Get 2 days of unlimited access
Class Notes (1,000,000)
AUS (30,000)
Monash (3,000)
ATS (300)
ATS1281 (40)
Lecture 11

ATS1281 Lecture Notes - Lecture 11: Corporate Crime, Collective Behavior, Jordan Belfort


Department
Arts - ATS
Course Code
ATS1281
Professor
Jarret Blaustein
Lecture
11

This preview shows pages 1-2. to view the full 7 pages of the document.
Overview:
Marx, Political Economy and Critical Criminology
-
From 'Crime' to 'Harm'
-
State corporate crime
-
State crime
-
Critical Criminology:
Broad tradition of research that is fundamentally concerned
with analyzing and addressing power differentials,
hierarchies, and inequalities that exist in society and taking
these as the starting point for trying to explain what crime
is, why it occurs and exists as it does and why some things
are criminalized and some aren't, but also looks at issues
more broadly such as social justice, and the way in which
different groups experience criminal justice in different
ways
-
---> The way in which society attempts to exercise social
control over its populations occurring through the criminal
justice system or other mechanisms
---> Labelling provides a foundation for these critiques
recognizing that not everything is harmful is necessarily
criminal and not everything criminal is necessarily harmful
so we must recognize that there's a process of
criminalization behind what we see written into the
criminal code as an offence or not but labelling theory
doesn't tell us about the substantiative nature of the power
differentials that exist in society
Marx & Crime:
Focus is on class, looking at the distribution of economic power
within society focusing on specifically modern society
-
Marx was essentially the quintessential critique of capitalism, his
work was fundamentally concerned with understanding the
relationship between economic and political power in the context
of a rapidly changing society where there was this emerging
capitalism that was fueling the modernization of an
industrialized society - refers to same process as social
disorganization however, is a different way of looking at it
-
Through the Marxist lens, essentially the criticism was that
capitalism and these changes that were taking place at a societal
level fundamentally served as a source of oppression,
exploitation and inequality for large segments of society
-
From the Marxist perspective you have two classes - capitalist
(economic elites - they have a vested interest as a class whereby
they want to accumulate more and more wealth and essentially
take over the means of production)
-
The fundamental existence of human nature is linked with our
desire to have some sort of meaningful productive work that is to
say, forming our identity through our profession or our
contribution in that context
-
As we have industrialization taking place, we have fewer people
owning means of production who start to experience strain
-
Primitive rebellion thesis i.e fundamental purpose of the state is
to regulate behavior of a ready supply of labor
-
Crime occurs as a form of resistance to an unjust capitalist order
-
Early Marxist Criminology: Willem Bonger
~ In order to provide a more richer critique of capitalism as a
way of thinking about crime
His values focused on the values associated with capitalism as an
ideology rather than the structures that exist which essentially
create inequality
These are values associated with individualism, greed and are
fundamentally criminogenic
The idea here is in the context of a capitalist society, the types of
values that it emphasizes in terms of individualism and the
accumulation of material wealth is problematic because it creates
an inhibition for individuals to develop a greater sense of
purpose and obligation to society, essentially having everyone
act in their own self interest
From Bonger's perspective, it was the culture of capitalism and
the values associated with it were fundamentally problematic
Capitalism described as:
‘a system of exploitation in which, in place of the exploited
person being robbed, he is compelled by poverty to use all
of his powers for the benefit of the exploiter’
A 'culture of competition'
‘The idea that wealth and success are central goals of
human endeavor is part of a large complex of beliefs that
may be termed the “culture of competition”…the
competitive economic struggle typical of life in capitalist
society is seen as a battlefield on which the most capable
and the hardest working individuals emerge victorious (and
essentially we as a society)…. “Winners” are admired for
the ability and drive that made them successful.’ (often
neglecting to consider advantages they may have had in life
which enabled them to get here) - Coleman
Eg. Jordan Belfort
How are states complicit?
There common interests between political and economic elites,
from a classic marxist perspective the argument is that they
essentially come from the same stock - common interest at stake
Marxists argued the law is designed and enforced to serve the
interests of the powerful (bourgeois)
-
Historically, the purpose of the state was to manage the conflicts
that exist between private parties i.e. In the business context, the
state is there to regulate the private sector recognizing that the
behavior of actors in the private sector does not always align
with the public interest, as they're there to compete with each
other
---> Hence, the state needed to place restrictions on this behavior
of corporations in order to ensure no problems were caused
The state must fundamentally act to create conditions that are
favorable to businesses or else they'll lose the business and
damage the economy, we start to see changes in how the global
economy is shaped - businesses are able to leave and pick up
with other jurisdictions if they find condition shat are better
---> Hence, the assumption is that states had to create conditions
as favorable as possible
States create and facilitate an attractive environment for existing
businesses
Eg. De-regulation, lax enforcement in terms of existing
regulations with the effect that the role of governments now
has been re-theorized to serve the interests of businesses
due to the fundamental assumption embedded in liberal
thought that 'what is goof for the economy is good fir the
public', legal protections
---> Consequence that states start to draw from other areas and
historically, the argument is that this has existed as a form of a
safety net for the most vulnerable and marginalized people in
society but at the same time, we see governments taking on a
more friendly stance towards businesses, they've also adopted
policies of posterity
Eg. In the 80's UK, the assumption that you have to get rid of the
welfare/ safety net in order for people to have the motivation to
go and do their own thing if you say, linking with the idea of
right realism
--> When you take away the needs for people to exist, it has an
impact on their strain, frustrations and deprivation in their lives
States create new opportunities for corporate crime
Eg. Privatization
* IMPORTANT to not think of the state as an inherent
regulator/ constraint upon the self interested corporate actors but
also potentially being complicit in this relationship
'Zemiology': Ideas that underpin recent iterations of critical
criminology
They take a fundamental critique of the criminal law and
these institutions as serving the powerful as a starting point
-
They reject the idea of crime as an object of study because
they see it as political compromise
-
Latest iteration of radical criminology focuses on ‘harms’
rather than crimes
-
Based on recognition of the fact that many acts which are
harmful are legal or rarely enforced
-
Types of social harm:
Harms which reinforce and perpetuate social inequalities -
actually seeing criminal justice as potentially problematic
in the sense that it reinforces these power differentials that
exist in society
1.
Harms resulting from production, distribution, and
consumption - can often be difficult to locate responsibility
with an individual, particular company even with the
government which are the harms that are a product of our
collective behavior as members of a consumerist society/
wider capitalist ideological system
2.
Eg. 2013 Rana Plaza Collapse
State corporate crime
'Criminal acts that occur when one or more institutions of
political governance pursue a goal in direct cooperation with one
or more institutions of economic production and distribution'
Essentially talking about states working with private actors,
corporations in a way that constitutes a breach in the law i.e
negligence
-
Eg. Challenger (Jan 1986) - Argument that we need to move
beyond thinking about such incidents as 'accidents' but rather as
forms of misconduct
State Crime:
‘Illegal or deviant act perpetrated by, or with the complicity of,
state agencies’ (Green and Ward 2005: 43)
-
Might be looking at states violating their own domestic laws/
international law/ human rights violations
-
It fundamentally shifts our focus beyond other previous activity
that occurs within the context of the nation state
-
We now see the state as a perpetrator rather than the enforcer
-
The scale of these atrocities and damage they generate, are often
far more significant than when we think about all of the
conventional/ violence that takes place domestically in a society
i.e issue of scale and severity
-
---> There's a direct correlation between scale and severity in
this case and the power of the actor in question and that is to say
that states are generally very powerful at least to relative to
perpetrators of mundane regular offences eg. 250 murders a year
in Australia compared to genocide where over 500,000 people
died - huge difference in scale
Examples of State Crime: Lines blur between international
relations criminology
There's a politics of labelling associated with these types of
behavior i.e a significance attached to whether you describe a
mass killing as a genocide or not, if you do there's arguable a
legal and moral obligation to act
Genocide ~ Illegal in that it's a breach of the 1948 convention
for the prevention and punishment of genocide
State terrorism
War crimes ~ Goes back to this idea of breaching international
laws
Systematic abuse of human rights ~ Generally associate these
abuses with a clear policy that was put in place by the
government not necessarily to harm people but rather a policy
that has that effect in any case
Eg. Offshore detention wasn't intentionally there to hurt people
but there are clear harms in human rights abuses that have been
linked with this however, the government has repeatedly failed
to address this problem
Police crime/ corruption
Impact of State Crime:
Issue of scale
Implication for fundamental question of state legitimacy and
that's if governments are actually perpetrators of crimes, then
what gives them the right to create the laws for people within
them are supposed to follow
Harms often far exceed those traditionally defined as ‘criminal’
Of particular importance because ‘it is states and governments
that ordinarily determine what is to be considered criminal or
otherwise and that manage and direct the justice system’
'States of Denial'
Contribution of neutralization is helpful to say that the people
who failed to act when asked why they didn't do anything about
the atrocities, often fell back on the techniques of neutralization
that people have committed crime
-
Point is that white-collar crime, corporate and state crime all
comes down to questions of power which is the fundamental
focus of critical criminology - thinking about how power is
distributed throughout society in the way in which it enables
some actors including states to act in ways which may be
harmful or beneficial in other cases
-
CASE STUDY: SYRIA CONFLICT
WEEK 11 - CRIMES OF POWERFUL PART 2
Sunday, 20 May 2018
9:55 pm

Only pages 1-2 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

Overview:
Marx, Political Economy and Critical Criminology
-
From 'Crime' to 'Harm'
-
State corporate crime
-
State crime
-
Critical Criminology:
Broad tradition of research that is fundamentally concerned
with analyzing and addressing power differentials,
hierarchies, and inequalities that exist in society and taking
these as the starting point for trying to explain what crime
is, why it occurs and exists as it does and why some things
are criminalized and some aren't, but also looks at issues
more broadly such as social justice, and the way in which
different groups experience criminal justice in different
ways
-
---> The way in which society attempts to exercise social
control over its populations occurring through the criminal
justice system or other mechanisms
---> Labelling provides a foundation for these critiques
recognizing that not everything is harmful is necessarily
criminal and not everything criminal is necessarily harmful
so we must recognize that there's a process of
criminalization behind what we see written into the
criminal code as an offence or not but labelling theory
doesn't tell us about the substantiative nature of the power
differentials that exist in society
Marx & Crime:
Focus is on class, looking at the distribution of economic power
within society focusing on specifically modern society
-
Marx was essentially the quintessential critique of capitalism, his
work was fundamentally concerned with understanding the
relationship between economic and political power in the context
of a rapidly changing society where there was this emerging
capitalism that was fueling the modernization of an
industrialized society - refers to same process as social
disorganization however, is a different way of looking at it
-
Through the Marxist lens, essentially the criticism was that
capitalism and these changes that were taking place at a societal
level fundamentally served as a source of oppression,
exploitation and inequality for large segments of society
-
From the Marxist perspective you have two classes - capitalist
(economic elites - they have a vested interest as a class whereby
they want to accumulate more and more wealth and essentially
take over the means of production)
-
The fundamental existence of human nature is linked with our
desire to have some sort of meaningful productive work that is to
say, forming our identity through our profession or our
contribution in that context
-
As we have industrialization taking place, we have fewer people
owning means of production who start to experience strain
-
Primitive rebellion thesis i.e fundamental purpose of the state is
to regulate behavior of a ready supply of labor
-
Crime occurs as a form of resistance to an unjust capitalist order
-
Early Marxist Criminology: Willem Bonger
~ In order to provide a more richer critique of capitalism as a
way of thinking about crime
His values focused on the values associated with capitalism as an
ideology rather than the structures that exist which essentially
create inequality
These are values associated with individualism, greed and are
fundamentally criminogenic
The idea here is in the context of a capitalist society, the types of
values that it emphasizes in terms of individualism and the
accumulation of material wealth is problematic because it creates
an inhibition for individuals to develop a greater sense of
purpose and obligation to society, essentially having everyone
act in their own self interest
From Bonger's perspective, it was the culture of capitalism and
the values associated with it were fundamentally problematic
Capitalism described as:
‘a system of exploitation in which, in place of the exploited
person being robbed, he is compelled by poverty to use all
of his powers for the benefit of the exploiter’
A 'culture of competition'
‘The idea that wealth and success are central goals of
human endeavor is part of a large complex of beliefs that
may be termed the “culture of competition”…the
competitive economic struggle typical of life in capitalist
society is seen as a battlefield on which the most capable
and the hardest working individuals emerge victorious (and
essentially we as a society)…. “Winners” are admired for
the ability and drive that made them successful.’ (often
neglecting to consider advantages they may have had in life
which enabled them to get here) - Coleman
Eg. Jordan Belfort
How are states complicit?
There common interests between political and economic elites,
from a classic marxist perspective the argument is that they
essentially come from the same stock - common interest at stake
Marxists argued the law is designed and enforced to serve the
interests of the powerful (bourgeois)
-
Historically, the purpose of the state was to manage the conflicts
that exist between private parties i.e. In the business context, the
state is there to regulate the private sector recognizing that the
behavior of actors in the private sector does not always align
with the public interest, as they're there to compete with each
other
---> Hence, the state needed to place restrictions on this behavior
of corporations in order to ensure no problems were caused
The state must fundamentally act to create conditions that are
favorable to businesses or else they'll lose the business and
damage the economy, we start to see changes in how the global
economy is shaped - businesses are able to leave and pick up
with other jurisdictions if they find condition shat are better
---> Hence, the assumption is that states had to create conditions
as favorable as possible
States create and facilitate an attractive environment for existing
businesses
Eg. De-regulation, lax enforcement in terms of existing
regulations with the effect that the role of governments now
has been re-theorized to serve the interests of businesses
due to the fundamental assumption embedded in liberal
thought that 'what is goof for the economy is good fir the
public', legal protections
---> Consequence that states start to draw from other areas and
historically, the argument is that this has existed as a form of a
safety net for the most vulnerable and marginalized people in
society but at the same time, we see governments taking on a
more friendly stance towards businesses, they've also adopted
policies of posterity
Eg. In the 80's UK, the assumption that you have to get rid of the
welfare/ safety net in order for people to have the motivation to
go and do their own thing if you say, linking with the idea of
right realism
--> When you take away the needs for people to exist, it has an
impact on their strain, frustrations and deprivation in their lives
States create new opportunities for corporate crime
Eg. Privatization
* IMPORTANT to not think of the state as an inherent
regulator/ constraint upon the self interested corporate actors but
also potentially being complicit in this relationship
'Zemiology': Ideas that underpin recent iterations of critical
criminology
They take a fundamental critique of the criminal law and
these institutions as serving the powerful as a starting point
-
They reject the idea of crime as an object of study because
they see it as political compromise
-
Latest iteration of radical criminology focuses on ‘harms’
rather than crimes
-
Based on recognition of the fact that many acts which are
harmful are legal or rarely enforced
-
Types of social harm:
Harms which reinforce and perpetuate social inequalities -
actually seeing criminal justice as potentially problematic
in the sense that it reinforces these power differentials that
exist in society
1.
Harms resulting from production, distribution, and
consumption - can often be difficult to locate responsibility
with an individual, particular company even with the
government which are the harms that are a product of our
collective behavior as members of a consumerist society/
wider capitalist ideological system
2.
Eg. 2013 Rana Plaza Collapse
State corporate crime
'Criminal acts that occur when one or more institutions of
political governance pursue a goal in direct cooperation with one
or more institutions of economic production and distribution'
Essentially talking about states working with private actors,
corporations in a way that constitutes a breach in the law i.e
negligence
-
Eg. Challenger (Jan 1986) - Argument that we need to move
beyond thinking about such incidents as 'accidents' but rather as
forms of misconduct
State Crime:
‘Illegal or deviant act perpetrated by, or with the complicity of,
state agencies’ (Green and Ward 2005: 43)
-
Might be looking at states violating their own domestic laws/
international law/ human rights violations
-
It fundamentally shifts our focus beyond other previous activity
that occurs within the context of the nation state
-
We now see the state as a perpetrator rather than the enforcer
-
The scale of these atrocities and damage they generate, are often
far more significant than when we think about all of the
conventional/ violence that takes place domestically in a society
i.e issue of scale and severity
-
---> There's a direct correlation between scale and severity in
this case and the power of the actor in question and that is to say
that states are generally very powerful at least to relative to
perpetrators of mundane regular offences eg. 250 murders a year
in Australia compared to genocide where over 500,000 people
died - huge difference in scale
Examples of State Crime: Lines blur between international
relations criminology
There's a politics of labelling associated with these types of
behavior i.e a significance attached to whether you describe a
mass killing as a genocide or not, if you do there's arguable a
legal and moral obligation to act
Genocide ~ Illegal in that it's a breach of the 1948 convention
for the prevention and punishment of genocide
State terrorism
War crimes ~ Goes back to this idea of breaching international
laws
Systematic abuse of human rights ~ Generally associate these
abuses with a clear policy that was put in place by the
government not necessarily to harm people but rather a policy
that has that effect in any case
Eg. Offshore detention wasn't intentionally there to hurt people
but there are clear harms in human rights abuses that have been
linked with this however, the government has repeatedly failed
to address this problem
Police crime/ corruption
Impact of State Crime:
Issue of scale
Implication for fundamental question of state legitimacy and
that's if governments are actually perpetrators of crimes, then
what gives them the right to create the laws for people within
them are supposed to follow
Harms often far exceed those traditionally defined as ‘criminal’
Of particular importance because ‘it is states and governments
that ordinarily determine what is to be considered criminal or
otherwise and that manage and direct the justice system’
'States of Denial'
Contribution of neutralization is helpful to say that the people
who failed to act when asked why they didn't do anything about
the atrocities, often fell back on the techniques of neutralization
that people have committed crime
-
Point is that white-collar crime, corporate and state crime all
comes down to questions of power which is the fundamental
focus of critical criminology - thinking about how power is
distributed throughout society in the way in which it enables
some actors including states to act in ways which may be
harmful or beneficial in other cases
-
CASE STUDY: SYRIA CONFLICT
WEEK 11 - CRIMES OF POWERFUL PART 2
Sunday, 20 May 2018 9:55 pm
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version