08/11/23

Sociology
Elisabetta Pala
Realist theories of crime
Realism:
 While all realist sociologists argue that criminology should
treat crime as a real problem, they do not all have the same
perspective on the nature of that problem or the possible
solutions. Realist sociologists are divided into 2 groups: right
realists and left realists.

Right Realism Left Realism

- Derived from the right-wing - Derived from the writings of
theories of James Q. Wilson Lea, Young and Matthews
- Emphasises zero tolerance. - Emphasises the importance
- Stricter punishment of of tackling deprivation and
offenders getting police to respond to
the needs of the local
population

Right Realists –
Crime is a product of 3 factors…
1. Individual biological differences - (Wilson & Herrnstein, 1985)
o Explored the causes of crime = biosocial theory of criminal
behaviour
o State that crime is inevitable as some people are innately
more pre-disposed to commit crime
o Personality traits (impulsiveness, lack of regard for others)
are apparent in their offspring
o E.g. Wilson argues that people are likely to commit crimes if
they are not socialised into acceptable behaviour in
childhood by their low-intelligence family

2. Inadequate socialisation of the underclass - (Charles Murray,

1990)
o Murray and Herrnstein (1994) agree with Wilson and argue
that the main cause of crime is low intelligence, which is
biologically determined
o Murray (1990) – effective socialisation from the nuclear
family can decrease the risk of offending however the rates
of offending in the UK and USA are on the increase because
of the growing ‘underclass’
o Single-parent families on perverse welfare benefits = males
can abandon their responsibilities
08/11/23
Sociology
Elisabetta Pala
o There is no male role model to discipline male offspring as a
result young males turn to delinquent role models on the
street and try to gain status through crime rather than
legitimate means
o The underclass undermines social cohesion by eroding
values of hard work and personal responsibility

3. Rational choice to offend – (Ron Clarke, 1980)

o Argues that crime is rationally calculated by those who
freely decide to commit crime
o They calculate that there is little risk of getting caught, so
people are more likely to offend and as society becomes
more affluent the benefits of crime increases
o The reward outweighs the risk and some criminals consider
punishments to be lenient

Felson (1998) -
Routine Activity Theory
For a crime to occur there must be…
o A motivated offender
o A suitable target (victim/property)
o The absence of a capable guardian (e.g. police
officer/neighbour) because offenders act rationally the
presence of a guardian will deter them
This is the main reason for CSOs (Community Service Officers) in
the UK

Right realism: tackling crime

o They argued that there is no satisfactory way of dealing with
the causes of crime (biological and socialisation differences)
o Instead, Right realists suggest practical measures to make
crime less attractive
o Wilson and Kelling' (1982) Broken Windows Theory argued that
crime flourishes in situations where social control breaks
down
o The "broken windows" theory is the idea that where there is
one broken window there will be many
o For example, it shows that the residents of a particular
neighbourhood do not especially care about it and that low-
level deviance is tolerated
o They therefore argued that police should be concentrating on
order maintenance - using the law to ensure the smaller
08/11/23
Sociology
Elisabetta Pala
incivilities are crushed (e.g. rowdy youths, noisy parties,
prostitution, begging, drunkenness etc)
o Wilson believed that this would create a different view of what
behaviour was acceptable and would make public areas feel
safe again for the majority of law-abiding citizens

Policy implications -
o Zero tolerance – police must crack all signs of undesirable
behaviour/ neighbourhood decline. E.g. keep drunks and
prostitutes, addicts muggers, vandals etc. off the streets so
law-abiding citizens feel safe
o ‘Target hardening’ crime prevention policies that reduce the
rewards and increase the costs of crime to the offender e.g.
greater use of prison, maximum sentencing

Evaluation
- Platt & Takagi (1977) criticise Right Realists for:
o Concentrating exclusively on working-class crimes and street
crime, ignoring the crimes of the powerful - corporate crime
which may be more costly and harmful to the public
o Failing to explain the causes of crime - apart from blaming the
inadequate socialisation. This approach clears the government
and economic system (poverty) of any blame
o Ignoring the ideas of justice and law enforcement and
advocating instead the maintenance of social order- even if it
is at the expense of justice

Left Realists –
 Developed as a response to right realism’s influence on
government policies
 UK (Young, Lea & Matthews) USA (Elliot Currie)

Young
 Young (1986) was one of the founders of ‘critical criminology’
who introduced elements of interactionist theory into Marxism
to provide a ‘complete’ theory of crime
 Young had become disenchanted with the Marxist approach
which stressed that criminals should be seen as the victims of
the capitalist system and that sociological analysis of crime
should stress the criminality of the rich and the powerful.
 This view was generated by the results of the Islington and
Merseyside Victimisation Surveys – which showed that real
victims of crime were poor and powerless, these people view
08/11/23
Sociology
Elisabetta Pala
street crime and burglary as one of the main social problems
they faced
 Therefore, Young (1986) argued that it is the role of
sociologists and criminologists to provide relevant and
credible solutions for policymakers to limit the harm that
crime is doing to the lives of the poorer sections of the
community
 This approach led to a bitter debate in sociology, with many
left-wing criminologists attacking Young for selling out his
Marxist roots (who advocated violent revolution to achieve
utopia and abolish crime)
 Young responded by labelling Marxist criminology as ‘left
idealism’ meaning that it was great in theory but had no
practical solutions.

Other theorists don’t take crime seriously…

 Traditional Marxists – concentrate on crimes of the powerful.
Left Realists agree that these are important however Marxist
ignore W/C crimes

 Neo-Marxists – Romanticise W/C criminals (Robin Hoods-

stealing from the rich as an act of political resistance to
capitalism) Left Realists point out that W/C criminals mostly
victimise other W/C people not the rich

 Labelling Theorists – See W/C criminals as victims of

discriminatory labelling by social control agents. Left Realists
argue that they neglect the real victims – W/C people who
suffer at their hands

Aetiological crisis
 Left realists therefore argue that there is an aetiological
crisis = crisis in explanation for theories of crime
 They take W/C crime very seriously
 The left realist explanation of crime has three elements:
 Relative deprivation
 Marginalisation
 Subculture

Relative deprivation
08/11/23
Sociology
Elisabetta Pala
 Runciman (1966) argued that political revolutions only
occurred when the poor became aware of the sheer scale of
the differences between themselves and the rich.
 Without this knowledge, they generally accepted their poverty
and powerlessness
 It is not therefore poverty that leads to revolution, but
awareness of their relative poverty
 Lea & Young (1984) applied this concept to crime today and
pointed out that poverty or unemployment do not directly
cause crime
 In times of economic depression, the crime rate is often lower
 Young people feel resentful at what they could earn compared
with their aspirations
 A more prosperous society = more crime-ridden people are
more aware of their relative deprivation because of the media
which raises people’s expectations – those who cannot afford
material possessions may turn to crime

Subculture
 AO3 – Links to Merton Strain Theory, Cloward and Ohlin –
Illegitimate opportunity structures.
 Subcultures develop amongst groups who suffer relative
deprivation and marginalisation.
 However, different groups may produce different subcultures
(e.g. crime, religion).
 Lea & Young (1984) claim subcultures are still located in the
values of wider society.
 They develop because their members subscribe to the
dominant values of society but are blocked off (because of
marginalisation) from success
 The result is street crime and burglary, committed largely by
young males
 AO3 – Links to Family and Crime - Murray Underclass – lack of
discipline and male role models, young males create their
criminal subcultures to replace these absent fathers.

Marginalisation
08/11/23
Sociology
Elisabetta Pala
 Certain groups in the population are more likely than others to
suffer: economic deprivation, social deprivation, political
deprivation
 The first two elements are well known - e.g. (young people,
ethnic minorities and unemployed) living in inner city estates
are likely to suffer from higher levels of deprivation than those
from more affluent areas.
 The third element is less known - political marginalisation -
refers to the fact that there is no way for these groups to
influence the decision-makers, and thus they feel powerless,
resentful and frustrated and resort to violence to achieve their
goals

Late modernity and crime

 Young (2002) argues we are now living in a state of late
modernity (since 1970s)
 Changes in the economy from production to service industries
= instability and insecurity in the workplace
 Growth of global as opposed to national economies = short-
term low-paid jobs contributed to higher divorce rates
 Decline in traditional social institutions such as social class
and family- and their replacement with greater emphasis on
individual identity and aspirations
 Contributed to the marginalisation of those at the bottom
 Growth in the importance of the mass media

Left realism: policy implications

Lea and Young (1984), Matthews and Young (1992)
 All argue that crime is a result of the inequalities generated by
capitalist society, however, they state that the Marxist solution
of creating a classless egalitarian society is romanticised and
it will not happen in the UK
 Therefore left realists such as Young (1992, 1997) propose that
govt, the local authorities need to unite in their response to
the concerns of the victim – inequalities - by addressing this,
the real cause of crime will reduce
 E.g., safer neighbourhood committees, (public consultations
with the police) local audits of crime, improved street lighting,
community cohesion, improved council housing, investment in
training of young people in sports recreational areas

Evaluation
Does not provide an adequate explanation of crime…
08/11/23
Sociology
Elisabetta Pala
 Marxists have criticised Realism for ignoring the ‘real’ causes
of crime that lie in the wider capitalist system. They also
ignore the crimes of the powerful simply concentrating on
street crime. E.g. Vincenzo Ruggiero (1992) LR’s don’t explain
corporate crime and organised crime
 Interactionists – Left realists don’t explain offenders’ motives
 Their use of Subcultural Theory in their analysis means LR’s
assumes the existence of a value consensus and that crime
only exists when this breaks down
 Relative deprivation is an inefficient explanation, as not all
who experience it commit crime (the poor can be law-abiding
too)
 Feminist & postmodern criminologists such as Carlin (1992)
and Henry & Milovanovich (1996) argue that left realist writers
accept the establishment views of what crime is, and so
concentrate their attention on issues to do with street crime.
They should be exploring. the way society harms less powerful
groups e.g. women and domestic violence
 Inadequate understanding of victims/effects
 Stephen Jones (1998)- Left realists are inconsistent, take
victims’ account of fear at face value, but don’t seek their
explanation of the causes of crime and substitute these for
their interpretations
 Left realists only examine the views of victims from inner city
high crime rate areas this is unrepresentative – makes the
crime appear to be more harmful in these areas.

Alternative postmodern approaches

Actuarial approaches to crime
 Giddens (1999) & O’ Malley (1992) suggest that in late modern
society, individuals and the government are less concerned
with justice being done than they are about limiting the risk to
themselves.
 The Actuarial approach is taken when the governments are
concerned about risk
 This term is taken from insurance companies who work out
what the risks are for a particular problem and then base their
charges on that
 Therefore gov’ts are not concerned with individual guilt or
innocence, but with controlling the behaviour of potentially
deviant groups
08/11/23
Sociology
Elisabetta Pala
 Through such reasoning, young people are seen as a problem
group and a range of legal measures such as ASBO are brought
in to control everyone before the offence is committed
 Actuarial theories do not explain crime- they do provide a
different way of understanding how societies respond to very
high levels of crime
The criminology of the other
 Garland (1996)- the idea that there is a lack of difference
between the criminal and the ‘law-abiding’. He claimed that
criminals are divided into two types:
o Criminology of the self:
-Based on the idea that these criminals are similar to the
majority of the population- rational and self-seeking. Therefore
ordinary people must engage in sensible activities to limit the
risk of violence or theft. Don’t go to poorly lit areas, lock up
possessions etc.
o Criminology of the other:
-Refers to those on the borders of our understanding- child
molesters, rapists and terrorists. These people are outsiders
by whom we truly feel threatened and should be excluded from
normal standards of justice and punishment.