Foucault, Rose and Miller, Garland and Recent Changes in Field of Crime Control - Essay Example

Foucault, rose and miller, garland and recent changes in field of crime control Foucault’s view Foucault was a French philosopher who lived was one of the most influential thinkers of the 20th Century. He was born in France in 1926, and he studied history, philosophy and sociology. He career started as a French teacher but he returned to France in 1968 and was director of philosophy at the University of Paris at Viennes. Foucault was well known for his books. His famous ones included Maldie Mentale et Personnalite in 1954, Histore de la Folie A L’age Classique in 1961, The Birth of the Clinic in 1963, The Order of Things in 1966, The Archaeology of Knowledge in 1969, Discipline and Punish in 1976, History of Sexuality, Volume 1 in 1976, Herculine Barbin in 1980, and The Use of Pleasure and The Care of Self both in 1984. Foucaults concept of governmentality has a distinct emphasis on self and promotes and encourages the actions that will help us evolve and fosters the relationship to other individuals and organizations by efficient interconnections. It recommends the use of governmental power not so much in terms of constraints and authorities but as a process of producing society that is healthy, literate, virtuous, normal, cultured, national citizens. Foucault sees government as a general technical form, which encompasses everything from ones control of the self to the control of populations. Correspondingly, he feels that the important thing in the political arena is to encourage the cultivation of the appropriate governmentality by politicians. Foucault introduced the term governmentality in a series of lectures that he gave at the College de France on the Birth of Bio politics in 1979 (Marks 2000: 128). These lectures engaged with the changing face of liberalism as a political project in the Reagan and Thatcher administrations. For Foucault, governmentality meant both strategies of organizational governance, in a broad sense, as well as self-governance by those who are made subjects of organizational governance. The concept of governmentality sought to capture new Liberal approaches to political management. The turmoil of World War II influenced his thinking and although his writings seem to cover a varied and widespread spectrum he was constantly looking to receive an understanding of the struggle of individuals against the collective power of the society. He was intrigued by the fact that individuals are controlled by the society at large and why this happens. He is very famous for his book “Discipline and Punish” written in 1975. This book analyzes the prison system and gave a new perspective of looking at crime and punishment. Foucault believed prisons should play a successful part in reducing crime. He discussed about how government enforced discipline influenced the life of the criminals. Today, Foucaults theories are still popular in all areas of academia and are under constant debate. For Foucault there was no higher purpose than being your own unique person. The ideas forced upon us by society do not allow this to happen (Maier-Katkin, 2000). Even as a social philosopher, Foucault’s ideas about government’s role in oppressing people’s behavior and true identity have been related to why people commit crime (Burchell et al., 1991). The concept of governmentality was developed by Michel Foucault to address the specificity of contemporary neo-liberal forms of governance -- premised on the active consent and subjugation of subjects, rather than their oppression, domination or external control. Foucaults concept of governmentality has a distinct emphasis on self and promotes and encourages the actions that will help us evolve and fosters the relationship to other individuals and organizations by efficient interconnection. It recommends the use of governmental power not so much in terms of constraints and authorities but as a process of producing society that is healthy, literate, virtuous, normal, cultured, national citizens. Foucault’s (1991) concept of Governmentality propagates that in Foucauldian terms, the state is not an essentialized thing in which power is centralized and from which it emanates. Rather the state is constituted by a hierarchical web of state agents and their practices accompanied by some sort of legitimizing discourse. The state, in other words, is epiphenomenal of the practices and accompanying ideological rationale of its constituent members who occupy the hierarchically ordered positions within a government. Foucault (1979) described as the movement from sovereignty to governmentality. By this he meant that the sovereign state was one focused on the maintenance of the ruler’s territorial power against both external and internal threats. This was replaced by the governmental state, less reliant on force and domination, and more on the development of technologies for governance, both of the state and of the self, where the object of exercising power is generally to increase the well being of the governed. Foucault was not without critiques. He was a forward thinker for his age, but that people can do what they want, whenever they want without being subject to authority was against the laws that govern society. He believed people should strive to be whatever they want, even to the harm of others (Maier-Katkin, 2000). This would definitely result in chaos. Miller & Rose (1993, pp. 78-82) suggest that governmentality is apparent in the way the state institutions operate. They are skeptical about the assumption that government reports and collected data are considered sufficient to make decisions and respond collectively to issues. They recommend the use of experts to address relevant problems. Miller & Rose also suggest that the underlying assumption about these activities is ‘an eternal optimism that a domain or a society could be administered better or more effectively, that reality is, in some way or other, programmable’ (1993, p. 78). Rose agrees with Foucault’s analysis of changes in punishment, and states that crime control cannot be accounted for within the sole jurisdiction of the codes, courts and constables, but has to be relocated within a broader field of rationalities and technologies for the conduct of conduct. (Rose, 2000: 184). Foucault believed that power and knowledge coexist and Rose and Miller (1992) agree that knowledge is an essential part of crime control and that it should be exercised with caution legitimately and with calculated power. With the globalization of the world, the strategies developed will not remain static but are always open to alternatives and resistance. Rose and Miller (1992: 191) also say that more than the success of the governing needs, the operational necessities need to be looked into. David Garland argues that the “Lombrosian” and “Governmental” concepts influenced criminology. The former involved studying the means to differentiate criminals from non-criminals while the latter was a series of enquiries to chart crime patterns and management. However by the late twentieth century, high crime rates were the norm and this rendered current methodologies as inadequate. Crime control needed to be revamped because of the new challenges it posed due to the changing culture of the conditions of crime according to Garland and Sparks (2001). Garland supports Foucault’s suggestion that modern power is a triangular combination of obliged-to-obey sovereignty, compulsory discipline required to correct and government that promotes self-regulation. In new crime control activities, crime is no longer considered a deviation, but is accepted as a part of a society and needs to be tackled as a risk or an accident rather than as a deviation that needs to be explained (Poyner, 1986). There is an understandable shift in the ways crime is being thought of and hence differences in the ways it needs to be controlled. Garland is of the opinion that the crime control strategies that are built today are more preventive partnerships and have more political and administrative alliances. According to Garland, the new culture of crime control has formed around three elements; A recoded penal welfare, criminology of control and an economic style of reasoning. Crime control is no longer under the control of the criminal justice experts but has taken on a social and economic presence as well. Recent changes in field of crime prevention Crime Prevention is a strategy that has the support of the state and federal governments in Australia. The Crime prevention Division 1996 has advocated a multi pronged effort. Crime control has taken a new form and crime prevention is trying to address the source of the crimes rather than waiting for the criminals to violate the criminal code and end up triggering the full impact of law enforcement. This also serves to bring down the costs of law enforcement, bring about reduced sentencing and make the community overall safer because problems are curtailed before getting fully blown up. Davis and Meyer have described the globalization of the world and the new world we face and see in their recent book, “Blur. The speed of change in the connected economy”. They say that the whole world is a blur due to the combination of the speed of changes, the connectivity to everything and intangibles associated with them. These changes have gone on to affect the criminal field as much as they affect the social and economic lives of people. These have contributed to the drastic changes in the nature, extent and impact of the crime from the international level to the lowermost local level. The strategic drivers driving the criminal field recently are: Globalization: The increasing connectivity and integration of the economy coupled with the high volumes of trade are responsible for the increase in trans national crimes. The difference in regulatory laws and the curtailed reach of the state enforcement agencies are conducive to crime. The criminals form mutually beneficial rings and help each other across borders causing more problems. Australia does face this problem because of its relationship with countries that have a lot of illicit goods movement, but the fact that Australia is not dependent upon these goods and it is a politically stable developed nation reduces its vulnerability. Illicit drugs: This is a major influence in Australia’s crime scene. Australia due to its proximity is the current supplier of heroin to more developed markets that have regulation for the cultivation of heroin. China is home to a lot of consumption and trafficking in heroin and is growing at alarming levels. China is likely to become the primary embarkation point for South East Asian heroin trafficked to Australia over the next five years. To counter the demand, domestic illicit drug production may increase causing more violence and aggression. Transnational law enforcement: Transnational law enforcement becomes a problem and the law enforcement agencies are at a disadvantage due to their limited jurisdiction. Traditional law enforcements methods are not sufficient and now non-governmental agencies have stepped in. they are not governed by the same constraints and are able to help by getting into areas they otherwise cannot. Competitive intelligence agencies like the Kroll are being sought after governments to aid in their activities. Technological Innovation: Technological Innovation has arrived and with it the Internet has offered tremendous advantages. With millions of transaction conducted over the cyber space the sheer volume of it has made crime detection that much more complex. This has increased the efficiency of the crimes and a hike in their extent. This can be countered by acquiring new competencies and more alliances with the private sectors. Implications for Australian Law enforcement agencies If law enforcement agencies have to keep up with the evolving crime scene that gets to be more sophisticated day by day, investigative methods, police technology and relationship with the other agencies will have to change. The global nature of the crime means that crime control needs to assume an International dimension. According to Australian government conference report on crime control,” The international impact will be mostly on the Australian Federal Police AFP, the Australian Custom Service, ACS, and the National Crime Authority but state and territory levels as well.” The fight against crime will necessitate staying on top of the sophisticated criminals and keeping abreast of the technological developments. This is a proactive approach rather than a reactive one. It is more of a focus on counter intelligence to avoid the penetration of crime into the existing infrastructure of law enforcement. The key is to understand that the recent changes in fact may help to enhance the current system. For example, the advent of new technology may improve forensics and help in faster apprehension of criminals. The traditional forms of policing are highly compartmentalized approaches to crime solving and are no longer in tune with today’s environment. Law enforcement has received so much notice that military budgets are being looked at for cuts and the money is fuelled into law enforcement activities. This is certainly being debated in Australia as it is in the United States. Crime fighting as a community has been now predominantly experimented and found to be greatly beneficial. The community approach to crime control seems to be gaining appeal. Relinquishing control rather than asserting it seems to be working better today. Working with the community and private agencies seems to work effectively rather than dictatorial authority. Receiving feedback and understanding the actual needs of the community seems to make best use of available resources. Recommendations as per the National research Council of the National academies: Enhancing crime control effectiveness by focusing police attention on accountability through achievement of measurable, visible, and “fair” results linked to community goals. Enhancing the lawfulness of police actions through pursuing police fairness, restraint in the use of force, and equity in allocating police resources; by providing the public with more information. Enhancing the legitimacy of policing by conducting a regular national survey to gauge public perceptions of police; through more research on the experiences of crime victims and the public; and through better overall data collection. Improving personnel practices and doing more research on how to measure police performance, assess officers, and provide incentives that will improve police practices. By fostering newer innovation through more research on police organization, upgrading processes and organizational change. Assessing problem-oriented and community policing by improving the police information systems that monitor them. Responding to terrorism through research on effective domestic responses and on the need for new information and intelligence sources. Organizing research by reinventing the National Institute of Justice so that it can fund and oversee a portfolio of well-crafted, evidence-based police research. Socialist theorist Foucault gave us valuable tools for thinking about the modern trends needed for crime control. Foucaults concept of governmentality allows us to think about how the activities that shape the care of the self, our relations with others and with social institutions are both organized and interconnected. It also allows us to investigate governmental power not so much in terms of constraints and repression but rather as a process of making up or producing subjects who are healthy, literate, virtuous, normal, cultured, national citizens or whatever. Laws govern any society and are amended to suit the growing needs of the society. Laws protect individuals, and do not necessarily enslave them. These laws may not be perfect, and may seem to benefit the moneyed but without laws there would be chaos. We would have endless and total domination of the weakest humans by the strongest humans. Foucault though had a lot of disregard for the law and although we have to applaud his concern for the “Self”, in many societies “...Foucault fails to see clearly the real problem is that the legal means for securing freedom also endanger it” (Hoy, 1986: 9). However his theory of not having rigid control by the authorities has evolved to current trends in society and the office of law enforcement and crime control has undergone timely shifts in outlook to adapt to changing scenarios in crime and crime control. Garland himself advocated the growth of a “Third governmental Sector” which took care of security and prevention of crime and was made up of crime prevention organizations, public private partnerships and community policing arrangements. Working as a community with more interactions between the various state and private organizations has become a fast and effective way of crime management. Australia has laid the ground for the deregulation of power and community oriented approach in crime management that sets the directions for crime control. Sources Foucault, M. Discipline and Punish: The birth of the Prison. 1975 Translated by Alan Sheridan, Pantheon Books, New York, 1977 Maier-Katkin, D., “A bust of Radzinowicz contemplating Foucault”. Presented as a lecture on a work in progress. Dean of the School of Criminology and Criminal Justice at Florida State University. 20 Sep. 2000 Skogan, W., Frydl, K., Editors, Fairness and Effectiveness in Policing: The Evidence Free Executive Summary, National Executive Council [On-line] http://books.nap.edu/execsumm_pdf/10419.pdf, 06 Oct. 2005 McGaha, S., Michel Foucault - Theorist Web Project [On-line] http://www.criminology.fsu.edu/crimtheory/foucault.htm, 06 Oct. 2005 Wardlaw, G., The Future and Crime: Challenges for Law Enforcement [On-line] 23 Mar. 1999 http://www.aic.gov.au/conferences/outlook99/wardlaw.pdf, 06-0ct. 2005 Fairness and Effectiveness in Policing: The Evidence Institute for Policy Research [Online] http://www.northwestern.edu/ipr/publications/newsletter/iprn0409/policing-fairness.html, 06 Oct. 2005 Lemke, T., Foucault, Governmentality, and Critique [On-line] 2002 http://www.thomaslemkeweb.de/publikationen/Foucault,%20Governmentality,%20and%20Critique%20IV-2.pdf, 06 Oct. 2005 Mazerolle, L., Ransley, J., Griffith University Queensland Third party policing Cambridge studies in Criminology Series - governance risk and crime control, Cambridge University Press, 2005 Wikipedia Definition of Management Information Systems [On-line] 2002 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governmentality#See_also, 06 Oct. 2005. Garland, D., Sparks, R. Criminology, Social Theory and the challenge of our times. Oxford University Press, UK, 2000 Davis, S., Meyer, C., Blur the speed of change in the connected economy Addison Wesley, 1998 Read More