to create a public impression, which stipulates that, their interests and those of the subordinate group, are the same when they try to achieve their own desires. Conflict theorists view the level of crime in a society as a result of one group having the ability to control the other group.
Radical criminology theory holds that crime is caused by social and economic factors in the society (Bohm, 2010). It states that in a society, the interests of the ruling class over rule the interests of the society as a whole. The theory bases on instrumental Marxism, which looks at crime being caused by inequalities in the society. In that, the decisions that benefit the society are made by considering the ruling class and not the whole society (Hagan, 2011). The theory describes crime not as competition for power position and wealth, but rather as denial right to food and shelter, human self-respect and self-determination (Bohm, 2010). It explores the exploitation of human rights to cause pain and worthlessness (Siegel, 2012).
Conflict criminology differs from radical criminology in the sense that the latter is more specific in identifying on a crime (Bohm, 2010). While conflict criminology narrows to the relative powerlessness as a cause of crime, radical criminology focuses on the political and economic setup of the society. Conflict criminologists argue that power in the society is exercised differently by groups who are in control, unlike radical criminologists who believe that power in the society is not in the hands of a particular ruling class. Radical criminology revolves around the social structure of a society while conflict criminology maintains that conflict is an outstanding factor in all societies (Hagan, 2011).
Peace making criminology defines crime as part of the various forms of violence that cause suffering and misery to humans. Crime is likened to racism, battles, and prejudice that contribute to human despair (Dekeseredy, 2013). The theory points to