Three Sociological Perspectives on Crime in the United States, Essay Example

The phenomenon of crime in the United States may be approached from various theoretical perspectives. Each of these perspectives tends to emphasize a certain specific group of factors to explain why crime occurs. In the following, we will present three of the theoretical frameworks: Durkheim’s structural functionalist approach, Marx’s theory of social conflict and economics, and the symbolic interactionism of Merton. All these frameworks provide concepts that seek to explain the logic of crime, and furthermore, provide possible solutions to crime.

The definition of crime is by no means consistent, as evidenced by the vast amount of academic literature on the subject. When looking for a general definition of crime, criminologists employ the notion of a “consensus view of crime.” As Siegel describes the consensus view: “According to the consensus view, crimes are viewed as behaviors believed to be repugnant to all elements of society.” (Siegel 16) This consensus view could also be applied to the case of the United States: a general definition of crime in America would be behaviors that are at odds with the basic norms of American society. The consensus view, however, does not really offer an account of how crime originates or a solution to crime. In this respect, thinkers such as Durkheim, Marx and Merton provide invaluable concepts to think about crime.

Emile Durkheim is often associated with the structural functionalist school of sociology. The basic view of structural functionalism is that society is composed of inter-related parts, such as institutions and organizations, which inter-act with each other to produce the phenomenon of society itself. Hence, “according to structural functionalists, society consists of various institutions, and groups, that owing to their constant contact with one another, shift, move, and alter their mutual influence.”  (Winfree et. al. 166) From Durkheim’s perspective, crime is the result of exceptions to the norms that this structure creates. Thus, in the case of the United States, crimes would be anything that is not consistent with the structure of American society. Accordingly, for Durkheim crime is relative to the norms of the structure, which would be relative to American norms. To prevent crime it is therefore necessary to take account not only of the criminal act, but also of the structures and norms that define what a criminal act is. In this way, refining the relations between structures can be understood as a means to eliminate crime.

In Marx’s view, society is structured according to an antagonism between classes. Thus, there is a constant conflict between those who own the “means of production”, and those workers who are forced to sell their labor. According to the Marxist perspective, crime is a result of the inequality between the two classes. Thus, as Tierney writes: “Marx too saw crime as an inevitable response to the conditions created by capitalism.” (Tierney 188) The solution to the problem of crime would be the elimination of societal inequality, which would eliminate the necessity of crime. Considering the case of the United States, it would be the wide class differences in the country that are responsible for crime; the elimination of this class difference would lower crime.

Symbolic interactionism states that crime should be understood in terms of meaning in society.  For example, a certain act may be considered criminal to the extent that it has a meaning for a given society as a transgressive act. This society itself is conceived in terms of a relationship between meanings. Robert Merton, viewed as an important figure of symbolic interactionism, suggests that crime occurs ”where approved means to approved goals are not available.” (Reynolds et. al. 698) Crime is therefore the result of the tension between meanings within a society and the possibility for people to act on these meanings. It appears that the solution to crime in Merton’s account would be the resolution of these different meanings in a common community of meaning.

Durkheim, Marx and Merton all present unique approaches to crime according to their conceptual frameworks. Moreover, their frameworks allow us not only to propose a definition of crime, but also to think about why crime occurs and thus how it can be prevented. When considering these thinkers in terms of crime in the United States, they all offer some pertinent perspectives with which to examine the phenomenon.

Works Cited

Reynolds, Larry T. and Nancy J. Herman-Kinney. Handbook of Symbolic Interactionism. Oxford: Rowan Altamira:, 2003.

Siegel, Larry. Criminology. Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning, 2008

Tierny, John. Criminology: Theory and Context. 2008. Edinburgh Gate, UK: Pearson Educated Limited, 2006.

Winfree, L. Thomas Jr., Howard L. Abadinsky, and L. Thomas Winfree. Understanding Crime: Essentials of Criminological Theory. Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning, 2010.