Punishment and the Social Structure - Essay Example

Running Head: PUNISHMENT AND THE SOCIAL STRUCTURE Punishment and the social structure Name Institution Date Punishment and the social structure Introduction Crime is defined as a breach of laws or rules which have been laid down by governing authorities. Punishment is the act of imposing unpleasant or negative deeds on people typically in reaction to defiance, disobedience, or behavior that is considered morally incorrect by governmental, religious, or individual principles. Forms of punishment include capital punishment, corporal punishment, and imprisonment. Foucault theory on punishment Foucault looks at the age of torture and states that at this time the authority to punish a person was directly linked to the power of the ruler. The crimes executed at this period were not against the civic good, but they were a personal disrespect to the king. The civic displays of execution and torture were public assertion of the authority of king to punish and to rule. As public executions and torture continued, individuals who were subjected to torture turned out to be heroes particularly if the punishment was too much for the committed crime (Tunick, 1992). The convicted individuals were given an opportunity to speak before being executed and this gave them a chance to apologize for their crimes but usually it was applied as a juncture to talk against the executioners and the throne. Towards the last parts of 18th century, complainants against public torture and execution continued. People demanded for punishment which was free from torture and this led to the discovery of prisons. Deprivation of freedom as a result of imprisonment became the major type of punishment. People felt that liberty is a thing that creates equality among all people. Imposition of fines hurt poor people more than rich people, but deprivation of liberty caused similar level of distress to all people. Prisons turned out to be more than mere places where freedom was deprived and they were locations where people who committed crimes could be disciplined. Discipline was a force to inspire helpful social qualities upon the criminals. It was an effort to reform criminals so that when they are freed, they are less likely to repeat the same crimes and much more likely to a productive member in the society. The discipline that prisons attempted to instill on offenders was same as discipline within martial units. The basic concept of discipline is an individual is remunerated for accomplishment and punished as a result of non conformity of lack of accomplishment. Forcing the inmates to work and live under stern regulations instilled discipline. Prisoners were pressured to constructively utilize time when not asleep. This acted as a social training which prepared offenders to lead a productive life when they were released. Monitoring of inmates required steady supervision. A warder monitored the inmates every minute to make sure they followed the set rules and regulations. Foucault said that forced discipline and constant supervision broke the spirit of criminals and made them docile bodies which were simple to regulate by people in power. The main goal of prison was to minimize crime through punishing the offender. Prisons are also supposed to prevent other people from carrying out criminal activities. Foucault felt that prisons failed to meet their goal and they made offenders worse. Rusche & Kirchheimer theory on punishment and the social structure Rusche and Kirchheimer work on punishment and social structure examines the growth of several forms of penalty within the context of the fluctuating needs of labor market from middle ages to modern day (Rusche, & Kirchheimer, 1967). The use of fines and penance were the most preferred ways of punishing people during the early Middle Ages. At this historical time, the social situations of the minor class were favored because even though the number of people living in Europe had increased, there was abundance of lately attained lands that people of minor class could labor. The main objective of criminal law at this period was maintenance of public order among people who had parities in wealth and status. There wasn’t influential central power to implement the law. Every criminal activity committed against an individual was viewed as an action of conflict against that person. In order to avoid disputes from taking place, private adjudication was established and it imposed fines against people who committed crimes thus creating a feeling of justice. The criminal justice structure of this time led to class distinctions. People of the minor class could were unable to pay fines imposed upon them could be subjected to physical or corporal punishment. When the central power was established and exerted its authority, it was swiftly noticed that this scheme of fines on criminals could be used as an excellent income source for the nation. Thus the financial interests certainly biased use of fines a method of punishment. Imprisonment acts as a helpful cheap labor source for the nation and during times of high rates of unemployment, as a helpful method of clearing the streets from potentially dangerous people. During the middle Ages, there was population increase which led to a surplus labor that permitted owners of the lands to lower their standards of living of reliant peasants. The unemployed labor force surplus generated groups of tramps which wandered all over the streets. The rule of demand and supply was exhibited when labor surplus led to reduction of wages. When labor value went down, penalties became harsher. It is during this period that physical punishment changed into types of torment and capital punishment was applied broadly. There was a thought that the harsher punishments were required to prevent the increasing population which had been stricken by poverty from committing offenses. Imprisonment came into use as a form of punishment in nineteenth century. This was contributed by the incapability of people to maintain pace with labor authority needs of the ruling class. The central class viewed the use of inmates as a solution to their manual labor requirements. The adverse conditions of people of low class didn’t allow the exploitation labor from prisoners. The people insisted on performing any work had had formerly been executed by prisoners. Capital and corporal punishment became famous again. In the effort to prevent the poor minor class from committing offense, the living standards of inmates was worsened that those of free people. Prison labor turned out to be a form of torture and authorities invented fresh forms which ensured that punitive disposition were made more fatiguing. One type of punitive labor was where prisoners were required to move stones from one place to another location and take them back to the initial location. The punitive labor along with corporal punishment and inadequate nourishment was an effort of the powerful class to make sure that conditions in prisons were poorer than the impoverished societal segments. Durkheim theory on punishment According to Durkheim, the social aim of penalty is to offer effect to emotional rage of a community whose customs have been violated by criminal acts. An illegal act is recognized the one which upsets social conscience and criminality acts a method of clarifying the ethical limits of a particular social group(Durkheim, 1957) Punishment acts as a reciprocal outcome of a society’s ethical outrage and generates and maintains a solidarity that is necessary for the well being of the society. Calls for restoration of justice are a contemporary demonstration of social solidarity theory by Durkheim. Other than concentrating much on criminal act or crime, solidarity theory centers on injuries caused by criminals and the needs of the victims and the entire community. Criminals are supposed to be accountable to their victims and a portion of their punishment can include apologies to victims, direct restitution, and communal service. Elias theory on punishment Elias believes that civilization is particularly manifested by a decline in the application of explicit and a rise in the strength of emotional control. As individuals became more dependent on each other for their personal welfare by increasing occupation specialization, their behavior becomes more restrained and disciplined. New types of penalty emerged because elites felt that it was improper to inflict unpleasant penalties in public. Capital and corporal punishment steadily declined in order to preserve respect for the community (Elias, 1994). The emergence of prisons offered solitary confinement to the offenders. Prisons were based on the concept of self restrain and revealed that people had lost confidence in external forms of restraint such as corporal or capital punishment. The prisoners were separated from the rest of the society and it was believed that they could learn ways of repressing his unsocial behaviors on their own cut off from all forms of influences. Imprisonment was viewed as the beat way of punishing criminals since it guaranteed to discipline the offenders and make them excellent citizens and neighbors. Capital punishment was too harsh and unsuitable for a community which was turning out to be more intricate as all classes of people became interdependent on each other. Ignatieff theory on punishment Ignatieff placed the study of penalty on a class framework. He believed that the development of prison was not only a response to criminal activities, but to social crisis and therefore was a portion of an attempt to reestablish societal control as a result of prevalent unrest. The emergence of prisons as a new method of penalty which did not use much physical severity is demonstrated by the condition of labour market (Ignatieff, 1978). When there was shortage of labour, the authorities created schemes which could utilize the labor of prisoners. Garland views that every tenderness and compassion shown to prisoners has a border and usually runs up beside an order that brutal punishment inflicted on them. He feels that the civilization process makes people to suppress their instinctual forces and especially to push their hostility into their insensibility (Garland, 1993). Criminals are a threat to the society because of their overt acts and because of symbolic hazard posed by their repudiation of the societal norms. The chance to emit anger on the criminal offers gratification and pleasure for people who have surrendered to ethical repression of their personal forces and punitive punishment offers a genuine passage for their intuitional hostility to which has been suppressed. Conclusion The emergence of prisons in the ninetieth century was as a result of peoples needs to have a form of punishment that was less brutal. There was a view that prisons instilled discipline on offenders and transformed them into productive members of the society. References Ignatieff, M., (1978). A Just Measure of Pain: The Penitentiary in the Industrial Revolution. New York: Columbia University Press. Garland, D., (1993). Punishment and Modern Society: A Study in Social Theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Rusche, G., & Kirchheimer, O., (1967). Punishment and Social Structure. 1939. New York: Russell and Russell Press. Durkheim, E., (1957). Professional Ethics and Civic Morals. New York: Routledge Press. Elias, N., (1994). The Civilizing Process. Oxford: Basil Blackwell Press. Tunick, M., (1992). Punishment: theory and practice. California: University of California Press. Read More