Social Control and Conflict Theory of Crime - Essay Example

?Social Control and Conflict Theory of Crime Social Control Theory Social control theories of crime claim that criminal behavior can be attributed tothe absence of social ties which promote lawful behavior. Elements such as norms, values and beliefs are central to explaining why people do or do not commit crime as opposed to motivational theories (Jensen, 2003). Reiss viewed criminal behavior as the consequence of failed “personal and social controls” (1951, p.127). When personal controls fail, individuals stop seeking ways to meet their needs which are consistent with community norms and rules. When social controls fail, shared norms and rules become ineffective and no longer allow individuals to act accordingly. According to Hirschi (1969), processes of socialization result in the development of self control which causes us to avert from criminal behavior. Criminal behavior occurs when moral codes and shared norms are not internalized and when individuals are not incorporated into a community (Nye, 1958, p. 4). Social control theory derives from Hobbes’ social contract theory, which claims that our desire to belong to society causes us to sacrifice the freedom to act as we please in order to promote our co-existence. We do not act in a way that damages the freedom of those around us, and in doing so we become “contented with so much liberty against other men as he would allow other men against himself" (Hobbes, 1985, p. 1651). Indeed, self control theory claims that a society’s norms must be ‘concrete’ enough to be effective and to prevent criminal behavior (Reiss, 1994). Garland views social control theory as “…a functioning system…which is also dependent on other forms and other social relations” (1993, p. 283). Social control thus adds a two-faceted dimension to the concept of criminal behavior. For example, it is a valid element of knowledge that criminal behavior if detected will attract sanctions. However, this may not be sufficient to prevent one from indulging in criminal behavior – Nagin and Paternoster state that there is also a social stigma which is attached to sanctions, and this directly influences social controls (1993). There is thus the existence of not only the formal sanction, but also the social norm which recognize “the competence of inner-city communities to control law enforcement” (Waldeck, 1999, p.2; Wilson and Kelling, 1982, pp.29-31). Conflict Theory Conflict theory mainly derives from Marx’s claim that crime is inevitable in societies which are capitalist. This is because such societies cause some groups to become segregated and less equal than others. Members of such groups may thus turn to criminal behavior in order to establish material equality with other groups. Conflict theory is based on the core notion that social contracts do not exist between citizens and the state, and because societies continually change, this causes social conflicts to arise. Citizens from different social classes, with different interests are a part of society, but their interests often do not correspond (Sellin, 1983). On the contrary, the lack of common interests between individuals and classes causes conflict (Vold, 1958). A society is collective in that the actions of its individual members cause it to progress – it is essentially limited to the actions of its individuals. Depending on which group or class has access to the coercion of the law, inequality may arise and cause those who are less equal to be oppressed. This inequality causes the conflict which in turn causes individuals to commit crime in an attempt to re establish equality. Reiman describes the conflict theory as “The Rich Get Richer and the Poor Get Prison” (2000); he portrays crime as the result of a struggle between crime and formal laws which govern when it occurs and how it is to be punished. Rather than being a collective social concept, crime is defined by elite groups which prohibit behavior which has the potential to damage their interests. Crimes such as theft and trespass are much more likely to cause poor people to be arrested, because the rich have no need to commit such crimes. Crime according to the conflict theory is not only a product of what the elite social classes define it to be, it is also a cause of crime. More poor people commit crimes because it is often the only method of solving economic problems, and so conflict theorists claim that establishing equality in any given society would eliminate most causes of crime. A Comparison While both theories appear to have sturdy grounding in explaining why people commit crime, each has its different base. Conflict theory explains crime as an opinion of elite classes as to what actions of others are to be prohibited or not. Contrarily, social control theory views crime as inherently behavioral in that it exists as a part of society, particularly when that society’s norms and values break down. Accordingly, crime rates under conflict theory depend on the number of behaviors which are labeled as criminal – the greater ranges of behavior that are viewed as criminal, the higher the crime rates. Social theory thus provides the valid potential for crime and acts which are viewed as criminal to change and evolve over time in accordance with the interests of the class it is purported to protect. While social control theory does not deny the evolution of crime and acts which are criminal, it does not base this evolution as a result of definitions and interpretations of a social class. The informal legal controls evident in social control theory have been criticized as counteractive to the informal social controls which the theory also recognizes, which have the potential to create “…recurring cycles of discontrol” (Fagan and Meares, 2008, p.173). This criticism highlights a major difference between the two theories, as social control theory requires individuals to be incorporated into a society, whereas conflict theory describes crime as a result of some form of segregation from higher class society. Where social controls in social control theory are not simply imposed on individuals (Fagan and Meares, 2008, p.182), conflict theory proposes the opposite; that such controls are simply imposed on lower classes. If one is to view the possibly most potent criticism of social control theory, an apparent overlap begins to emerge within which the two theories have the potential to share (albeit briefly) a common ground of crime and method of explaining criminal behavior. The criticism is that social controls as described in social control theory can lead to societal separation, which allows conflict theory to take central stage as a more convincing theory. It is argued that “rules are made by people with power and enforced upon people without power” (Hopkins-Burke, 2005, p.143) and it is this concept (which is central to conflict theory) which cause dominant ideologies to be imposed on weaker ideologies, indeed against their will. Social control hence becomes unfair and oppressive, and the explanation of criminal behavior becomes not one of free choice or abiding by social norms and values, but one of force to obey the rules of the stronger. If this is true, then boundaries of ‘normal’ behavior are in danger if shifting constantly, allowing the strong to impose their definitions of criminal behavior on the weak – a concept which undermines and weakens the concept of ‘society’ as a whole, as well as social controls (Briar and Piliavin, 1965). Yet which seems more plausible? That we are forced to comply to social controls or that we willingly abide by social controls as a result of our desire to remain a part of a close society? It could be argued that the fact that some people commit crime means that we essentially feel no obligations to willingly abide by social controls. Yet the existence of social norms which are not backed by sanctions but which we adhere to suggests that coercion is minimal. It seems that both theories aptly explain criminal behavior, yet the absence of social ties in social control theory is a little more difficult to reconcile with the fact that even those who commit crimes expect to be and are punished. If societal ties have become deconstructed, then how can criminal sanctions be administered legitimately? Indeed, which side of the fence one chooses to fall depends on the way in which one views the world and the society within which they live. Similarly, the emergence of contemporary crimes such as white collar crimes inject some weakness into conflict theory; if crime is defined by the wealthy, then why is white collar crime (often committed by the wealthy) existent today? It appears that perhaps social control theory is much more convincing in explaining why we commit crimes, for the complexity of the criminal justice system today conveys a much more profound concept than that which is proposed by conflict theory. Bibliography Briar, S. and Piliavin, I. (1965). "Delinquency, Situational Inducements, and Commitments to Conformity". Social Problems 13(5). Fagan, J. and Meares, T.L. (2008). “Punishment, Deterrence and Social Control: The Paradox of Punishment in Minority Communities”. Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law 6(173). Columbia Law School, Public Law and Legal Theory Working Paper No. 010. Garland, D. (1993). Punishment and modern society: A study in social theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Hirschi, T. (1969). Causes of delinquency. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Hobbes, T. (1985). Leviathan. Macpherson, C.B. (ed.). London: Penguin Books. Hopkins-Burke, R. (2005). An introduction to criminological theory. Cullompton: Willan University Press. Jensen, G.F. (2003). “Social Control Theories”. In Encyclopedia of criminology. Wright, R.A. (ed.). Illinois: Fitzroy Dearborn. Nagin, D. and Paternoster, R. (1993). “Enduring Individual Differences and Rational Choice Theories of Crime”. Law & Society Review 27(467). Nye, F. I. (1958). Family relationships and delinquent behavior. New York: John Wiley. Reiman, J. (2000). The rich get richer and the poor get prison. New York: Allyn and Bacon. Reiss, A.J. (1951). “Delinquency as the Failure of Personal and Social Controls”. American Sociological Review 16(2): 196-207. Reiss, A.J. (1994). Understanding and preventing violence. Washington: National Academy Press. Sellin, T. (1983). Culture conflict and crime. New Jersey: Social Science Research Council. Vold, G. (1958). Theoretical criminology. New Jersey: University of Delaware Press. Waldeck, S. (1999). “Cops, Community Policing, and the Social Norms Approach to Crime Control: Should One Make Us More Comfortable with the Others?”. Georgia Law Review 34(2). Seton Hall Public Law Research Paper No. 2007-007. Wilson, J. and Kelling, G. (1982) “Broken Windows”. The Atlantic Monthly. Source: http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1982/03/broken-windows/4465/. Read More