The Conception of Power Class and Crime by Marxist Theorists - Essay Example

Conception of Power and Crime by Marxist Theorists The famous sociologist Karl Marx did not entirely devote much of his time developing theory on crime and criminal law. However, there are several areas in his analysis of capitalism where he directed his attention to criminality and law. Marx makes the study and evaluation of criminality in society useful. According to McLaughlin et al (2003, p 249), the general Marxist theory central proposition is that the most important element in peoples lives in society is how they relate with the mode of production. The modes of production in society consist of two elements: the means of production, which is constituted of technological, process and the relationship of various classes to the means of production whether they either own the means of production or work for those, who posses them. Since the ultimate economic source of surplus in society involves the amount of goods which is produced in excess of what the workers consume, there is a need to understand the difference between those who hold the means of production and those who work for them so as to be able to comprehensively understand who owns the surpluses in society. McLaughlin states that means of production in society can either be privately owned or not. In some societies, means of production are owned by state, for example in former soviet Union, in others they are controlled by small groups of workers for instance in Yugoslavia or collectively owned by units of workers, farmers, peasants and other classes in society for example in china This forms of production definitely produces different types of social relations and also lead to various forms of crimes an criminal law. McLaughlin et al notes that in capitalistic societies particularly where means of production concentrates on private individuals and there has been a development of divisions between the class that dominates, the owners of means of production and the class that is dominated, those working for the ruling class, the level of crime is very substantial and of high degree. This is because of the contradiction that is created by the capitalist system. (McLaughlin, 2003, p 250) To begin with, the first contradiction is that the capitalist enterprise tries to crate a desire among the class of workers to consume the products generated by their system. Many of this products don’t do not necessarily contribute to the improvement of peoples wellbeing and also have no value. For their system to be viable, they develop mechanisms to make the people utilise what they produce. In order for the capitalist to produce their goods, they make labour force to work diligently and over time. This helps the ruling class to accumulate more and more capital and maintain their position in society. Also to keep the workers at bay, the capitalist specialise in keeping a considerable proportion in society poor and miserable. This means that if the currently employed group of workers down their tools, and refuse to carry their duties as required by management, they are dismissed and the reserve work force waiting for the job takes over immediately. In the long run, the capitalist structures end up creating both a desire to consume and the inability for the large population of the people to earn the money required for buying necessaries need for life. The second contradiction about capitalism is that the categorization of society in two classes: one that owns means of production and a deprived group that inevitably works for wage so as to survive leads to conflict between the two classes. These conflicts can be seen from rebellion and riots emanating from the proletariat. Also the state passes law to protect the interest of the ruling class, applies sanction to regulate the actions of proletarian which threatens the egoistic interests of the bourgeoisie .The proletarians who are caught jeopardising the interest of the ruling class are labelled to as criminal and their actions branded as crime. As capitalism builds strength in society, and their activities become immense, the conflict between social classes frequently occurs and become violent in nature and more actions of proletarians are defined to as criminal. Thus according to McLaughlin et al(2003,p250 ), note that contrary to what other theorist argue that criminal law is a reflection of customs in society, criminal law involves a set of rules laid down by the state to protect interest of ruling class and the resultant effects of the conflict that lies within structured classes in society. In society, the criminal behaviour is an expression of class conflict that results from exploitive nature of economic relations between the ruling class and the labour force. The behaviour of proletarian is made criminal due to coercive power of the state so as to endeavour the implementation of the ruling class will. Thus criminal behaviour in society is both as a result of political and economic system (McLaughlin et al, 2003, p 2) According to McLaughlin et al (2003, p 58), they note that the present economic system is based on exchange and in this type of production we don’t fail to have egoistic character. Also any society that is based on exchange isolates individuals by weakening the bond that binds them together. When the issues of exchange take centre stage, the parties involved think only about their own advantage over others. (p 58}This is particularly the case when the ruling class are dealing with the proletariat. The possibility of the bourgeoisie to give some of their surpluses to improve their social welfare does not exist in their mind despite making it difficult for them to obtain necessaries of life. The merchant capitalistic individuals result into conflict in two ways. The first point is that their interest is usually against those of other people who sell their labour to them and secondly to those who buy their product. This, according to McLaughlin et al, is a true element of industrial capitalists. (McLaughlin et al 2003, p 60)The labour providers despite being exploited by owners of means of production have to work so as not to die from hunger. As a result of this, the ruling class takes advantage of the poor and wanting situation of the workers to exploit them. According to sociology.org, it notes that, criminals in society are treated differently. The poor criminals are harshly punished than the richer ones. The website also states that Marxist criminologist emphasised on types of crimes in society, that is, white collar and organized crime and paid little attention to blue collar types of crimes. The crimes of the upper class individuals are stated as the greatest cause of social harm in any in society .According to Marxists theorists quoted on sociology.org, they define business crimes as crimes of people who engage in fraudulently activities on behalf of their company so as to increase their profits. White collar crimes on the other hand are used in reference to business fields and are varied .Organised crime involves a complex web of politicians, law enforcers and big companies which are characterised by immense corruption and violence to shut those people who acts as a threat to their business. A good example of organised crime is the Mafias. sociolgy.org notes that capitalistic states are often reluctant to pass laws which regulate big business activities and even threaten the business profitability. The website fur adds that capitalistic states often use huge sum of money to attract investment from large companies. The state provides the investors with cheap loans, tax concession, grants and even build infrastructure to help the capitalists. The state always shows its unwillingness to implement laws against pollution workers hath and safety. Thus in conclusion one can infer that the state is always in support of the capitalist interest Foucauldian criminologist ideologies on crime and society According to Danaher et al (2002, p 4), they note that Foucault rejects the idea that individual govern themselves. They point out that whatever that comes between people and experience is based on how people act, speak, and make sense of things. Danaher et al says that the most significant force that shapes individual experience is language. People always use language to expresses a thought or make sense of an experience. Language is not only used to explain ideas and feelings but also to explain things to ourselves and others. . As a result of the advantages of languages mentioned above, Danaher et al writes that Foucault are not only interested in language as a system in whole but individuals actions in language or discourse .Discourses are seen by Danaher et al to as language in actions: They say that language is like a widow that allows people to make sense and visualize things in the world. These discourses usually shape the explanation of individuals understanding of themselves, their capability to differentiate the things which are valuable from those that are not, and that which is right from that which is not. Danaher et al says that people are not only driven by instinct but by their thoughts and actions are influenced and controlled to a greater extent by different discourses. Talking of the concept govermentality, Hannah, (2000, p 22), says it has a wide range of meanings which either denotes analytical or specific historical forms of government. In historical sense, the term means a more readily connection that can be observed between economic and demographic processes and trends in society. Govermentality is its self created by institutions, analysis, procedures and reflections and also the strategies that allow the exercising of power that targets a particular subject population mainly as it forms knowledge about political economy. The activities that mainly fall under bio power or govermentability ranges from individual initiatives, the provision of life insurance and policies of government According to Hannah (2000, p 23), the concept of govermentability usually dominates over discipline and sovereignty and also help to generate a complex body of knowledge in the present modern society. Thus in general, although bio power involves surveillance function in society, it involves more of discipline on large scale or systems associated with disciplinary roles. Hannah notes that people need to visualise things in terms of replacing sovereign society with a disciplinary one or replacing a society by government. Bio- power also produces subjects in society but unlike disciplinary system, govermentality sees that people should not be manipulated in any way. According to Blundo et al (2009, p 11), govermentality brings certain mentality in focus, particular way of thinking about the sort of problems which can and should be addressed by a particular authority through specific strategies. Thus govermentality concentrates on governing as a problem solving activity According to Blundo et al, the heuristic strength of govermentality usually lies on its capability to bring domination and subjection into a frame work while at the same time focusing attention to the knowledge and ability of all the actors involved. Thus any government that aims at problem solving oriented activity should include all the subjects in process of policy formulation and implementation. Blundo et al sees the combination of heuristic and interpretation role of govermentality and the use of descriptive governance as vital in documenting and analysing of policies and more in particular the field in society defined by production and delivery of public and collective services. According to Epstein (1999,p 25),notes that slavery is no longer needed as a method of exercising power or governing the people since the modern society is becoming more efficient .This is mainly through schooling and institutionalisation of various social practices McLaughlin and Muncie(2006 p 192), says the term govermentality applies to modern forms of government that monitors each individual and the entire society through apparatus of social control such as police courts and welfare departments. The concept also means an approach that usually focuses on either linguistic, technical or intellectual ways in which phenomena in society are seen as problems that should be solved by government. According to O’Farrell, (2005, p 147), notes that the concept panopticon was a design of prison which was produced by Jeremy Bethany in the late 18th century that had grouped cells around a central viewing tower. This design was used by Foucault as a model for operating of power and surveillance in contemporary society. Aas(2007, p 60), note the importance of panopticon in relation to crime in society is to bring about conformity among individuals not by physical force or restriction ,but by making sure individuals are visible all the time since individual internalise the idea that they are being watched at all times ,this helps to uphold law and order in society. In modern setting, Panopticon is used in a number of settings such as boarder surveillance to help combat terrorism, in institution and big organisation to regulate employee behaviour. How crime is controlled in Australia According to bluelight.ru (2011), it notes that there have been changes in Australian policy particularly in regard to Anti–terrorism law. This change have resulted into the police being given more powers to enter into an individual house without a warrant of arrest and search for any terror suspect The law according to federal Attorney–General Robert McClelland of Australia, will give Australia federal police and security agencies the powers needed to fight terrorism. The new regulations on terrorism are supposed to be exercised in accordance with justice and accountability. The time given to police to enter a building and conduct a search for suspects has been extended from one to twelve hours. This legislation provides for a seven day detention of suspects. The law has also been modified to include individuals, groups that incite others to violence either on the basis of race, religion, ethnicity, nationality or political opinion. The National security information Act 2004 has been enacted to hasten the national security and counter terrorism proceedings in court. The change in policy has also seen the establishment of a joint parliamentary on law enforcement to monitor the conduct of Australian federal police Australian crime commission. The government of Australia in a bid to control problems of substance abuse, in its country has come up with very harsh policy. The government has moved away for liberal policy on personal drug use and embraced a legal approach .According to spoehr (2009, p 349), he says that drug abuse has been addressed through harsher laws that target marijuana growers and bikie gangs. Under the Serious and Organised Crime control Act 2008, also known as Bikies Act, the subscription of members to certain organisation can only be allowed by Attorney general upon advice by police. The members belonging to such gangs are usually placed under control and are neither allowed to interact with their peers. This law in specificity does target the bike gangs who are regularly accused of in South Australian media of being involved in drug trafficking. The decision of Attorney General is usually final when it comes to such matters. Therefore no appeal is allowed to an independent judiciary. The person who is subjected to control in Australia do have a lot of difficulty in challenging the order because the police have a right to keep the evidence in secrecy and thus cannot be presented on a court of law. Thus in conclusion the changes in policy with regard to the Acts discussed above have given the instruments of social control much power to deal with acts of criminality and law breaking (Spoehr, 2009, p 349) Reference list: Aas , K. F .( 2007)Globalization & crime:Key Approaches to Criminology. Edition illustrated. London: SAGE, p 60 bluelight.ru (2011). New Anti terrorism law allows police to Enter house without a warrant.Rertieved 9th May 2011 http://www.bluelight.ru/vb/showthread.php?t=537023 Blundo G. et al. (2009).The governance of daily life in Africa: Ethnographic explorations of public and collective services. Edition illustrated. Leiden: BRILL, p11. Danaher, G. etal. (2002).Understanding Foucault. New Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, p 31 Epstein, L. (1999). Reading Foucault for social work. New York: Columbia University Press. p25. Hannah, M. G. (2000) Governmentality and the mastery of territory in nineteenth-century America geography. Edition illustrated. New York: Cambridge University Press, Volume 32,p 23 McLaughlin ,E and. J. Muncie. ( 2006). The Sage dictionary of criminology Edition2, revised . California: Pine Forge Press,p 192 McLaughlin, E. etal. (2003).Criminological perspectives: essential readings. Edition 2, illustrated London: SAGE, p 58,60,249,,250 O'Farrell, C.( 2005). Michel Foucault: Core Cultural Theorists Series. Edition reprint London: sage. p1. sociology.org .(2011).Traditional Marxist Perspectives on Crime. Retrieved on 8th May 2011 http://www.sociology.org.uk/pcdevmx.pdf Spoehr , J.( 2009).State of South Australia: From Crisis to Prosperity? . Wakefield: Wakefield Press, pp 324. Read More