NCJ Number
115074
Date Published
1987
Length
29 pages
Annotation
This paper reviews two competing theoretical paradigms in the sociology of law -- moral functionalism and moral Marxism -- and presents an alternate perspective that reconciles apparent differences between the two.
Abstract
Moral functionalism essentially views criminal law as the product of value consensus, reflecting a common consciousness and functioning to reconcile individual or group interests in favor of the good. In contrast, moral Marxism portrays criminal law as reflecting the values and interests of the economic and political elite to the exclusion of other values and interests; Criminal law is viewed as the product of class conflict and an instrument for maintaining capitalist society. A review of the law questions the theoretical and empirical adequacy of both these positions. In general, there is conflict over legislation, and, even in cases of apparent consensus, it is consensus by the majority directed against a minority group. A conflict model provides an integrative approach that emphasizes both the structural and cultural foundations and the triggering events of crime control legislation. Factors such as racial or urban/rural heterogeneity, economic and political inequality, economic conditions, the vigilante tradition, and myths of crime and punishment with such triggering events as symbolic and status politics and media sensationalization mobilize the political arena to consider and enact crime control law and policy. 1 figure, 143 footnotes, and 73 references.