How Social Class Affect the Way Society View Criminality - Essay Example

How Social Affect the Way Society View Criminality Ever since the first documentation of the history of the human society, it is evident that there have always been social stratifications in the society. These stratifications give rise to social classes based on both material qualities such as wealth and income, as well as non-material qualities such as power and status. These social differences have existed in the history of humankind, and can be seen very clearly in the society today. The social stratification of the society has a huge bearing on not only the distribution of crime in the society but also how the society views different forms of criminalities, and subsequently the punishment and penalties for various crimes. This paper will explore the effects and correlation of social class with criminalities in various aspects. First the paper will have an insight into deviance, and the definition of crime, and then look into the distribution of various crimes in the society, and lastly a deep analysis of the effects of social class on the criminal justice system. The statistics show that there is generally a higher crime rate among people of lower social classes than among people of the middle or the so-called high class (Smedt 2005, p.108). There have been numerous explanations and theories that have been brought forward by different scholars including Karl Marx. There has however been seen a sharp division in how the society view crime in general. Crime or deviance can simply be defined as an act that is generally accepted as illegal or an offence, or an act that is prohibited by law. There are those who subscribe to the functional theories of criminology while others tend to subscribe to the conflict theories, which suggest that crime is a continuous struggle for class and dominance. Those who subscribe to functionalism believe that crime and deviance plays a very important role in the society and is essential in shaping the society in a better manner. Sociologist Robert Merton who developed the strain theory agreed that deviance is an inherent part of a functioning society, but stated that the access to socially accepted goals determines whether a person will conform to the norms of the society or will deviate (Cote 2002, p.113). The people of the middle and the upper class have an advantage in the access of socially acceptable goals unlike their counterparts in the lower class, who are less privileged. However, not all people have the privilege of accessing their goal in a socially accepted manner. For instance, a young man can go through the university, pursue an MBA, and proceed to make his billions in the society. This man has a socially accepted goal that he can access in a socially accepted manner. On the other hand, there is a young man who has such a goal but never went to school, and chooses to steal from his employer to get start up capital for his business. This shares some similarity with the conflict theories, which state that crime his just but a continuous struggle for class, and an evidence of inequalities in the society. Societies in the low class, who are mostly poor people, tend to have high levels of social disorganisation (Akers 2009, p. 337). This is thought to be a great cause of high crime rates among the people of the low class. For instance, a child who grows up in a society that has a drug problem and high crime rate is more likely to engage in crime than a child brought up in a wealthy society with a good schooling system and individuals who are actively involved in community work and social development. Broad social factors in the community highly influence criminality in that a person is not born a criminal but becomes one under the influence of the prevailing factors in their social environment (Taylor 1995, p.22). This can highly influence public policy, for instance research has shown that children from disadvantaged societies that attend school programs that teach social skill are less likely to engage in crime (Openstax College 2012, p.145). The cultural norms of the lower class are also thought to highly contribute to criminality in the society, and thus conforming to these norms is not encouraged. (Matthews & Pitts 2001, p.197). In the 1900s, a research on the crime patterns in Chicago was carried out to examine the correlation between class and crime, and the result was intriguing. They found out that criminal activities were more concentrated towards the middle of the city, and reduced as one moves outwards towards the city suburbs. It was found out that the socioeconomic status that was correlated to ethnicity and race highly influenced crime in the middle of the city. It was thought that the mix of culture and values created a smaller community with different ideas on culture and norms thus increasing the rate of criminality and deliquescence. Research has also shown that societies with increased poverty and single parenthood have higher crime rates than families in middle and upper class (McAra & McVie 2005, p.7). The part of the society that subscribe to the conflict theory view social and economic factors as the prime cause of crime in the society, but unlike the functionalists these factors are not a positive aspect of the society but evidence of inequality and disparity in the society (Vito & Maahs 2011, p.213). The power and status relationships are emphasized here as the main variables that lead to crime. The law is not something neutral that is meant to protect everyone, but the strong and powerful in the society. The upper class are the people who make the laws, and define crime in such a way to protect their own interests (Quinney 1974, p.54). They view criminality, the law, and the penalties or punishment for crime as emanating from the inequalities concerning power and resources in the society as put across by Karl Marx. In this perspective, the law is not a neutral system to protect every person but it is a tool for the rich and privileged, who criminalise acts that are contrary to their selfish interests. You do not need to have a college degree to know that great inequalities concerning power and wealth exist in every society, and that the wealthy class always have an upper hand in everything. History has documented a lot of evidence about the inequalities that existed in the society since time in memorial. The conflict theory can be said to originate from the work of the great sociologist and philosopher Karl Marx. The core of Marxism is the concept of conflict and class struggle between the rich and the poor, freeman and slave, patrician and the plebeian, in other words the oppressors and the oppressed (Bartos & Wehr 2002, p.38). Karl Marx predicted that the poor shall rise against the rich, and advocated for a classless society. Marx divided the society in two classes; the bourgeoisie, who were the owners of the means of production, and the proletariat who were the working class where bourgeoisie strived to keep the cost of labour at its minimum whereas the proletariats strived to sell their labour at the highest price possible. There were many people in the proletariats class who were seeking jobs, and somehow the levels of payment remained down. In this context, the bourgeoisies are the oppressors, and the proletariats are the oppressed and the two groups are always in a struggle. This really makes a lot of sense in a capitalist society where there is often a large army of job seekers who are always ready to offer their services at any cost thus making the level of payment relatively low. By concentrating the resources and power on a few people, the bourgeoisie also have the power and means to control regulation of the society concerning laws, government, and other institutions, a situation that gives them the opportunity to expand and maintain their power and wealth in the society. According to Karl Marx, these two opposing goals of the two classes determine what a person believes in, what values they uphold, and even how they behave. In the society, there exist the so-called power elite who are a small group of wealthy and influential individuals at the top of the society who reserve the power and the resource. This class of the wealthy elite made up of the wealthy executives, celebrities military leaders, and politicians often have the access to national and international power, where their decisions affect everyone in the society. The rules and regulations of the society are therefore made in a way to suit a few individuals who manipulate them to stay on top of the social class. It is this group of the power elite that decide what is criminal and what is not, and the effects are greatly felt by those with little power in the society (Hills et al., 2002, p.11). This explains the reason why celebrities such as Justin Bieber or Chris Brown or influential politicians can commit crimes with little or no punishment as it happens to other people in retribution. There has also recently been complains by the African countries who are members of the Rome statute concerning the International Criminal court. The African leaders who threatened to pull out of the Rome statute cited bias in the manner in which cases from African nations were handled. While crime is often associated with people of the low class (the less privileged), crime committed by the rich and powerful remain under punished, and a big problem in the society today (Hagan & Peterson 1995, p.46). Fraud and pyramid scheme offences, which are often committed by the middle and upper class, remain under punished largely (Nelken 2007, p.736). The inequalities in the society exist in most legal systems in the world ranging from the developing countries to the leading economies in the world. For instance when cocaine became a drug problem in the USA in the late 1980s, crack cocaine (purest form of cocaine) wiped through the poor communities while cocaine was a drug of choice among the wealthy. The punishment for being caught with crack cocaine was 100 times higher than that of being caught with cocaine. The situation did not change until 2010 when president Obama signed the Fair sentencing Act into law, which decreased the disparity. This clearly shows that those in power have the resources and the means to make the laws in a manner that favours them whereas the powerless class suffers the consequences of the formulated law. There is also a section of the society who believes that criminality is all about symbolic interactionism in how societies or social groups come to view behaviour as deviant/ criminal or conventional. Although all people violate norms from time to time, nobody would consider him/her self-deviant or criminal, and those who do so are labelled so (Loftus 2007, p.252). With time they come to believe that they are deviant not because of their behaviour but due to the reaction of the society towards the behaviour. It is due to this that what is labelled deviant or criminal is relative and can vary significantly with time and across cultures (Bernburg 2002, p.732). The reason why crime is seen to persist in lower class societies is due to differential socialisation. Criminality is actually not a personal choice but a result of differential socialisation in the society whereby people who interact with criminals are more likely to be criminals because they learn the way and means of criminality (Currie 1997, p.167). This is the main reason why crime is seen to be Transgenerational. For instance in a family where the parent has been convicted, it is more likely that a child in the family will engage in crime. Another example is a teen whose friends are sexually active; this teen is more likely to view sexual activity as an acceptable thing or a norm in the society. In summary, the social stratification that exists in the society has a great bearing on the society’s perspective of criminality and its motivation. Functionalists believe that criminality is an essential part of a functional society as it strengthens norms by reminding people the significances of going against them. Violating the norms can somehow open the eyes of the society to injustices in the system to warrant some adjustment or influence public policy. Other view criminality as a function of the inequalities in power and resources in the society in that crime results from the struggle between the haves and the do not haves in the society. Crime is thought to be a social construct, which is greatly determined by the wealthy and power elite in the society. Bibliography Akers, R. L., 2009. Social Learning and Social Structure: A General Theory of Crime and Deviance. New Jersey: Transaction Publishers. Bartos, O. J. & Wehr, P., 2002. Using Conflict Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bernburg, J., 2002. Anomie, Social Change and Crime. British Journal of Criminology, 42(4), pp. 729-742. Cote, S., 2002. Criminological Theories: Bridging the Past to the Future. California: Sage Publishers Inc. Currie, E., 1997. Market, Crime and Community. Theoretical Criminology, 2(1), pp. 147-172. Hagan, J. & Peterson, R., 1995. Crime and Inequality. California: Stanford University Press. Hills, J., Le Grand, J. & Piachaud, D., 2002. Understanding Social Exclusion. Oxford: oxford University Press. Loftus, B., 2007. Policing the “irrelevant”: class, diversity and contemporary police culture. In: M. ONeill, M. Marks & A. Singh, eds. Police and Occupational Culture. Oxford: Elsevier. Matthews, R. & Pitts, J., 2001. Crime, Disorder and Community Safety: A New Agenda?. Lonbdon and New York: Routledge. McAra, L. & McVie, S., 2005. The usual suspects? Street-life, young people and the police. Criminal Justice, 5(1), pp. 5-36. Nelken, D., 2007. White Collar and Corporate Crime. In: M. Maguire, R. Morgan & R. Reiner, eds. The Oxford Hanudbook of Criminology. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 733-771. Openstax College, 2012. Introduction to Sociology. s.l.:The Saylor Foundation. Quinney, R., 1974. Critique of the Legal Order: Crime Control in Capitalist Society. New Jersey: Transaction Publishers. Smedt, H. D., 2005. Unexpected Approaches to the Global Society. London: Garangt Publishers. Taylor, I., 1995. Crime in Context: A Critical Criminology of Market Societies. Cambridge: Polity press. Vito, G. & Maahs, J., 2011. Criminology: Theory, Research, and Policy. 3 ed. Sudbury: Jones & Bartlett Publishers. Read More