2

Different theories of crime, deviance,social orderand social control.• Consensus theories vs

Conflict theories• Functionalism• Ecological• Subcultural• New Right/Control• Marxism• Neo-Marxism• Labelling

The social distribution of crime and deviance:• Age• Ethnicity• Gender,• Locality• Social class

Globalisation and crime in contemporary society;• the mass media and

crime• Globalisation and crime• Green crime• Human rights and state

crimes.

Crime control, prevention and punishment,victims, and the role of the criminal justice systemand other agencies• Policing and the courts• Crime prevention• Punishment (inc.

Prisons)• Victimology

The sociological study of suicide• Studies of suicide• Theoretical and

methodological implications

The connections between sociological theory andmethods and the study of crime and deviance.• Measuring crime (stats

etc)• Methods in Context

Contents1. Theories of Crime and Deviance2. Gender and crime3. Age and Crime4. Ethnicity and Crime5. Social class and crime6. Area and Crime7. Mass Media and Crime8. Globalisation and Crime9. Policing and Courts10. Crime Prevention11. Punishment12. Victimology13. Suicide14. Measuring crime (usefulness of statistics) 3

Consensus Theories Conflict Theories

Functionalist

Subcultural

Ecological

New Right/Control Theory

Marxist

Neo-Marxist

Feminist

Anti-Racist Sociology

Labelling

• Harmony • Social control and socialisation• Community• Shared values• Police/courts/media fulfil a

positive function• Trust crime statistics• Blame ‘criminal’

• Conflict• Social control and ideology• Police/courts/media serve the

powerful• Crime is socially constructed/

distrust statistics• Blame ‘society’

1. Theories of Crime and Deviance

4

For each theory ask….

• What influences our definition of deviance/crime?

• What is the cause of crime and deviance?

• Who are likely to commit crime and deviance?

• What is social order based upon?

5

CONSENSUS THEORIES

6

7

CONSENSUS THEORIES – at a glance

Functionalism

Subcultural Ecological New Right/Control

Functions of deviance• Shared values• Test boundaries• Punishment

unifies• Social rules =

clear

Anomie

Strengthen community

Strain theory

Alternative values

Delinquency

Status frustration

Self-esteem/rebellion

Illegitimate Opportunity Structure

Focal concerns

Urban areas

Lack of community

Disorganisation

Zone of transition

Informal social control

Differential association

Sink estates

Tipping

Nocturnal economy

Underclass

Moral decay

Welfare dependency

‘broken windows’

Families without fatherhood

Community decline

Cost-benefit analysis

Attachments/bonds

Communitarianism

Poor socialisation

8

Studies Evaluation

Functionalist Durkheim Functions of deviance• Reinforces solidarity/commitment to

shared values• Punishment unifies community• Social rules = clear• Singles out undesirables• Boundaries reinforces/tested =

changeDysfunctions• Crime is threat to social order• Anomie – normlessness = deviance Causes of crime• Anomie from rapid social change• Boundaries unclear/uncertaintySocial order & social control• Consensus = shared values = order• Social control = socialisation =

cohesion = integration = community• Institutions restrict deviant behaviour

Merton• Strain theory (goals and means)• Anomie = strain between

goals/means• American Dream = pressure• 5 responses to anomie (eg,

innovation)

Durkheim• What is the right amount of crime? (not

scientific)• Would victims find crime beneficial?• Does not explain why certain commit

crime (and what crimes they choose to do)

• Assume that laws reflect the interests of all in society (ignores power/ideology)

• Tends to ‘blame’ the deviant Merton• How can ‘anomie’ be measured? (not

scientific)• Where do goals/means come from? (he

ignores role of capitalism)• Ignores subcultures driving the choice of

individuals• Doesn’t explain crimes that are not

driven by ‘economic goal’

General• Ignore conflict in society (and power)• Values are manipulated by the ruling class• Laws are biased and serve the powerful• Ignores crimes of the powerful• Ignores group nature of crime• Ignores selective policing/bias in the

criminal justice system• Ignore how the media can create crime

9

Studies Evaluation

Subcultural(Functionalist)

Albert Cohen• 1950s USA – juvenile delinquency• Working class youths – socialised into

‘alternative’ norms and values• Caused by status frustration &

blocked opportunities = sense of failure

• Rejection of mainstream values• No monetary gain crime – vandalism

and fighting• Gained status & rebellion

Cloward & Ohlin• Illegitimate opportunity structure• Career ladder – opportunities/status• 3 structures (criminal/conflict

/retreatist)• Criminal subculture – working class

areas/networks/role models etc

Miller• Lower class values – socialisation into

these ‘focal concerns’• Focal concerns –

smartness/toughness/ excitement/fatalism etc

• A source of status/self-esteem

• Most working class boys do not commit crime

• They ignore female deviance

• Ignore middle class subcultures

• Ignore crimes of the powerful

• Most youths grow out of it

• Assume working class youth are raised in a vacuum and cut off from wider society/values

• They ignore labelling/biased policing

• Deterministic – ignore free will

• Accept crime statistics as true

• Matza notes how subcultural membership is transitory

10

Studies Evaluation

Ecological • Urban areas = high crime rate• City centre = less cohesion/ommunity• Normlessness = anomie• Social control is limited (informal)

Shaw & McKay• Neighbourhoods/zones• Zones have distinct cultures/values• Zone of transition = ‘twilight zone’ – inner

city (cheap rented housing, poverty, high immigration, transitory population) = No bonds…crime!

• Social disorganisation = no sense of community – unstable..no controls

• Subculture = cultural transmission• Shaped by people around them

(differential association – Sutherland)

Marshall• Sink estates in UK = crime

Baldwin & Bottoms• Tipping – problem families onto certain

estates• Morris – Found similar results when problem

families concentrated in area (diff. assoc.)• Skogan (USA) – noted public space and

disorder there..decline of neighbourhood

Hobbs• Nocturnal economy – city centres-

pubs/clubs..expansion..more chance of criminal activity there

• Which comes first? (crime or social disorganisation)?

• Most people in these areas do not commit crime

• Ignores white collar crime by wealthy people in suburbs

• It may be that in urban areas there is a high concentration of young, deprived people…rather than area

• Most youth crime is transitory..not permanent/fixed

• Maybe urban areas are policed more and crime figures reflect the fact they are over-policed

• Some areas are treated as ‘problem areas’ by councils/police

• Ignores ‘gentrification’ of cities in recent years, ie) Yuppie flats etc

• Ignores strong sense of community on working class estates

11

Studies Evaluation

New Right/ Control Theory

- Underclass theory

- Rational choice theory

- Control theory

• Fears of moral decay• Desire for greater control of people

who harm normal society• Critical of welfare state

Murray• Underclass reject mainstream norms

and values• Dependency culture• Rise of single parents – lack of

discipline/no father figure/ poor socialisation/instability

• Families without fatherhood (Dennis)• Communities damaged – no bonds -

‘good people’ move away

Wilson (Broken Windows)• Communities need informal soc. Cont.

to reglate deviance• Cost-benefit analysis = less chance of

getting caught/no fear punishment

Etzioni• Government is disempowering

communities

Hirschi• Low attachments = high crime• Bonds

(attachment/commitment/belief/ involvement

• Family = vital for socialisation

• Marxists are critical as the right use this theory to justify inequality

• Contradiction – belief in selfish interests and community

• Most working class citizen are moral even though struggling in poverty

• Ignores middle class crime• Ignores how the powerful

manipulate society to control poor• Attack on single parents• Ethnocentricism – bias

12

Norman Dennis - ‘Families without Fatherhood’ (1993)Trends

• 30 years = family changes = weakened • Decline of the traditional family• Rise in cohabitation and decline of marriage

Issue• Family/community used to be a form of social control• They used to restrict the extremes behaviour of youth• People today struggle with ‘inner policeman’

Crime related to:1. Changing role of women = fathers now marginal2. Fathers leaving families = no role model/discipline3. Cohabitation = no moral fabric…values/morals are relative

Farrington & West - 1990Findings• Study – Cambridge – Longitudinal study (1953-1990)• 1/3 of 411 boys = offenders by age 25

Delinquency linked to:• Types of family linked to crime• Poor parenting • Fathers had criminal records• Poverty & single parenthood

CONFLICT THEORIES

13

14

CONFLICT THEORIES – at a glance

Traditional Marxism

Neo-Marxism Labelling

• Criminogenic capitalism

• Laws serve ruling class

• Ideological role of law/social control

• White collar crime

• Selective law enforcement

• Crisis of hegemony

• Symbolic resistance

• CCCS (Marxist Subcultural theory)

• Fully social theory of deviance

• Selective policing

15

Studies Evaluation

TraditionalMarxist Theories

• Society shaped by economic base• Capitalist class exploit working class• Society is based on conflict – inequality and

power central to crime an deviance• Laws serve the powerful – ideological

Law serves ruling class• R/C control laws• Law enforcement benefits R/C• Chambliss – protect private property –

business interest = profits (tax loopholes/Vagrancy laws)

• Snider – serve business – state avoids tighter laws on pollution/Safety etc

Law as ideology & social control• Althusser – Ideological State App.• Law (and crime) is defined by R/C• Crime is seen as blood on streets & w/c

White collar crime• Crimes of the powerful (see next slide)

Criminogenic Capitalism• Crime is normal under capitalism =

greed/competition (Gordon)• Poverty is created by capitalism =

frustration/alienation

Selective Law enforcement• Reiman – w/c crime most pursued• Gordon – selective policing feeds stereotype

and divides w/c

• Not all laws are just serving R/C – many benefit workers

• Laws reflect value consensus

• Too deterministic – ignores power of SFP

• High crime rates in socialist countries

• Ignore the importance of values/culture and socialisation in criminality

• Ignores individual motivation

• Ignores gender/ethnic inequality

• Not all w/c people commit crime

• Left-Realists not how this focuses too much on crimes of the powerful

• Laws can act against the R/C

16

White-Collar Crime

What is it?

• Middle class crime – by people of ‘high social status/ respectability’ (Sutherland)

• Corporate crimes (business)• White collar (employees)

Types

• Employee theft• Fraud• Computer crime• Tax fraud• Crimes against consumers• Crimes against employees

Level of harm

• 20 times more harmful than street crime (Snider)

• Harm from faulty goods/safety infringements/pollution etc

• Fraud – far greater than burglary, mugging, theft (millions) (Levi)

Why hard to detect/police?(Croall)

• Invisibility• Hard to isolate blame• No direct victim• Law is ambiguous/grey area• Consumers don’t report – trivial• Policed by inspections (not

police) – warnings/fines..not conviction!

• Technical knowledge/complex ahead of police skill set

METHODS ISSUEWhite collar crime is very hard to investigate due to its invisible nature!

17

Studies Evaluation

Neo-Marxist Theories (1)

New Criminology (1973)

Taylor, Walton & Young (1973)• Blended Marxism and Labelling• See Trad. Marxism as deterministic• Working class have choice• Fully social theory of deviance

which looks at structure and individual

• Marxist Subcultural Theory (see next slide)

Ethnicity & Crime studies• Gilroy – ‘black youth crime’ in 1970s

= political response to racism/oppression

• Selective policing – racist• Hall - 1970s economic crisis = and a

crisis of hegemony = scapegoating of black youths for problems = moral panic ‘mugging scare’

(see ethnicity and crime slide also)

• Ignore female criminality

• Romanticises w/c criminal as a Robin Hood ‘stealing from the rich’ (but left realists note their main victims are also working class/the poor)

• They ignore the ‘seriousness’ of these crimes on w/c victims

• Now described as ‘Left Idealism’ as it was over-optimistic about the oppressed and their ability to exploit the ‘crisis of hegemony’ and find a true class consciousness

Wider origins of act, immediate origins of act, the act itself, immediate origins of societal reaction, wider origins of societal reaction, effects of labelling

Look back at your notes on GRAMSCI• Hegemony• Humanistic Marxism• Voluntarism

18

Subcultural Theories – Brief comparison

Functionalist Marxist Labelling• CCCS (Birmingham Uni 1970s)• Youth subcultures linked within

a wider structural context• Crisis in hegemony = working

class youths see through R/C hegemony

• Working class youths find ‘magical solutions’ to their oppression…resistance through rituals (Stuart Hall/Dick Hebdige)

• Symbolic resistance expressed through subcultures

• Stealing signs and distorting their meaning (subcultural bricolage)

Cohen • Skinheads – ultra w/c symbols

as a response to destruction of working class communities in 60s

Hebdige• Punk – nihilistic/shock collaging

of symbols and distorted meanings

Hall• Rastas/Rudies – challenges to

racist Babylon

19

Studies Evaluation

Neo-Marxist Theories (2)

Also see ‘Realism’ cards later on with focus on crime policy/solutions

New Left Realism (1984)

• British Crime Survey 1983 = poor and marginal = main victims of crime (not the rich/powerful – “sack Robin Hood!”

• UK riots 1981 • Crime = a REAL problem• Main criminals = working class/Afro-

Caribbean youths

Lea & Young – 3 factors

Relative deprivation• Feel deprived compared to others• Advertising/consumerism = pressure• Lack of means to reach goals =

frustration• Growth of ‘self-interest which

undermine family values/communitySubculture• Collective solutions to a group’s

problems• Anti-mainstream values/culture as

rejected by wider society• Develop a way of life = street crimeMarginality• Groups – lack power – no voice• Violence = political action• Hostility with police/authority

• Too much focus on w/c crime – ignores white collar crime and its level of harm

• Over reliance on statistical data

• Seem to have too much faith in the police as ‘neutral’

• What’s so new? – Merton/Cohen

• What’s so left? – anti-w/c

• Underplay the role of the media in influencing police

• Ignores the labelling process and its effect..need to use more qualitative data to explore motives

• Deterministic = not everyone who experience relative poverty = criminal

• Too much focus on ‘urban’ crime in inner cities = makes it seem a greater problem

20

Right Realism Left Realism

Comparing ‘Realist Theories’ of Crime & Deviance

21

Studies Evaluation

LabellingTheories (1)

Note how these differ to ‘structural theories’ as they focus on interaction/social constructionism

• Distrust official stats on crime

• Police not neutral• Use qualitative

methods (ethnographic)

• Committed sociology

• Society ‘creates’ deviance – social constructionism

They do not discuss economic matters (capitalism)

• Origins – Chicago School ‘symbolic interactionism’ and later phenomenology

• Thinkers – Becker/Goffman/Cicourel/Lemert

Deviance as relative• Normal/deviant are defined by society – not

fixed• Becker ‘deviant behaviour is behaviour so

labelled’• Who controls definitions? (not the underdog)

Social construction of deviance• Becker – society applies this label to certain

groups..defines their actions as deviant = create outsiders

• Labels = stereotypes• Selective policing of W/C, youths, males• Greater surveillance of powerless groups• ‘seek and ye shall find’

• Becker – M/C negotiate with police more• Lambert – policing w/c estates in UK• Cicourel – stereotyping in courtrooms• Kalven & Zaesel – chivalry thesis (females)

Effects of labelling• Self concept shaped (Cooley) = SFP• Primary & secondary deviance (Lemert)• Stigmatisation & societal reaction = increases• Label = master status (Becker) = identity• Rejection = outsider = join deviant subculture• Goffman ‘deviant career’ – learn culture –

deeper• Young – hippy marijuana users – drug use more

important after police sensitisation and negative societal reaction to hippies…defined as ‘junkies’

• Over romantic – ‘too committed’ and see criminal as not so bad

• Too much focus on exotic and bizarre deviance (drugs use etc)

• Ignores origins of deviant acts

• There is absolute deviance

• Labelling is too deterministic – simplistic – one direction

• Deviants can adopt identity without being labelled

• Where do the stereotypes come from and why do the police use some and not others

• Out of date –police today are trained to not be prejudiced

• They ignore economic power and the nature of capitalism in deviance

• Ignore women in researchCooley‘looking glass self’

22

Studies Evaluation

LabellingTheories (2)

Deviance Amplification• This is how efforts to control/limit deviance =

create more deviance• Look back at Lemert – secondary deviance

grows after sensitisation & societal reaction

Stan Cohen – Folk Devils & Moral Panics (1972)• Role of media in ‘amplifying’ deviance• Newspaper reporting of ‘mods and rockers’

fighting and how it created more deviance• Youths (folk devils) and media promoted a

(moral panic) surrounding them…needed a solution!

• Media exaggerated the problem = public concern (sensitisation & societal reaction)

• Moral entrepreneurs – magistrates/police/local council wanted to ‘stamp it out’ = more concern

• More arrests and convictions• Demonising mods/rockers (folk devils) =

marginalisation = affected their identity/self concept - ‘fighting was normalised’

• Media = key role in causing public fear/concern about certain groups (immigrants/single mums etc)

Rule creation• Becker - Laws = relative = serve interests of

minority - conservative• Moral entrepreneurs – campaign to change law

to serve their interests/values• Use of media to stir ‘moral crusades’ to

influence the public’s view and law makers• The underdog has very little say in the process –

driven by powerful minority, eg) Marijuana Tax Act 1937 – Reefer Madness campaign

Includes:• What is globalisation?• The extent of the global crime economy• Globalisation and :risk consciousness, capitalism and

organisation• Green crime• Human rights and state crimes

7. Globalisation and Crime

23

Think about:

Power, harm and interconnectednessCrimes of the powerful

• Nation states/large corporations power

• Cause major harm• Hidden crime• Unpunished crime

Zemiology

• Beyond traditional criminology

• How crime is defined• The study of harm

Crimes without frontiers

• Beyond national boundaries

• Global connections = more opportunities

24

How to focus on this topic..• Globalisation is a ‘game-changer’ for the study of crime

• Globalisation = new forms of crime/new opportunities

• Global crime = a challenge for ‘nation-states’ and law making/jurisdiction (hard to police)

• Global crimes by powerful groups = able to define laws (to serve selves), able to hide crimes, able to escape punishment

• Global crimes = high level of harm/damage (to environment or to citizens)

You can use these as strands to return to again and again in your analysis of them.

These revision cards try to focus on these strands for you.

25

The extent of Global crimeWhat is globalisation?• The increasing interconnectedness of

societies

• ‘the widening, deepening and speeding up of world wide interconnectedness’ (Held)

• causes: global media, cheap travel, ICT, migration, business links

• Crime across national borders

The level of Global crime• Manuel Castells – global crime

economy = £1 trillion per year

• Arms trafficking• Trafficking nuclear materials• People smuggling/illegal immigrants• Prostitution/slavery• Sex tourism• Cyber crimes (fraud/pornography)• Terrorism• Green crime• Drugs trade• Money laundering

Global risk consciousness (Beck)

• Fears of harm/need protection• Media exaggeration/moral panics• Immigration worries (welfare/jobs)• Led to tighter border controls• 9/11 terrorism and consequences

Capitalism and crime

• Ian Taylor – greater inequality = crime• Businesses (TNCs) switch to low-

wage countries = poverty = insecurity + frustration = poor people turn to crime

• New crim. Opportunities for rich and powerful = insider trading/tax avoidance/moving funds

• Capitalist employers using foreign labour + breaching laws

Demand (rich west) + Supply (3rd world)

26

New patterns of criminal organisationGLOCAL organisation

• Hobbs & Dunningham

• Global economic changes = local crime organisation

• Individuals with contacts form a ‘hub’• Loose-knit networks – NOT hierarchy

(different to subcultures and traditional ‘mafia’ style gangs)

• Key root = local context• But has global connections• Each locality will affect the nature of

the criminal organisation (global crime filtered through a local lens)

• Example – old industry shut because of global competition = nocturnal economy in Sunderland – bouncers/body capital

Evaluation• Not clear if these hubs are ‘new’• Older structures may still run alongside

McMafia

• Glenny

• Organisations emerging after fall of communism in 1989

• Deregulation of global markets• Communism falls = free market

except for natural resources, ie) oil• Russian govt controlled these and

kept prices low (communist officials bought these for next to nothing)

• They sold them abroad = high price• Became very rich/powerful –

oligarchs• Ex-KGB/former convicts formed

mafias - used to protect this new wealthy class, ie) Chechen Mafia

• Not like Italian mafia – kin/hierarchy• These mafias were purely economic/

driven by greed• Chechen Mafia became a brand –

ruthless/protection rackets• Exported brand elsewhere• Built links around the world

27

Green Crime1. Global risk society and

environment

• Crime against the environment• Planet is a single eco-system (goes

beyond national boundaries)• Examples: air pollution, water

pollution, nuclear disasters• Mainly ‘man-made’ risks today• Beck – manufactured risks are

damaging humanity (made by industry/transport etc)..go beyond national boudaries

2. Green Criminology

Traditional criminology• Harm to the environment may be

defined as ‘legal’ though• Traditional criminology is tied to

‘criminal law’ and green crime ignored

• Situ & Emmons – see env. Crime as ‘an unauthorised act or omission that violates the law’ – a definition that is limited by the law and who control it

Green criminology (Rob White)• Focus on harm rather than law• Some of worst harm = not illegal• This is transgressive criminology

that moves beyond traditional criminology

• Different countries have diff. laws• Looks at crimes of the powerful – like

Marxists note invisible/escape punish.

2 views of harm• Anthropocentric view – human view –

man can exploit envt. (businesses)• Ecocentric view – humans and envt.

are linked…envt. needs protecting from global capitalism

3.Types of Green Crime (Nigel South)

Primary crimesDirect result of destroying Earth’s resources:(a) crimes of air pollution(b) crimes of deforestation(c) crimes of species decline/animal rights(d) crime of water pollution

Secondary crimesResult from flouting the rules to prevent disasters:(a) State violence against opp. Groups eg) French Govt – Greenpeace ship attack(b) Hazardous waste and organised crime eg) business dispose of waste illegally, ship waste to 3rd world/role of ‘ecomafia’ Italy

28

Examples of ‘Green’ crimes/studies Evaluation

Bhopal disaster • 1984 - India – Union Carbide• Leaking cyanide – safety failure• 30 tons of gas = 20’000 deaths and

120’000 continue suffering

Air pollution – from industry/transport

Deforestation – Amazon for beef cattle

Water Pollution – 25 million die each yr from contaminated water (toxic waste and untreated sewage)

Day – those who oppose governments supporting nuclear power/arms are seen as ‘enemies of the state’ (Greenpeace)

Walters– ‘ocean floor has been a radioactive rubbish dump for decades’

Bridgland – 2004 Tsunami = barrels of radioactive waste dumped by European countries washed up by Somalia

Rosoff – notes how cheap disposing of toxic waste in 3rd World coiuntries

• recognises importance of global issues

• shows where law is lacking where harm is concerned

• reveals how the powerful define laws and hide crimes

• hard to define the boundaries of ‘green criminology’

• definitions are value-laden with moral criteria used

The extent of ‘state crime’What are state crimes?

• Crimes of the powerful - ‘state organised crime’ (Chambliss)

• Green & Ward ‘illegal or deviant activities perpetrated by, or with complicity of, state agencies’

• The state is able to define what is criminal

Examples – genocide, torture, imprisonment without trial, assassination

McLaughlin – 4 categories of state crime• Political crimes• Crime by security/police forces• Economic crimes• Social/cultural crimes

The extent of state crime

Michalowski & Kramer argue that these crimes are s0 serious because:

• The state has a monopoly on violence – potential to cause much harm

• It can conceal it’s crimes and avoid punishment

• It is hard to police the actions of these states (by other states)

• It makes laws and can use them to control/persecute their enemies

29

The extent of ‘state crime’Example of state crimes?

• Cambodia (1975-8) – Pol Pot’s Khmer Rouge government killed 2 million people

• Nazi Germany – persecution of Jews, the Final Solution

• Guantanamo Bay – US using excessive methods with terror ‘suspects’

• Iraq – Saddam Hussein attacking the Kurds in Northern Iraq

• Vietnam – My Lai massacre of 400 civilians by US troops during Vietnam war

• Hiroshima/Nagasaki – Atomic bombs dropped by US on Japanese cities in WW2

The Violation of Human Rights

• Natural Rights/Civil Rights • Protection from state

Schwendinger & Schwendinger• Crime = level of violation of human

rights (harm/zemiology)• States denying basic human rights

• Crimes include: racism, sexism, homophobia, economic exploitation

Evaluation• Cohen – not objective/easy to

explore ‘economic exploitation’• There is limited agreement on what

is classed as a human right

30

How states crimes become possibleStates ‘hiding’ their crimes• Cohen – state crimes are being

explored more within criminology and notes how states try to hide/ legitimate their crimes

Denial• 3 stages – didn’t happen/its not what

it seems/its justified

Neutralisation theory• Applies Matza’s model for justifying

deviant behaviour

• Techniques : denial of victim, denial of injury, denial of responsibility, condemning the condemners, appeal to higher loyalty

State crime as acceptable• How normal people perform evil acts

on behalf of states

Kelman & Hamilton – 3 factors that create ‘crimes of obedience’:

• Authorisation – given permission = duty to obey

• Routinisation – role/detached• Dehumanisation – enemy seen as

sub-human (linked to propaganda)

Dehumanisation and modernisation• Science and technology help states

to commit these crimes (Bauman)• They dehumanise and turn mass

murder in a routine/admin task31Negotiation/social construction

Globalisation & Crime (bring together)

32

Examine Globalisation

& CrimeGREEN CRIME• Global risk

consciousness• Green criminology +

harm• Types of green crime• Examples• Evaluation

STATE CRIME

Risk consciousness

Organisations• Glocal• McMafia

Global capitalism

• What are state crimes?• The level of harm• Examples• Violations of human rights• How states conceal crimes (denial)• How states make such crime acceptable

GLOBAL CRIME

Levels/types(Castells)

Evaluation• Issue of defining crime• Objectivity/values• Political flavour

(committed sociology)