Left wing social policy

• Taylor et al (1973) - the aspects of deviance

  • the effects of deviance, the consequences of being labelled as deviant, eg. self-identity and future behaviour
  • holistic analysis, external factors as the cause of crime, eg. response of the media
  • political activism, sociologists should work towards social change to address the root causes of crime
  • moral panic, the media scapegoats certain groups to divert issues that could be damaging to the ruling class
• left wing view on crime

  • crime as the result of poverty, unemployment, and lack of education
  • harsh punishment does not address the root causes of crime
• Gordon (1973) - the concept of crime in contemporary society

  • public fear and media influence, exaggeration leads to moral panic
  • criminalisation of the poor, minorities targeted by the CJS
  • crime as a social construct
  • the media causes moral panic influencing the public to support repressive measures, eg. more surveillance
• Malinowski (1966) - public shaming

  • based on social control and norms
  • "the function of shame", maintains social order
  • public shaming as a mechanism for restoring balance
• Young (1971) - the social meaning of drug use

  • the efforts of social control agencies to address and combat deviance amplify behaviour
  • labelling leads to alienation and social stigma, individuals then rebel
  • moral panic by the media amplifies deviance
  • "feedback loop of deviance", individuals as labelled as deviant join subcultures to celebrate and normalise deviance
• Left Realists - Crime Prevention

  • the government needs to improve social conditions so that people are no longer motivated to look for criminal opportunities
  • recommend that government social policy should reduce inequalities
  • recommend that the police need to attempt to regain the trust of local communities
• Braithwaite (1989) - types of punishment

  • Disintegrative Shaming, the offender is negatively labelled and is excluded from society
  • Re-integrative Shaming, avoids stigmatising or negatively labelling the offender as ‘evil’, while at the same time making them aware of the negative impact of their actions upon their victims
• Cons of Braithwaite‘s disintegrative shaming

  • Interactionists argue that this stigmatisation means that employers are reluctant to trust people who have been criminals
  • their reputation disintegrates
  • thus, they socialise with with people of similar ex-criminal status, the temptation to re-offend may be high
• Pros of Braithwaite’s re-integrative shaming

  • makes it easier for the victim and community to spreader the offender from the offence, to forgive them and to re-admit the offender into mainstream society
  • it avoids pushing wrongdoers into more deviance