Asma Gul 13So1
Assess the usefulness of the realist explanations of patterns and trends in crime
and deviance. [40 marks]
Realists explanations of crime and deviance can be seen contributed by both left and
right realists. Left realists view crime on a large scale, ranging from street crime to
white collar and corporate crime, whilst right realists simply focus on street crime
and take a wholly conventionalist approach to explaining crime. Whilst they
obviously differ in their outlook on crime and society, the majority of realist
criminologists are in consensus with regards to the rise of crime as reflected in
criminal statistics and the ‘corrosive effects which crime can have on communities’
(Matthews and young 1992). However, realist explanations merely succeed to
address offenders’ motives and the causes behind why certain people commit crime,
which is significant when explaining patterns and trends in crime.
To explain the patterns and trends in crime and deviance, right realist, Hirshci posed
the Control theory, which eliminates the reasons as to why people don’t commit
crime. Some of the reasons include attachment to others in society, commitment
(jobs, children etc.) and involvement (active participant in society). All these reasons
are what Hirschi called social bonds, and those who do not have strong social
bonds, then they are more likely to commit crime. This suggests that the reason the
working-class individuals are shown to commit the majority of crime, is due to the
lack of purpose in their lives and mere persistence to achieve in society, like working
towards getting a well-paid job. Working class individuals can may also place limited
emphasis towards the value of family, which means they have little public
expectations to live up to. Therefore, working class individuals are more likely to turn
to crime and deviance as they have weak social bonds and not integrated fully to the
norms and values of society. Prison population statistics, like 67% of prison
population are unemployed before conviction, corroborate Hirschi’s notion.
On the other hand, Marxists would argue that such weak ‘social bonds’ are inherently
created by the capitalist system to maintain the proletariats’ positioning in society.
For example, since the proletariat are exploited and thus occupy a redundant
lifestyle, with long working hours on a little salary, their ability to create strong social
bonds, like getting a well-paid job, to afford possessions like a house and car and
start a family are inhibited. This means that, working class people, are more likely to
turn to crime and deviance, because of alienation actively created by capitalist
system and out of frustration, since they are hindered from succeeding by structure
of society itself. Therefore, Marxists would argue that Hirschi fails to recognise, that
the working class have limited chances of achieving strong social bonds by
capitalism and have little option, but to resort to crime.
Wilson and Herrnstein identified that there is biological element to criminal
behaviour, arguing that some people have a pre-deposition and uncontrollable
impulse for criminality. For right realists, this would explain why males commit 80%
of all offences (PRCF) suggesting that males are likely to be innately
temperamentally aggressive and therefore challenge society’s norms and values
from a young age. New Rights would corroborate such notion provided by right
realists, adding that low level disorder from males (minor c/d) escalates into
