4. Realist theories of crime

• Left realist Background


  The left road is view of crime developed in the 1980s and 1990s they follow the marks as view that society is unequal and this is what causes crime and deviance however unlike the Marxist they believe that gradual change is necessary rather than a violent overthrow of capitalism.
• Causes of crime


  Relative dep

  Lea and Young suggest that deprivation is at the root of criminality not poverty. In the 1930s poverty was high but crime weights were low. Instead they argue that as living standards have risen so has people feel so has peoples feelings of being deprived compared to others this can need to resentment and people turning to crime to achieve wealth that they feel entitled to.
• Marginalisation


  marginalised groups are those people that do not feel like they are part of society and like the girls and organisations to represent their interests. This leads to a sense of frustration and resentment amongst those groups and this can need to criminal behaviour which they believe will improve their situation.
• Subcultures


  links to the work of cloward and Ohlin and Cohen especially their ideas of blocked opportunities and groups inability to achieve goals through legitimate means for leftists a subculture is a collective response to the problem of relative deprivation for leftist criminal subculture still subscribe to the goals and values of society such as materialism and consumerism for example, ghetto in America hooked Gucci BMW and Nike.
• Tackling crime


  left realist believe that in order to tackle crime you first need to tackle the social problems which lead to it, In particular the causes of inequality and deprivation. policies and strategies should focus on creating better relationships between the public and police and creating multi agency approach.
• evaluation


  Milovanovic:

  Accepts the governments definition of crime being the street crime committed by the poor.accepts the governments definition of crime being the street crime committed by the poor.

  Interactionist claim that it doesn’t explain the motives due to resilience on quantitative data. Assumes the value consensus. Relative deprivation cannot explain all crimes as not although the experience it go onto commit crime. Focus on high crime in a city areas gives an unrepresentative view of crime and makes it appear a greater problem than it is