Left Realism (AQA A Level Sociology): Revision Note

Left realist theories of crime

• Left Realism developed in the 1980s and 1990s

• Like Marxists, left realists see society as unequal and capitalist

• Unlike Marxists, they are reformist, not revolutionary:

  • They argue for gradual reform to reduce inequality

  • They want practical solutions now, rather than waiting for a revolution to abolish crime

Taking crime seriously

• Left realists argue that crime is a real problem, especially for disadvantaged groups (e.g., working class, women, ethnic minorities)

• Left realists criticise other approaches:

  • Marxists: Focus on corporate crime, ignoring working-class street crime

  • Neo-Marxists: Romanticise working-class criminals as “Robin Hoods”, ignoring harm to their own communities

  • Labelling theorists: Focus on offenders as victims of labels, ignoring the real victims of crime

Aetiological crisis

• Left realists argue that from the 1950s onwards, crime rates rose, particularly among the working class

• Young (2011) suggested this created an aetiological crisis

• Critical criminologists and labelling theorists denied this was a real increase, arguing it reflected more reporting or labelling

• Left realists argue the rise was real, shown in victim surveys (e.g., the British Crime Survey):

  • Disadvantaged groups were more likely to be victims

  • They were also less likely to report a crime to the police

Causes of crime

• Left realists highlight four linked causes of crime:

  • Relative deprivation

  • Individualism

  • Subculture

  • Marginalisation

Relative deprivation

• Crime occurs when people feel deprived compared to others

• Expectations for consumer goods and lifestyles rise faster than opportunities to achieve them

• This leads to resentment and frustration, sometimes pushing people towards crime

Individualism

• Lea and Young (1984) believe that modern societies have become more individualistic, focused on self-interest, greed, and consumerism

• Decline of community controls (e.g., family, neighbours) has weakened informal deterrents

• This creates a spiral of antisocial behaviour, aggression, and crime

Marginalisation

• Those at the bottom of society feel powerless and excluded

• This can create resentment and hostility towards the police and wider society

• Lea & Young argue that harsh, 'military-style' policing (e.g., stop and search) often reflects institutional racism, which deepens anger

• Marginalisation may lead to riots, looting, or violence

Subcultural response

• Some respond to deprivation and marginalisation by joining subcultures

• Subcultures provide status and a sense of belonging

• However, deviant subcultures may channel frustration into crime, especially among young men seeking status through offending

Late modernity

• Young (2002) describes contemporary UK society is more diverse, unstable, and unequal

• Relative deprivation is widespread, even among the middle class

• There is growing cultural inclusion as everyone is exposed to consumerist lifestyles via media

• There is also economic exclusion, as not everyone can afford these lifestyles

• This gap between aspirations and reality fuels more crime

• Those on the margins of society often respond by pursuing material success through criminal means

Left realism & social policy

• In the UK, Left realism influenced New Labour’s approach: 'tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime'

• They argue that crime must be tackled through both improved policing and structural reforms

Tackling crime

• Left realists believe crime cannot be solved by law enforcement alone

• Policies should combine:

  • better policing and community control

  • addressing deeper social and economic causes of crime

Policing and control

• Kinsey, Lea and Young (1986) argue that the police must work with the public, not against them

• Priorities and strategies should be set with community input, e.g.,

  • Neighbourhood Watch schemes

  • reducing the over-policing of ethnic minorities

• Police should spend less time on military-style policing and more time building community relationships

  • Heavy stop-and-search tactics create conflict

  • Routine beat patrols are ineffective

• Left realists argue that to control crime, there must be:

  • more focus on community relationships

  • a multi-agency approach: not just police, but also schools, housing, councils, leisure services, voluntary groups, and victim support working together

Tackling structural causes of crime

• Crime has deeper roots in inequality and exclusion

• Left realists call for major social reforms to reduce deprivation and marginalisation

• Key policies include:

  • tackling inequality of opportunity and unfair distribution of rewards

  • investing in education, housing, and community facilities

  • providing decent jobs for all to reduce unemployment

  • addressing discrimination in all forms

• They also stress the importance of being tolerant of diversity and avoiding the stereotyping of whole groups as criminals

Evaluation of left realism

Strengths

• Takes crime seriously

  • Hughes (1998) notes that left realism addresses real problems of crime, especially street crime affecting disadvantaged groups

  • Unlike Marxism, Neo-Marxism, or labelling theory, it avoids romanticising offenders and focuses on the harm caused to victims

• Policy relevance

  • Offers practical policy solutions (e.g., community policing, tackling inequality)

  • Influenced real-world policies, such as New Labour’s 'tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime'

Criticisms

• Over-predicts crime

  • Relative deprivation has increased, but crime rates have not risen at the same pace

  • Fails to explain why most working-class and ethnic-minority youths conform rather than offend

• Neglects corporate crime

  • Over-focuses on street crime, ignoring crimes of the powerful

  • Cannot explain corporate or white-collar crime, which is often more harmful.

• Doesn't explain all crime

  • Emphasises subcultural responses, but cannot explain individual crimes like burglary

  • Ignores non-economic motivations for crime

• Postmodernist critique

  • Postmodernists argue crime is not always about deprivation or exclusion

  • Katz (1988) argues that some crime may be motivated by excitement or thrill, not inequality

• Lacks empirical evidence

  • Limited evidence that young, working-class or black offenders see themselves as relatively deprived or marginalised

  • More qualitative research is needed on offenders’ motives