The Neo-Marxist Perspective on Crime (AQA A Level Sociology): Revision Note

Neo-Marxism & crime: critical criminology

• Neo-Marxism combines Marxist ideas (crime linked to inequality and capitalism) with insights from labelling theory (crime as socially constructed)

• Taylor, Walton and Young (1973) agree with Marxists that:

  • capitalism creates inequality and crime

  • the state makes and enforces laws in ruling-class interests

  • a classless society would greatly reduce crime

Anti-determinism

• Neo-Marxists reject the determinism of traditional Marxism

  • Marxists often portray the working class as passive victims of capitalism, driven into crime by forces beyond their control

• Instead, Neo-Marxists are interpretivists:

  • They see individuals as active agents with free will

  • Crime is a voluntaristic act — a conscious, meaningful choice

• Criminals are not puppets of capitalism; they may be deliberately resisting or challenging the system

Crime as a political act

• Taylor et al. argue that crime can be understood as a form of political protest against capitalism

• Examples:

  • Burglary, robbery, and mugging are attempts to redistribute wealth from the rich to the poor

  • Vandalism is a symbolic attack on capitalism’s obsession with property

  • Drug use is due to a rejection of material values promoted by capitalism

  • Sabotage/rioting can be viewed as direct resistance to ruling-class power

• The wider social meaning of crime must be considered, not just the act itself

• The ruling class recognises this potential and uses the state apparatus (e.g., police) to control working-class resistance, often targeting poorer areas

The fully social theory of deviance

• Taylor et al. (1973) outlined a 'fully social theory of deviance' – a comprehensive framework combining Marxist and interactionist ideas

• They aimed to understand crime in a way that could help change society for the better

Six elements to understanding crime

1. The wider origins of deviance

   • How crime and deviance are linked to the unequal distribution of wealth and power under capitalism

2. The immediate origins of deviance

   • The context in which individuals decide to commit a crime, e.g., unemployment

3. The act itself

   • And its meaning for the individual, e.g., rebellion, resistance

4. The immediate social reaction

   • How family, community, and police respond when the act is discovered

5. The wider origins of social reaction

   • How ruling-class power and ideology shape law enforcement; why some acts are treated more harshly than others, e.g., why do some crimes trigger moral panics

6. The outcome

   • How the deviant is labelled and the wider social effects of this labelling, e.g., impact on the offender’s future

• This framework links micro-level meanings (individual motives) with macro-level structures (capitalism and power)

Evaluation of critical criminology

Strengths

• Combines structure and agency

  • Links Marxist concern with inequality to labelling theory’s focus on social reaction

  • Provides a more complete framework for understanding crime

• Crime as resistance

  • Highlights how crime can be a political act, challenging ruling-class power

  • Recognises the role of free will and choice, unlike traditional Marxism

Criticisms

• Too idealistic

  • Left realists, e.g., Lea & Young argue Neo-Marxists romanticise criminals as political rebels

  • Most working-class crime is directed against other working-class people (e.g., burglary, assault), not the ruling class

• Neglects victims

  • Ignores the real harm caused to victims of crime, especially in poor communities

  • Feminists criticise Taylor et al.'s approach for focusing mainly on male criminality, neglecting women

• Over-complex

  • The 'fully social theory' is criticised as too abstract and difficult to apply in practice

  • Hopkins Burke (2005) argues that critical criminology is 'too idealistic' and offers little help in tackling crime