Dimensions of Conflict Theory, Essay Example

There are two different dimensions of conflict theory used in the criminal justice; socioeconomic class and radical criminology. The origin of the use of conflict theory in criminology lies in early Marxism. When Marx first revealed the power differences between various classes of the society, the expression: “social class” was born. When social interest groups are fighting for resources, that creates conflict. The main determinant of power and influence, according to Marx (1971), were authority and property. The original theory also concluded that every class is antagonistic and looks after their own interest.

Socioeconomic Class Theory

As mentioned previously, the source of the general class theory is found in the writings of Marx. However, this complex theory has been developed further in the next decades. Weber (1947) included two more factors in the theory; social prestige and political influence. Access to wealth and prosperity, opportunities – according to Weber were no longer only determined by the class but the position in the society as well. He defined power differently; “the ability to impose one’s will on another, even when the other objects. (p. 72.) According to his thesis, the source of conflict in the society is the struggle of distribution of authority and power. The only way of avoiding conflict is to convince subordinates to agree. Similarly, Mills defined three different types of power; authority, manipulation and coercion. While, according to Collins, coercion is the sole source of conflict.

Radical Criminology

Similarly to socioeconomic class theory, radical criminology also draws its ideas from Marx’s original social conflict theory and social class theory. According to this approach, the criminal justice system is a tool to keep the social classes in place, while crimes of different level can represent deviance. For example, stealing can be an act of demolishing barriers between classes and taking goods away from the rich. Protestation can also be seen as the fight for the more just distribution of goods and power.

Radical criminology addresses crime deviance. Later, different realist groups re-created the theory in a way that it was attempting to reveal the possible “solutions for crime”. According to Young, (1986. p. 28.) “the major task of radical criminology is to seek /a solution to the problem of crime and that of a socialist policy is to substantially reduce the crime rate” The ideology was to reveal the affects of crime on the most vulnerable members of the society.

The two major propositions of the radical criminology approach:

a, criminology was dependent on the interest of powerful classes; ie. politicians, therefore, it served them better than other, less fortunate members of the society. This means that inequality in the society can be also present in criminal justice

b, crime has got no independent existence and without studying criminalization, there is no equal treatment in front of the law. As some classes have privileges, such as restrictions of the media, access to lawyers and advisor, political and social influence, crime as an independent occurrence does not exist without taking into consideration the social constructions.

According to the radical conflict theory, individuals are the subject of injustice, because of their social class, the unequal distribution of power and influence. It also examines victimization in criminal justice. It is evident that the various forms of criticism related to the criminal justice system are based on Marx’s conflict theory, as well.

References:

Marx, Karl. 1971. Preface to A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy, Tr. S. W. Ryanzanskaya, edited by M. Dobb. London

Weber, M. (1947) The Theory of Social and Economic Organization .

Young, J. (1986) ‘The failure of criminology: the need for a radical realism’. In R. Matthews and J. Young (eds), Confronting Crime. London: Sage