NCJ Number
84233
Date Published
1981
Length
14 pages
Annotation
Major criminological perspectives that have critiqued domination (unnecessary constraints of human freedom) are (1) the labeling or societal-reaction school of thought, (2) conflict theories of law, (3) radical criminology, and (4) critical criminology.
Abstract
The labeling perspective established two important building blocks upon which a more radical criminology could build: (1) it introduced into American criminology an awareness of contradiction by suggesting that attempts to control deviant and criminal behavior can generate additional criminality by the application of deviant and criminal labels; and (2) it demonstrated that definitions of deviancy are created and applied through social interaction rather than universal consensus. Conflict theory, which holds that law emerges from attempts of divergent interest groups to control socioeconomic behaviors to their liking, has played a major role in the demystification of the generally accepted view that law is consensually created and implemented with value neutrality. Partly in reaction to the inadequacies of the conflict and labeling perspectives and partly in response to the social turmoil of the 1960's, some criminologists developed approaches to the study of law and crime that drew heavily on Marxist and neo-Marxist social theory (radical criminology). This radical criminology differed from labeling and conflict theories, as well as from more traditional criminology in its methodology, its transformation of criminology into a unit of analysis, its critique of state law, and its emphasis on radical praxis (personal participation in radical socioeconomic reform). A blending of radical criminology and critical sociology, with their respective attentions to the instrumental and ideological functions of state law, would be a significant contribution to the modification and eventual elimination of domination by privileged classes. A total of 48 notes are listed.