Before discussing radical criminology and its implications of crime policies, it is first necessary to define radical criminology but before doing so, let us begin with defining criminology itself. Criminology is a theoretical field of study that endeavors to to discern the root causes of crime, what crime means in terms of law, and the populaces reaction to crime in general. Criminology, being an offshoot of sociology, tends to embrace Marxist idealism and radical criminology, also known as conflict theory, wholly embraces Marxism as an answer towards dealing with crime. The notion that criminal behavior and the criminals that engage in such behavior need to be studied in order to better develop policies in dealing with crime is a very modern practice. Indeed, it is a product of a post Marxist world. Radical criminology or conflict theory is based on the belief that crime is directly caused by the social and economic forces of any given society. In criminology this view is taken as well but in radical criminology the belief is that the justice system exists primarily to serve the wealthy and oppress the poor. There is no doubt some validity to the idea that social and economic forces contribute greatly to crime. In fact, Victor Hugo's outstanding novel Les Miserables presents an epic tale of Jean Valjean, a man who when very young stole a loaf of bread to feed his destitute family and found himself imprisoned for many years because of this.

That action, one of theft, no doubt a crime, set forth a series of events that inspired Valjean to endeavor to repent his crime and do penance. Upon his release, having nowhere to stay he is welcomed into the home of the local priest who feeds him and offers him lodging for the night. Later that night, Valjean steals some silverware and other such items of value and steals away in the night. He is soon captured and claiming the priest gave these items of value to him as a gift he is brought back to the priests home so the gendarmes may verify this story. To Valjeans great surprise, the priest testifies he did indeed give the items Valjean stole and demands the gendarmes let him go. Upon doing so, the priest demands of Jean Valjean a price. That price is that Valjean endeavor to live a life without sin and to be a better man. Valjean does so, and in doing so rises up in the social order to a standing of wealth and respect only to find himself hounded by a gendarme who recognizes him from his days in prison. This tome of tremendous scope and length is the conflict between these two men, Valjean the former thief and the gendarme Javert. While Valjean who began as a thief stands as the iconic hero of the ages, moral and upright in his character, Javert as the lawman stands as the amoral opportunist and villain. This portrayal of a moral thief who is hounded by an amoral officer of the law is wholly plausible and the book is well worth reading. However, to use it as the perfect model and example of how societies are and tend to be is not such a good policy.

The law, is nothing if it is not a collective organization of the individuals right to self defense. In other words, the law is that which defends the natural rights of the individual. The only reason to organize a system that would dispense justice is in defense of the individuals right to life, liberty and the pursuit of property. When the law or justice functions in this capacity then it follows that if an individual does not have the right to use force against a persons liberty, life or property then the organization founded on this principle has no right to use force against a persons lawful right to life, liberty and property.

When the law moves beyond this scope we find ourselves in a society that suffers from social injustice. It is not because there are wealthy and poor that there is social injustice but because there is a perversion of law. There will be anomalous situations such as Jean Valjean who while noble and good commits the crime of theft in order to survive, but let's be honest about the "social justice" of France during that countries tumultuous revolutionary period of 1815 to 1835 is hardly known historically as a time of social peace and justice. Those revolutions began because of an aristocracy who gleefully plundered the people and got even bloodier because the people plundered back. Plunder, whether it be through illegal or "legal" means is plunder and as such a crime. There is no justification for plunder and a criminal policy based on the Marxist principles of legal plunder will never bring about a just society.

Only when the people endeavor to organize a system of justice that protects the rights of the individual to live free from harm from others, and most importantly from the tyranny of governments will a just society have a chance of surviving. Any other form of organization is surely breeding grounds for injustice.

Resources

Top Categories

Product

Company