View
1.222
Download
1
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Knowledge Area Module 1 Principles of Societal Development
by
Fred Biney Fred.biney@Waldenu.edu
Student ID # A00169570 Program: PhD in Human Services
Specialization: Criminal Justice
Faculty Mentor: Keith Bryett keith.bryett@waldenu.edu
KAM Assessor: Keith Bryett keith.bryett@waldenu.edu
Walden University
April 11, 2010
Abstract
Breadth
The first part of this paper will identify and examine three major change theories. These theories
are evolutionary theory, conflict theory and, structural-functional theory. The theorists whose
work is to be considered are Spencer, Comte, Marx and Parsons. Additional objectives will be to
identify and examine how poverty and social inequalities have been explained by evolutionary
theorists, social functional theorists, and, structural-functional theorists. Furthermore, the paper
will compare and contrast the classical philosophies of Herbert Spencer, Auguste Comte, Karl
Marx and, Talbott Parsons as they relate to poverty and social inequality. Finally, this paper will
also analyze the strengths and limitations of Spencer’s, Comte’s, Marx’s, and Parson’ theories of
social change in terms of their underlying philosophies as they relate to the building of a fair and
just society.
Abstract
Depth
This section of the paper will identify, examine and analyze current research and literature on the
treatment of racial minorities and the economically disadvantaged offenders in the criminal
justice system in relationship to the social change theories examined in the Breadth paper.
Further objectives for this section will be to explore, identify, and evaluate the current treatment
of racial minorities and economically disadvantaged offenders under the criminal justice system
and its relationship to social change. Furthermore, this section will compare and contrast current
research concerning racial minorities and economically disadvantaged offenders under the
criminal justice system. Finally, the paper will also identify and discuss current theories being
advance towards the equal and fair treatment of racial minorities and economically
disadvantaged offenders under the criminal justice system.
Abstract
Application
The third section of this paper will consist of two parts. The first part is about 10 pages to link
the ideas, themes, theoretical findings of the authorities whose work is examined in the Breadth
and Depth paper are related and linked to the application project; which is the production a
booklet manual. The title of the booklet will be called, A Framework for Understanding
Minorities and Economically Disadvantaged Offenders under the Criminal Justice System. The
objective of the booklet is to promote a positive social change in the criminal justice system.
Furthermore, the booklet could be to utilize to train existing staff and all newly employed staff
towards the proper and fair treatment of minority and economically disadvantaged offenders
under the criminal justice system
Table of Contents
List of Table of Contents……………………………………………………………….i
List of Table of Contents……………………………………………………………….ii
Breadth: Poverty and Inequalities in America…………………………………………..1
Classical and Contemporary Social Change Theories……………………………………5
Evolutionary Theories…………………………………………………………………..11
Herbert Spencer…………………………………………………………………………13
Auguste Comte………………………………………………………………………….15
Karl Marx’s Conflict Theory……………………………………………………………17
Structural Functional Theory……………………………………………………………18
Talcott Parsons………………………………………………………………………….19
Summary and Analysis………………………………………………………………….20
Differences and Similarities………………………………….…………………………24
Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………..27
Depth: Racial Minorities and Criminal Justice System…………………….………….28
Annotated Bibliography………………………………………………………………28
Literature Review Essay………………………………………………………….......58
Social Change in Contemporary America…………………………………………….59
Racial Minorities, Economically Disadvantaged People & Law Enforcement………61
Fear, Mistrust and Tension between Races…………………………………….........63
Mass Urban Poverty…………………………………………………………………70
Theoretical Perspective on Inequalities and Crime…………………………………..74
Inequality in the Criminal Justice System………………………………………….……..76
Large Racial Minority Imprisonment……………………………………………..……….80
Summary and Conclusion…………………………………………………………..………84
Application: Framework for Understanding Racial Minorities & Economically
Disadvantaged Offenders in the Criminal Justice System…………………………………88
Social Change: Racial Minorities and the Economically Disadvantaged in America………89
The Classical and Social Theories of Crime………………………………………………..90
Racial Minority, Economically Disadvantaged Offenders and the Courts’ System……….91
Discussion…………………………………………………………………………..………93
Conclusion……..………………………………………………………………………….106
References………………………………………………………………………………...107
Breadth
SBSF 8110: Principle of Societal Development
“A new civilization is emerging in our lives, and blind men everywhere are trying to
suppress it. This new civilization brings with it new family styles, changed ways of working,
loving, and living, a new economy, new political conflicts…” (Alvin & Heidi Toffler, 1994.
p.1) The only thing that is changing constantly is change itself. Change is inevitable because
with the passing of time and the development of nature, everything along its path also changes.
There are different types of change. However, the change that has impacted the human
population the most is Social Change. Social Change is important because it has been the
primary driving force that has shaped and molded societies all across the world. To understand
why and how social change takes place, I will identify and investigate three major social change
theories developed or advanced by Spencer, Comte, Marx, and Parsons.
THEORIES OF SOCIAL CHANGE
The theories that will be examined are evolutionary theory, social conflict theory and
structural functional theory. Social change affects individuals and society in different ways,
thus, social change may mean different things to different people. Social change has brought
happiness and misery to America in many different ways. Social change has been a blessing to
many people because many lives have been enhanced and improved but for others also, social
change has been a misery and has brought untold hardship and challenges. However, to fully
understand the evolution of social change, we must recognize what social change is and the
forces that bring about social change.
Causes of Social Change
What is social change? What are the causes of social change? And how does social
change affect minorities and economically disadvantaged people in America? The Breadth part
of this KAM will explore and answer these questions, and it will also investigate how poverty
and social inequalities have been explained by evolutionary theorists, social conflict theorists,
and structural functional theorists. Secondly, it will compare the classical philosophies of
Herbert Spencer, Auguste Comte, Karl Marx, and Talbott Parsons as they relate to poverty and
social inequality. Thirdly, it will also analyze the strengths and limitations of the theories of
social change of those authorities as they relate to the building of a fair and just society.
The Causes of social change for years have baffled great minds and social thinkers alike,
due to the drastic and observable social transformation both positive and negative taking place in
their eras. Macionis (2003) stated that social change involves the transformation of society
through its cultural and social institutions. Changes in social patterns like role, status, social
stratification, innovations, advancements in technological know-how, expansions of complex big
governments, and sprawling urban centers are all examples of social change. Additionally,
human ideas in the form of values, ideologies and beliefs, whether religious or secular, all have
the same tendency to bring about social change. Thus, even charismatic people with good ideas
can introduce social change into society even though sometimes they may be met with resistance
by the more conservative people who will wish to stay with the old ways of doing things.
However, at a later stage the ideas or an innovation gradually gains momentum and becomes
acceptable and adopted by some or all the members in a community, hence better mental
resources could also lead to social change. Social change, Macionis (2003) asserted, is always
accompanied by four major characteristics. The first major characteristic of a social change is a
constant change. Macionis claimed that, nothing ever remains permanent even though some
societies and cultures that are less materialistic experience change slower than technological
complex societies like America. Macionis (2003) said the second major characteristic of a social
change is that change is most often unplanned, even though it may be intentionally set in motion.
He explained that manufacturers and advertisers may lure people into buying the latest products
like an automobile without knowing the full future consequence of the social changes that
massive automobiles will bring on society.
Alvin & Heidi Toffler (1994) also asserted that, the human race has gone through great
waves of social change, each period mostly wiping out earlier cultures or civilizations and
substituting them with ways of life unthinkable to those who came before. For instance, scientists
have been able to genetically alter and even possibly find a solution to the production of new
human parts like the research being carried out with stem cells; something that was once
inconceivable by the previous generations. Nevertheless, society is also confronted with a
dilemma concerning the ethical issues surrounding its usage, because the full ramification or the
impact may not be known to society for some time. The third major characteristics associated
with social change is controversy, claimed Macionis (2003). According to him, social change
brings both good and bad consequences often leading to social conflicts, thus, the industrial
revolution for example was welcomed by capitalist societies because of its ability to increase
productivity and expand profit margins for investors. However, the downside was that workers
felt threatened knowing very well that continued change will eventually lead to the replacement
and reduction of human skills and physical labor. Consequently, workers were less enthusiastic
about cooperating towards full automation. Additionally, even among the American society itself
social change led to many social conflicts and created many social groups, ethnic groups, social
and civil rights movements as each sought to assert or protect its role in the ongoing social
transformation. Ethnic minority groups and social and civil rights movements are all elements
and a by-product of social change. Thus, people with a common interest also band together to
form social movements when it becomes apparent that they are being deprived of something they
hold dear to their heart. Moreover, social groups have the capacity to encourage or discourage
social change in a society. They could also pursue a radical social transformation of society or
just be a platform for partial reformation. The last major characteristic associated with social
change is its ability to create massive societal impact. Macionis (2003) pointed to clothing styles
and minor inventions as something of less significance than the invention of the personal
computer and the internet as something that has changed the world and will continue to change
the information revolution.
A society without the ability to conceive new ideas and change current patterns of
lifestyle could not survive even though human society could be stable. Hence, humans are
resilient and have the ability to adapt new ideas. Thus, the causes of social change differ from
society to society and certain factors in a society are more pronounced and dominant than others
to bring about social change. Human societies, for instance, have been analyzed to determine
that, they evolve and grow by passing through stages during their development. These stages are
nomadic, hunting and gathering, rural, agrarian, urban, commercial, industrial, and post-
industrial(Macionis, 2003). Marcionis (2003) pointed out that certain non materialistic cultures
are slow to change but in a materialistic society like the United States, materialistic factors, like
economic production and technology are some of the factors that bring about a change in society
very quickly. Furthermore, he said changes in technology may lead to new and more inventions.
In other words, innovations produce new objects, ideas, and expand society’s knowledge base.
Additionally, scientific and technological changes have led to the production of sophisticated
machinery including but not limited to the spacecraft. Moreover, advances made in medical
research and discoveries have led to a better understanding of the human body thereby extending
human life expectancy. However, these new opportunities also carry with them unforeseen
consequences, like the gradual or drastic shaping and altering of current social patterns and
structures of our human groupings.
Further advancement made in medicine has also led to population growth and longer life
span. Demographic patterns of migration from one part of a country to another part or even
between countries are also major factors attributed to social change. According to Macionis
(2003) from 1870 to 1930 tens of millions of people from other countries have settled in the
industrial cities of the United States. There was also an internal migration from the rural southern
agricultural producing areas to the newly industrialized cities. In 1910, 9 out of 10 African
Americans lived in the rural southern part of the United States. However, from1950 to 1970, the
number of African Americans living in the central cities has doubled from 6.6 million to 13.1
million (Shannon, R, T., Kleniewski, N, & Cross, M, W.1991). According to Shannon et al.
(1991) the single most significant cause for the movement for African Americans was that
employment prospects in Southern agriculture steadily declined during most of the century. They
stated that, “Mechanization of production and the changing of agriculture in the South were
eliminating the need for agricultural laborers and sharecroppers and making survival of the
small, independence black farmer more and more difficult” (p.31). Thus, the unintended
consequence of these migrations is cultural diffusion, and the decline of rural communities and
the urbanization of many American cities into metropolis. Consequently, a change in
demographic patterns has also led to social change.
Classical and Contemporary Social Change Theories
According to Patterson (1999) 2,500 years ago, the Greek social theorists characterized a
social change as growth. According to them, from an analogical point of view, social change and
biological change all have a fixed number of interacting parts and both develop through stages-
birth, youth, maturity, and senility. Patterson (1999) asserted that the flaw in this analogy is that
it fails to distinguish natural growth and unforeseen circumstances acting directly or indirectly on
the social organism. Additionally, an analogical theory of social change like this will only open
up further implications to various interpretations. Heraclitus (c.544-c.483 BC), believed that
social change was brought about by internal and external pressures or forces. Hence, external
force theory was based on the cosmological, meteorology, and celestial events as observed
through time immemorial. Likewise, the internal pressures or forces theory was also attributed to
the oneness and the compatibility of nature and human society. Additionally, the theory stated
that, human being form part of the latest cosmological chain thus, the cosmos and the evolution
of the city-state were self-creating, self-governing and self-contained (Patterson, 1999). Patterson
(1999) however, found this view not thoroughly satisfactory due to its materialist appeal.
Another classical and idealist social theorist Anaximander (c 610-546 BC) in Ionia also
claimed that the genesis of the world was brought about by a universal god who did not reside in
it. This view according to Patterson (1999) laid down the foundational debate of human society
and social change. For instance, Patterson said, the classical Greek philosopher Aristotle (384-
322 BC) added his voice to the debate stating that, the individual and the family are the origin of
a state which by nature is also an extension of the cosmos from which the state emerges. Thus,
Aristotle said the state could be studied scientifically just as the cosmos is studied. This view of
Aristotle had profound influence on mediaeval writers like St. Augustine’s (354-430) who wrote
and further advanced it in his acclaimed book, City of God, which was also partly based on the
Greek’s theory of a human and state cyclical view of birth, youth, maturity, and senility.
However, St. Augustine was only interested in the decaying aspect of the theory which he
believed would open up future possibilities of rebirth and growth marked by eternity of grace,
upright morality, justice, and service to humankind. Nevertheless, to achieve the goal of rebirth
and future growth, the Roman history must be reexamined from the theory of growth and decay,
and further extended to the formation of Rome when Romulus murdered his brother Remus, and
additionally, to the beginning of biblical times when Cain murdered Able (Patterson 1999).
St. Augustine’s theory of change and development led to further advancement of social
change known as Cyclical Renewal. Furthermore, Cyclical Renewal became a widely accepted
view in the western hemisphere until the beginning of the Renaissance. The beginning of the
Renaissance also ushered in some social theorists and commentators who wanted to find an
explanation, answers, and even new theory to explain the social upheavals of the time. Even
though, St. Augustine’s Judeo- Christian thoughts and theory of social change had also been
incorporated with the classical Greek and Roman views, nevertheless, the outcome still led to the
same theory of cyclical up and downs, reoccurring beyond the control of human nature. Hence,
this unsatisfactory trend quickly led to the erosion of the Augustinian dominant world view of
social change and development (Patterson 1999).
According to Patterson (1999) during the sixteenth-century social theorists came up with
another theory of social change in response to the civil wars, repressions, overseas expansions
and foreign land dominations. This theory was called Progress, and it was a complete deviation
from the classical and historical views of explaining social change. However, it also borrowed
from St. Augustine’s view of a more prosperous and optimistic future without the religious
aspect of it. Jean Bodin (1530-96) who was a political theorist, and an adviser to the King of
France, further advanced the theory of progress to formulate a universal historical analysis by
arguing that human history has been marked by three distinctive periods; each period reflecting
regional dominance, and people being more sophisticated than they were previously. Jean Bodin
claimed that, the Babylonians, Persians, and Egyptians controlled the world in the first two
millennia due to their advancement in religion, philosophy, mathematics and their understanding
of the forces of nature. Additionally, the Mediterranean people, Greeks and Romans also
dominated the world stage for the next two millennia due to their skills, crafts, gifted
statesmanship and political acumen. Finally, the Northern Nations also ruled the world due to
their warfare skills and their dominance in mechanical innovations. In other words, civilization
or social change as human progress can be traced historically and chronologically from, the early
Babylonians and Persians, to the Greeks and Romans, then to the Northern European States
before moving across the Atlantic to America(Patterson 1999). The theory of progress also
stated that if systematic reasoning is applied to the study of social change and development then
progress will be the ultimate outcome since customs and superstition could find no hiding place
to cripple society’s growth. Additionally, the theory also claimed that reason is abstract and does
not depend on internal or external bodies thus, with proper education in scientific enquiry; reason
will be a catalyst for progress. Frances Bacon (1561- 1626) and Descartes (1596-1650) were
among the intellectual forces behind reasoning as progress for social change. Bacon, believed
that reason, should be a scientific application towards the analysis of evidence to establish a
social fact. Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) who was a leading Seventeenth century social theorist
of progress theory also defended reason as the ultimate inevitable goal because without reason,
there will be no industries, no inventions, no navigation, no infrastructure, no equipment, and no
advancement will be made in government rather there will be only fear, danger and violent death
(Patterson 1999). Alvin & Heidi Toffler (1994) also added that, before the first wave of social
change around 8000 B.C. to A.D 1650-1750, humans resided in small nomadic groups and fed
themselves by foraging, fishing, hunting, or herding. Then, the agricultural revolution
commenced and crawled slowly across the world.
Commencement of the eighteenth century also saw many critics and reactionaries to
Thomas Hobbes assertion of social change. This was due to his generalization that all societies
are the same and for that reason, patterns of social change must be the same. Gambattista Vico
(1688-1744) was a leading opponent of this view who eventually formulated an alternative view
to Hobbes. Vico argued that, “…this world of nations has certainly been made by men; it is
within these modifications that its principles should have been sought” (Patterson, p.15).
Furthermore, he claimed that the advancement of reasoning is not the engine of social change or
the development of every society. Vico, asserted that, social institutions were human inventions
that had gone through historical processes starting from huts, villages, cities and advanced
institutions like schools and governments. Therefore, social change is rather part of an historical
developmental dialectics (Patterson 1999). Nisbet (1969) on the other hand, also noted that, the
objective of investigation in any theory of societal development seems to be consistently linked
to social class, kinship, tradition, law, society as a whole or other categorization of
institutionalized and ordered behavior.
Jean Rousseau (1712-78) in the Discourse on the origin of Inequality, agreed that
humanity and society can be studied systematically since it will also make room to examine the
original nature of humankind thus, showing that humans originally depended on nature solely for
their upkeep not the social and political organizations currently existing, which has led to social
inequalities. Rousseau used the term amour-propre to denote a love for oneself and the desire to
be superior to others and be respected and cherished by them. He claimed this to be the
beginning of social inequality. Moreover, Rousseau said, social inequality was very rare in the
advent of human history thus, with the development of mechanical agriculture; people began to
fence agricultural lands hence, the formation and development of private property. According to
Rousseau, this gave birth to personal wealth and powerful landlords’ thereby destroying people’s
natural liberty through the subjugation of the masses to constant physical labor, slavery and
human misery (Patterson 1999).
On the other hand, to counteract Rousseau’s growing intellectual influence on human
development, Adam Smith (1723-1790) claimed that the rise of commercial society is also a
historical process noting that, humankind progressed through subsistence production- hunting
and gathering, then to domesticating animals and becoming pastoral this process continued and
the division of labor became more sophisticated. To stay above the fray, Smith tried to separate
economics from politics and morality, by claiming that he was more interested on how the
human division of labor could be harnessed to enhance productivity in an emerging capitalistic
society. Smith further said this process of the division of labor could lead to less people
producing more food thereby enabling some people to move on to towns to learn and practice
new trades that could also be utilized in the exchange market (Patterson, 1999). Additionally, to
help address the issue of workers’ exploitation as argued by some leading opponents, Smith
wrote in, The Wealth of Nations, “Capitalists derived their income from stock, landowners from
rent and laborers from wages” (Patterson, p.18).
As noted and discussed above, theories of Social Change are complex phenomena which
great social thinkers like Marx, Weber, Durkheim, Comte, Spencer, and Parsons have argued
about. Nisbet (1980) also observed that, “…Mankind has slowly, gradually and continually
advanced from the original condition of deprivation, ignorance, and insecurity to constantly
higher levels of civilization, and that such advancement will, with only occasional setbacks,
continue through the present into the future” (p.10) The observation, noted by Nisbet, (1980) that
society will continue to advance slowly, gradually from deprivation, ignorance, insecurity and
with setbacks is one of the reasons that led to the serious scientific study of society and social
change. The scientific inquiry of social change became the center of sociological inquiry for
most social theorists. Patterson (1999) asserted that, social theorists of the late nineteenth century
all tried to explain, redefine, and refine the theories of social change based on the ideas and
concepts which were handed over to them from the previous intellectual generation. However,
there were few notable exceptions like Karl Marx, Emile Durkheim, Max Weber, Auguste
Comte, Herbert Spencer, and Talbott Parsons who actually came up with well grounded theories
and explanations to social change. Marx (1955) however, divided history into five major stages:
(1) Tribal ownership, a type of primitive communism.
(2) Ancient communal and state ownership accompanied by slavery.
(3) Feudalism
(4) Capitalism.
Communism: Marx, divided communism into two, one is a dictatorship of the proletariat and the
other, pure communism. According to Marx, except for pure communism, each stage is
distinguished by economic conflict involving two or more contrasting economic groups with the
separate opposing economic interest. The economic disagreement between these groups
inevitably leads to the advancement of a group in their own interest at the expense of other
groups (Marx, 1955). According to Patterson, nineteenth- and twentieth- century social theorists’
understanding of social change was mostly influenced by the emergence of materialist or
capitalist development and an agenda of idealism or imperialism. Furthermore, these influences
have lingered on to this day.
Evolutionary Theories
A number of theories of social change have been introduced above, but the first major
social change theory to be examined thoroughly is evolutionary theory. Evolutionary theory
includes many schools of thought with each trying to explain the theory differently. According to
Patterson (1999) evolutionary theory did not have its origin from Charles Darwin (1809-82) as
many have mistakenly believed but rather from the work of other contemporaries in France and
Scotland like Adam Smith and Thomas Malthus (1766-1834).
Social evolutionists saw a social change as an engine of progress and development and
claimed that progress is inevitable because of the successive stages it has undergone in its
intellectual and social development. The concept of evolution was utilized to explain virtually all
forms of human development from sociology to biology. Among the leading evolutionary
biologists was Charles Darwin. Darwin’s theory on natural selection assumes the foundational
basis for explaining biological evolution.
According to social evolutionists, society proceeds inevitably through a fixed set of
stages - savagery, barbarism and civilization. To them, evolution is a natural law and the term
evolution is used to signify the processes and stages of social development that humankind has
evolved through. The social evolutionists also claimed that, even though humankind everywhere
is subjected to the same natural order, progress, and development on a global scale has not
always progressed at the same pace. According to social evolutionist, the so-called civilized
societies have been exposed to greater change and interaction with other civilized societies
resulting in faster progressed (Patterson 1999).
Herbert Spencer
Herbert Spencer (1820-1903) was an English engineer and a popular writer who believed that
human society, nature and the universe are all governed or subjected to the laws of progress or
evolution. Duncan, (2003) stated that, Spencer believed that the evolution of human society and
the rise of civilization were laws driven however; each society has the right to achieve the
highest degree of happiness provided; they do not prevent others from doing the same. Spencer
believes that this is also a natural law of the world. According to Duncan (2003), Spencer
believed that, evolutional process is twofold: One it builds up complex structures through the
process of integration, and two, through the process of the dissolution of weakened structural
remains. Thus, evolution is seen by Spencer as aggregation, differentiation, integration, and
dissolution (Duncan, 2003).
Herbert Spencer argued that there is a correlation between the social realm, biological
realms, and the physical realm, and that they are all subjected to natural laws. He further
explained that there are laws that need to be discovered, and sociology should be the main
vehicle for uncovering morphology or structures and the physiology of all organic and super -
organic forms in society. He also claimed that structures and functions are common in all organic
bodies (Spencer, 1892).
Spencer (1892) said, several important factors will propel and influence small and
homogeneous societies to become large and complex. Spencer employs an organic analogy or
the comparing of body parts and super-organic societal organization to develop a perspective for
analyzing the structure, function, and transformation of societal phenomena. Elwick, (2003) in
his article, Herbert Spencer and the Disunity of Social Organism, identified the correlations
Spencer drew in the evolutionary process of the entire realm of the universe. First, he pointed to
the similarities between societies and bodily organizations as follows:
1. Society and organisms both can be differentiated from inorganic matter because society and
organisms all grow and develop, whereas inorganic matter does not.
2. Both society and organisms all grow and increase in size and become complex which in turn
leads to differentiation.
3. Both society and organisms progress in growth, differentiation and structural functions.
4. Equally, society and organism’s parts are interdependent. However; a change in one part
affects the other parts.
5. They both represent a part micro society or organism, in and of itself.
6. Both organisms and societies as a whole could be subjected to destruction but some parts
will survive and live on for a while (Elwick, 2003).
Auguste Comte and the Laws of Three States
The French social thinker Auguste Comte (1798-1857) is credited for coining the term
sociology in 1838 to describe the new school of thought for the study of society. Comte divided
sociology into three stages of historical development starting with a theological stage when
people used religion to explain everything happening in society. In the European Middle Ages of
Renaissance so called Metaphysical thoughts took over. The Metaphysical stage sought to
explain the world from a natural perspective instead of attributing it to super natural forces.
According to Comte, the final stage was the scientific stage when things began to be explained
from a scientific point of view. Comte said that society is neither fixed by God’s will nor set by
human nature. Comte, on the contrary, claimed that society is a system that can be studied
scientifically as did the sixteenth-century Polish astronomer, Nicolaus Copernicus (1473-1543),
the Italian astronomer and physicist Galileo (1564-1642) and the English physicist and
mathematician Isaac Newtown (1642-1727). Comte asserted that humans can carefully study the
world and based on the results can intentionally improve their lives (Macionis, 2003).
Based on the foundational work of these early scientists, Comte believed that a scientific
approach could be utilized to analyze the physical world, especially the study of this new
discipline he called sociology, which is the study of society. In view of this fact, Augustus
Comte became a strong proponent of positivism- using science to analyze or study the physical
world. Comte believed that society also functioned through certain unknown laws, just as the
universe operates under the influence of gravity and other laws of nature. Macionis (2003)
claimed that, Comte’s new science of society was to both explain the past development of
humankind and, as well, have the ability to predict its future course. Social stability according to
Comte can be attributed to certain conditions at any given historical time. The motto of Comte’s
positive movement was Order and Progress. The society of man, according to Comte, must be
studied in a scientific manner just as the world of nature is also subjected to basic laws like the
rest of the cosmos, even though it presence added more complexities. Natural science Comte
argued had succeeded in establishing the lawfulness of natural phenomena and has also
discovered that these phenomena from the falling of stone, to the movement of planets all
followed ordered sequences of development in the world of nature. Hence, science had
succeeded in progressively contracting the realm of the apparently non- ordered, the fortuitous
and the accidental. According to Comte, the stage was set for a similar endeavor in the study of
society (Comte, 1915). According to Comte, the new science must be able to benefit humankind
and play a major role in the amelioration of the human conditions. Thus, for humans to transform
their nonhuman environment to their advantage Comte argued that, civilization had progressed
through a natural and logically unavoidable course of human organizations and had become the
supreme law of all practical phenomena (Comte, 1915).
Karl Marx and Conflict Theory
Karl Marx (1818-1883) was born in Rhineland, Germany and was a leading proponent of the
conflict theory paradigm. The Social conflict theory states that social behavior can be understood
in terms of tension and conflict between groups and individuals. According to the theory, society
is seen as a platform showcasing social inequality and struggle over scarce commodities, hence
generating both conflict and change (Macionis, 2003). Conflict theory assumes that structural
differentiation is one of the major sources of conflict in a society and social change is also
brought about through conflict. Social conflict theory study, to understand societal conflicts
between dominant and categories of minority groups: rich versus the economically
disadvantaged, White people in relation to people of color. Karl Marx stated that all stratified
societies have two major social grouping made up of a ruling class who controls, exploits and the
oppressed who is the working class thus, there is always a conflict of interest between the two
classes. Marx, furthermore, asserted that, the various established institutions like the legal and
political frameworks are all tools and instruments employed by the ruling class to serve and
further their own goals and protect their interests (Marx, 1955).
Marx claimed that conflict is a normal condition of social life whose nature and variables
are very important to be described and analyzed by social scientists. Marx also sees social
change from an evolutionary point because human history has gone through a succession of
models: tribal, ancient, feudal, and to the present capitalist mode of production. Marx further saw
private property as the central point of focus for capitalism: the system by which the factors of
production like money, tools, machinery, factories, industries, and other items used for
production in the hands of the elite class (Marx1959). Furthermore, Karl Marx also saw
capitalism to be superseded by a socialist mode of production in the future. Nevertheless, Marx
was also concerned about the plight of the working masses that also happens to be the poorest.
Having observed the worker for some time, Karl Marx points to alienations as the effect and the
result of the separation between the worker and the product of his labor under the capitalist labor
relations (Marx, 1959). Karl Marx pointed out that in every stage of a society’s historical
development economics becomes the bedrock which he terms, the mode of production of
commodities. According to Marx, the first stage in the mode of production is the force of
production or the physical or technological arrangement of economic activity. He postulated that,
the second stage is the social relations of production or the indispensable human attachments that
people must form with one another in carrying out this economic activity. Marx, furthermore,
stated that the mode of production in material life determines the general character of the social,
political, and spiritual processes of life. Thus, at a certain point of development the material
forces of production in society come into conflict with the existing relations of production
(Marx, 1959). Marx (1959) furthermore, wrote in The Communist Manifesto that, “The
bourgeoisie (i.e., the capitalists) cannot exist without continually revolutionizing the instruments
of production, and thereby the relationships of production and with them the whole relations of
society…” (p. 70).
Finally, Marx said, no one person or group could stop a revolution from occurring since a
conflict is a necessary means of social change and social survival. He also pointed to a series of
events that would bring about the ultimate proletariat revolution as follows: (a) need for
production (b) the expansion of the division of labor (c) the development of private property (d)
increasing social inequality (e) class struggle, and (f) creation of political structures to represent
each class interest (Marx, 1955).
Structural Functional Theory
Structural functional theory states that society operates through a complex system of
interdependent parts that work to increase stability. Structural Functionalism framework depends
on social structures and social functions to operate in equilibrium. According to the theory, a
change in one part of the system generally affects the other parts of the system (Spencer, 1892)
Structural functionalism is also an evolutionary model with a cyclical beginning with
differentiations and increasing complication of an organic body, followed by a fluctuating state
of equilibrium or disequilibrium and finally a state of disintegration or dissolution (Spencer,
1892). Structural-functionalism is a broad perspective with very diverse theorists who consider,
order, stability and collaboration within a society as a value consensus. Sociologists of the
structural-functional theory usually divide or separate the latent function and the manifest
functions of social relationship. According to Macionis (2003) manifest functions are built into a
social system by design and manifest goals are well understood by group members. Latent
functions are by contrast unintentional and very often unrecognized due to the unanticipated
consequences they might have achieved other than what they set up to achieve.
Auguste Comte is well known as a positivist, but he is also equally known as a structural-
functionalist, especially on his views on maintaining strong central solidity, order and progress
after witnessing the social outcome of the French revolution. Comte realized that social systems
must have a spontaneous harmony between all parts of the system to maintain equilibrium;
however, the lack of such harmony will eventually lead to disequilibrium (Comte, 1915). Emile
Durkheim, was the most important and respected structural-functionalist who developed the full
theory of organic solidarity. Durkheim was also curious as to why certain societies maintain
internal stability and survive over time. His answer was that these societies have been segmented
with equivalent parts held together by shared values and common symbols. Herbert Spencer is
probably one of the truest structural-functionalists even though he is best noted for evolutionary
theory. According to Spencer, just like the human body and its noted parts and organs, society
also has social structures that must work towards its proper functioning (Spencer 1892). Herbert
Spencer’s work, The Principle of Sociology (1874- 96) has influenced many contemporary
theorists notable among them was Talcott Parsons.
Talcott Parsons
Talcott Parsons is best known for structural functional theory. Parsons was also
influenced by the writings of Durkheim and Marx Weber, which can be seen in his work, the
action theory. The action theory is based on the system-theoretical concept and the
methodological principle of voluntary action. According to Parsons, social systems are made up
by individuals in a society, thus there are also interactions between individuals who may be
confronted with a variety of choices. How they respond to each one of these choices is
influenced by a number of physical and social factors. The action theory’s aim is to create
equilibrium between the two major methodologies of utilitarian-positivism and hermeneutic-
idealism. Parsons’ theoretical system was centered on equilibrium, evolutionary universalities,
and the identification of properties that are common to all societies. Parsons compared a societal
evolution to biological evolution with modern societies showing greater ability to adapt than
previous generations. According to Parsons, a society is more or less like biological systems with
its natural counterparts. Thus, social systems have evolved historically towards greater
adjustment of the systemic order and improving the specialization of social institutions including
the upgrading of the division of labor existing in complex societies (Parsons, 1964).
Parsons (1964) believed that order, stability and cooperation in society are based on value
consensus generally agreed upon by members of society concerning what is good and
worthwhile. Parsons stated that for a society to survive or maintain an equilibrium in its
environment, it must learn to some degree to adapt (Adaptation) to that environment and also
attain its goals (Goal Attainment), integrate its components (Integration), and maintain its latent
pattern (Latency Pattern Maintenance), which serve as cultural blueprints. Parsons (1964) stated
that in every society people take up positions and enact roles associated with the positions; and in
an advance modern society, the roles become complex differentiated in the division of labor.
Summary and Analysis
According to social evolutionists, society proceeds inevitably through a fixed set of
stages- savagery, barbarism and civilization. To them, evolution is a natural law, and the
expression evolution is used to signify the processes and stages of social development that
humankind has evolved through. The social evolutionists also claimed that, even though humans
everywhere are subjected to the same natural order of progress and development on a global
scale which are slow but steady, civilized societies have the ability to progress faster than less
civilized ones. Herbert Spencer also emphasized that certain principle of structure and function
are common in all organic bodies. In the volumes of Principles of Sociology, Spencer stated that
whenever there is an increase in the size of both biological and social aggregates, pressure for
differentiation of functions occurs. Spencer further noted that, these result in the creation of a
distinctive regulatory, operative, and distributive process. Thus, it becomes essential for some
unit to regulate and control action, for others to produce what is necessary for system
maintenance (Spencer, 1893).
Evolutional theory explains poverty and social inequality as a natural law based on the
biological principle of natural selection of the human species’ ability to adapt. Herbert Spencer
believes in the rights of the individual and does not believe in government intervention. Spencer
believes that, the only power government should have is the protection of the rights of
individuals and collective protection against an external threat. However, if there should be any
external regulation by governments it should be minimal and everything else must be left to the
free initiatives of individuals. Spencer also made it clear in his geopolitical dynamics that, when
power is concentrated in the hands of the few or the government, it could be used to drain the
wealth and resources of a population which eventually will lead to further inequality in a society.
Spencer claimed that those with concerted power for instance could use it to tax or take resources
from others to finance a war (or in today’s era pay for social services) and supplement their
privilege, this, he believes will also lead to more social inequality. Spencer believed that once
resources are taken from people they become more hostile, which eventually poses an internal
threat to the elite who then tends to further harness the more power to deal with the escalating
threat. Spencer, felt that this cycle of escalating social inequality and internal threat would often
and potentially lead to the disintegration of a society (Spencer 1893). According to social
conflict theory society is seen as a platform showcasing social inequality and struggle over
scarce commodity, therefore, generating both conflict and change (Macionis, 2003).
Conflict theorists explain that social inequality and poverty are the results of structural
differentiation in a society. As a result, it is a major source of conflict in all societies hence social
change is brought about through conflict. Social conflict theorists analyze and study social
inequality and poverty through the ongoing social conflicts between dominant categories of
minority groups: rich versus the economically disadvantaged, White people in relation to people
of color. Karl Marx stated that all stratified societies have two major social groupings, a working
class and a ruling class, who controls, exploits and oppresses the working class. Thus, there is
always a conflict of interest between the two classes. Marx, further asserted that, the various
established institutions like the legal and political frameworks are tools and instruments
employed by the ruling class to serve and further their own goals and protect their interest (Marx,
1955). Marx, Furthermore, explained social inequality and poverty as the results of private
property being the central point of focus for capitalism. He identified private enterprise as, the
system by which the factors of production like money, tools, machinery, factories, industries, and
other items used for production are in the hands of the elite class (Marx, 1959). Marx’s conflict
theory was concerned about social inequality and poverty, especially the plight of the working
masses that happen to be the poorest. Karl Marx, having observed the worker for some time,
points to alienations as the effect and the result of the separation between the worker and the
product of his labor under the capitalist labor relations (Marx, 1959).
Structural functional theory explained social inequality and poverty as part of social
stratification based on meritocracy that keeps society operating. Structural functionalists believe
that society as a whole benefits when greater rewards are linked to important social positions.
Structural functionalists stressed that social stratification matches people’s ability and talents to
appropriate occupational positions, which they believe are very useful and inevitable.
Furthermore, structural functionalists claimed that the values and beliefs that legitimize social
inequality are widely shared throughout society. According to Parsons, social systems are made
up by individuals in a society, thus there is an interaction between individuals who may be
confronted with a variety of choices and how they respond to them is a choice they must make,
even though these choices may be influenced, constrained by various numbers of physical and
social factors.
The aim of Parsons’ action theory is to create equilibrium between two major
methodological traditions of utilitarian-positivism and the hermeneutic-idealistic tradition.
Parsons’ theoretical system was centered on equilibrium, evolutionary universalities, and the
identification of properties that are common to all societies; Parsons compared the societal
evolution to biological evolution but acknowledges that modern societies show a greater ability
to adapt than previous generations. According to Parsons, a society is like a system with
biological and natural counterparts. Therefore, social systems have evolved historically towards
greater adjustment to maintain a systemic order and to improve the specialization of social
institutions, including the upgrading of the division of labor existing in complex societies
(Parsons, 1964). Parsons (1964) believed that order, stability and cooperation in society are
based on a value consensus generally agreed upon by members of society concerning what is
good and worthwhile.
Auguste Comte to some extent touched on poverty and social inequality when he asserted
that systems must have a spontaneous harmony between all their parts to maintain equilibrium;
however, the lack of such harmony will eventually lead to disequilibrium of the system.
According to Comte, the new science must be able to benefit humankind and play a major role in
the amelioration of the human conditions including poverty and social inequality. Comte also
believed in the principle, that the division of labor fostered the development of individual gifts
and capabilities and creates a sense of dependability on each other, he was, however, bothered by
what he considered the negative aspects of modern industrial division of labor. Finally,
contemporary structural functionalists like Robert K. Merton added that social inequality and
poverty are the results of social structures with many functions. According to Merton, manifest
functions are those built into a social system by design; like manifest goals which are well
understood by group members. Latent functions are by contrast, unintentional and often
unrecognized. However, they carry unanticipated consequences to the system that has been set
up to achieve other ends. Thus, social inequality and poverty would be the eventual outcome of
latent functions
(Macionis, 2003)
Differences and Similarities
In order to compare the classical social theories of Herbert Spencer, Auguste Comte,
Karl Marx, and Talcott Parsons, it is necessary to identify the social theory they represent.
Herbert Spencer is well known as a social evolutionary theorist. Auguste Comte is a positivist
who is also known as a social evolutional theorist due to his formulation of the Law of Three
States, but he is best known as a structural functionalist. Karl Marx is known to some extent for
his conviction in evolutional theory. He is especially known as a social conflict theorist. Talcott
Parsons is known as a structural functionalist. Herbert Spencer, Auguste Comte, and Talcott
Parsons all believe that evolutionary social change follows a natural law. Spencer believed that
the process of societal evolution followed inevitable laws of nature, which eventually led to
social progress. Comte also argued that, civilization had progressed through a natural and logical
unavoidable course of human organization and had become the supreme law of all practical
phenomena. Comte believed there to be three laws, which operate to foster societal growth. The
first law was theological, the second was metaphysical, and the third scientific. In each phase,
some level of dominance is achieved.
Parsons compared a societal evolution to biological evolution with modern societies
showing greater ability to adapt than previous generations. Parsons had similar ideas to Spencer
because they both believed that individuals must have the right to pursue their respective interest
voluntarily. Both Parsons and Spencer believed that social differentiations and stratification are a
natural social out come. However, in contrast, Spencer does not believe in a strong central
government and does not believe in government interventions except to protect individual
liberties and against external aggression. Auguste Comte, on the other hand, believed in a strong
central social order and submissiveness that will ultimately lead to progress, but was also
concerned about the conditions of the working poor who happened to be the masses. Comte,
furthermore, has something in common with Parsons, they both believe in social stratification
and the meritocracy system.
Karl Marx’s conflict theory rejects and denounces both the evolutionary and structural
functional theories as systems based on classes and exploitation. However, he does have
something in common with Spencer’s social evolutionary theory. Marx believed that human
history has gone through a succession of models: tribal, ancient, feudal, and to the present
capitalist mode of production. Marx concluded that this progression would continue with
capitalism being superseded by a socialist mode of production. Marx‘s ideas, do have something
in common with those of Auguste Comte, they were both concerned with the conditions of the
working poor and wanted to do something to improve them. Comte, however, did not share
Marx’s views of violent workers revolting in order to correct social conditions or the historical
succession models which eventually will bring about a socialist mode of production.
Comte also believes in the class and meritocracy system, since he asserted that people
with talents and advanced knowledge would work to make society better thus benefiting society
as a whole. Marx’s Conflict theory is in sharp contrast with Spencer’s evolutional theory and
Parsons’ structural functional theory in that, according to Marx, social inequality and social
stratification lead to social conflict. Consequently, the future would eventually be corrected when
a socialist mode of operation existed to administer equal rights and justice to all.
In reality, however, societal evolution has resulted in the creation of social stratification,
social inequality and a vast number of poor underclass citizens. Moreover, it has in addition
limited the powers of the government to regulate, change and promote equity. Despite the
present inequality, the strength of structural functionalism lies in the fact that people are
rewarded based on the work they do, and it does encourage productivity and efficiency. The
consequence of social stratification are extreme on some groups of people, especially racial
minorities and the economically disadvantaged who are denied access to certain opportunities
that would enable them to compete fairly, thereby uplifting their social standing. For example,
children of rich parents do not have to compete equally with children of poor parents. Rich
parents do send their children to rich and good schools, whereas most poor parents send their
children to poor and ill prepared schools.
Finally, social stratification promotes social conflicts and does not help in building a fair
and just society. Social conflict theory’s strength lies in the fact that it sought to build a fair and a
just society. Ideally, it is the best social theory that could be employed in building a fair and just
society. This is because its aim is to abolish social stratification and racial discrimination, as they
impact on those who are disadvantaged by their social circumstances. Moreover, conflict theory
sees everything from the perspective of a two class system of rich and poor, but in reality, there
are other factors, which may contribute to people’s successes and failures in life that has nothing
to do with class or race. Marx’s simplistic views of class structures are valid to some extent
because society has evolved and has become more complex than it was. Thus, there are certain
dynamics at play, which call on people to address their own deficiencies, inefficiencies and
weaknesses.
On the other hand, to build a just and fair society, we may need to blend the three theories
discussed. However, based on the knowledge presently at hand, I may recommend using more of
the Marxist social conflict paradigm in order to address the social inequalities and the vast social
stratification that has been created by the current system being used namely, evolutional and
structural functionalism. We must also give credit where credit is due and recognize the fact that
human competitiveness and personal responsibilities have played a vital role in societal
development and progress.
Conclusion
In conclusion, I believe that the social evolutional and structural functional theories have
produced the most successful models of capitalism in the world. Additionally, they have also
made the United States the richest capitalist nation in the western world but at the expense of
several of its inhabitants, especially racial minorities and the economically disadvantaged.
Conflict theory has not alleviated the problems of the masses and has led to the collapse of many
Eastern European Countries, especially the former Soviet Union.
What do contemporary researchers’ think of social evolutionary theory, structural
functional theory, and social conflict theory? Do they believe these theories are still valid? It is
for current researchers in the field of criminal justice to try to resolve social inequality. In the
Depth paper which follows the extent to which they have been successful will be examined.
Depth
SBSF 8120: Current Research in Societal Development
Annotated Bibliography
Anonymous (2006). Oklahoma: 38% of adult blacks have felony records. Corrections Digest; Dec 1, 2006; 37 (47); Criminal Justice Periodicals pp. 6-7.
According to the Oklahoma Sentencing Commission, 38% of black adult men in the State
of Oklahoma have been convicted of a felony however only less than 9% of all citizens of
Oklahoma had felony records. The data were collected from Oklahoma’s prison system by the
commission and the analysis was done using data dating as far back before statehood.
Additional data were also collected from census and mortality rate. The commissioner, K.C.
Moon concluded that the high percentage rate of African Americans with felony convictions was
not due to racism but instead, poverty. He also pointed out that conviction rates among the two
races are about even. However, he asserted that previous research confirms the fact that it is
more of a socio-economic problem than of race and discrimination.
In an assessment of the above article, it can be concluded that the research is very
significant, and is well framed. Additionally, the research is much related to an existing body of
knowledge about the unequal treatment of racial minorities and economically disadvantaged
offenders under the criminal justice system.
The theoretical framework of the study was adequate and appropriate whilst the sample
size of the study was sufficient because the data were collected from all the prisons in Oklahoma
and mortality rates were in addition collected from census records. Many details of the research
were not given. However, the result was published in a scholarly peer-reviewed journal, which
gave it much credibility status. The research could be duplicated in other states but the results
may vary due to different conditions in every state. Thus, the results may not be universally
applicable. There may also be a limitation to the research because it focused mainly on felony
cases and adult black men in particular as a result leaving out other racial minorities.
Consequently, it is more likely that there may be room for researcher bias. Nevertheless, the
research considered the existence of different socio-economic and cultural groups by indicating
that the research results from the outcome was produced and influenced more by socio-economic
factors than by race. The article written about the research was very short and does not provide
much information to make a very constructive analysis. However, the topic and the research in
particular are very relevant to the issue of race relations in America. The research also points to
the issue of social inequality and the plight of the economically disadvantaged people under the
criminal justice system. Furthermore, this research also serves as a wake-up call to scholars and
practitioners to come to terms with the delicate issue of race and poverty in America, especially
how it affects the criminal justice system in particular. This research is very valuable to me as a
scholar-practitioner because it will help me advance my argument for building a fair and just
society in America.
Button M.D (2008). Social disadvantage and family violence: neighborhood effects on attitudes ab...American Journal of Criminal Justice: AJCJ; 33, 1; Criminal Justice Periodicals, pp. 290-293
The author’s purpose for the research was to analyze the effect of social disorganization
theory on crime and collective efficacy, in addition to the individual factors of gender, race and a
history of child maltreatment, on the acceptance of using violence within the family. The author
defined social disorganization theory as the inability of a community structure to realize the
common values of its residents and maintain an effective social control. According to the
researcher, social disorganization theory asserts that neighborhood composition affects the level
of violence within the community. Data for the research was collected from the Norfolk Police
Department (2000-2004). Additional data were also collected from the 2000 census and from the
2006 Norfolk residents’ attitude about a crime survey to determine the differences in approval of
family violence.
Button asserted that, social disorganization theory has been used to indicate the eruption
of violence within local communities. Furthermore, there are certain indicators, which make a
neighborhood to be labeled as socially disorganized. These include the presence of concentration
of economically disadvantaged people, ethnic heterogeneity and residential instability.
Moreover, such neighborhoods have the lowest incomes, increased rates of unemployment, lack
of institutional investment, inadequate resources and financial support. Additionally, in such
communities, institutions such as Churches, Schools, and Community organizations struggle to
prosper and lose the ability to exercise control over the community. Button claimed that, there is
an indirect effect of economic deprivation in such communities.
The researcher asserted that in such a socially disorganized community, the
neighborhood socio-economic status has been affected negatively to link its residential stability
and its ethnic heterogeneity. The results of the study found that race did not significantly predict
intimate partner violence when other factors are controlled like income and education. The
results also found that, there was a negative correlation between family income and intimate
partner violence. However, inadequate education was found to be a contributing factor.
The above research question was not well framed, because it sought to answer too many
questions within the same research. For instance, the topic: Social Disadvantage and Family
Violence: Neighborhood Effects on Attitude about intimate Partner Violence and Corporal
Punishment/Violence of Children could have been without the children in order to concentrate on
intimate partners as the family involved in the study. The study as a whole was very significant
because it points to the effect of poverty and social inequality and to a large extent why many
poor and less educated people may end up becoming victims of the criminal justice system. The
research contributes to an existing body of knowledge because it will help policy makers, social
workers and criminal justice practitioners to understand the dynamic interplay between social
inequality, poverty and racism as a social manifestation. The research was well communicated
and the methods used were appropriate. The researcher used interviewers, and also made sure
that questionnaires were hand delivered in enclosed, self-addressed stamped envelopes to
selected households.
Additionally, the researcher also used the 2006 Norfolk, Virginia Residents Attitude
towards crime survey to achieve the respondent rate of 20.9%, the 2000 decennial census data,
and the 2000-2004 Norfolk Police data. The data and the sample size were adequate enough for
the study to be conclusive. However, there could be a better way for the researcher to obtain a
more convincing result. Furthermore, there were not enough controls in place to prevent a
researcher’s personal bias. The research could be replicable with similar findings but there were
also limitations to the study. The findings are not universally applicable because only selected
neighborhoods were used. The conclusions are, however, justifiable and the author also took into
account the racial/ethnic, socioeconomic and family structures by using census data, police data
and neighborhood survey data, which comprises of the demographic make-up of the community.
The research was very useful because it lends itself to the three social theories examined
in the breadth: Social evolutional theory, Structural-functional theory, and the Social Conflict
theory. It shows that social evolutional theory and structural functional theories are still valid and
being used in our society, whereas conflict theory serves as a reminder pointing to social
structures and social inequality as the source of conflict and poverty in our society. The value of
this research to my paper is that, it has shed light on the three social theories that I have
examined in the Breadth portion of this paper.
Hannon, L., & Knapp, P. (2003). Reassessing nonlinearity in the urban disadvantaged /violent
crime relationship. Criminology; 41, (4); Criminal Justice Periodicals, pp. 1427-1448.
This research was in response to the increasing concerns and doubts about nonlinear
relationships and interaction effects. The authors claimed that some research and studies suggest
positive correlation between neighborhood disadvantage and violent crime; whereas other
research also indicates that there is a negative relationship between neighborhood disadvantage
and violent crime. According to the writers, these inconsistencies are due partially to the lack of
logarithmic transformation in criminological research. The authors, claimed that though,
logarithmic transformation has lots of benefits, there are also drawbacks. The authors asserted
that, a recent research done by Krivo and Peterson (1996:620) supported their idea that there is a
positive correlation between socioeconomic disadvantage and crime which disadvantage
neighborhoods. Additionally, there was also an unusually high crime rate in comparison to
neighborhoods with a relatively moderate or low level of socioeconomic disadvantage.
The research question was well framed and will be very significant to sociologists,
criminologists, and policy makers because it will put to rest their increasing concern about the
inconsistencies in the logarithmic transformation. Furthermore, this research is also related to an
existing body of knowledge, and in addition makes an original contribution due to the
importance it placed on the methodological discrepancies and how they have eventually been
cleared. The theoretical framework for the study was adequate and appropriate, and it was well
communicated. The conclusions were justifiable by the results. Race and ethnicity were also
taken into consideration. The authors suggested that log transformation has a powerful side effect
thus; it should not be used as a common practice because it deserves a more thorough
justification.
The research is very valuable to me and to this research because it indicates that there is a
strong positive correlation between extreme urban disadvantage and violent crime in our society.
Thus, reducing extreme poverty or partially bridging the inequality and urban poverty gap will
go a long way in reducing violent crimes in our cities and society at large. This research is also
unique because it exposes the bias in using log transformation for research on a nonlinear
relationship between neighborhood disadvantage and violent crime.
Holtfreter, K., Reisig, M. D., & Morash, M. (2004). Poverty, State capital, and recidivism among women offenders. Criminology & Public Policy: Criminal Justice Periodicals 04; (3), 2; pp. 185-208
This study focuses on the effect of poverty and state aid to women offenders and
recidivism. The researchers used 134 female felony offenders from the community corrections in
the State of Oregon and the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul, Minnesota to do a self report of
re-arrested and probation or violations over six-month time periods. According to the
researchers, the results of the study based on logistic regression analyses indicate that poverty
status increases the probability of those re-arrested by a factor of 4.6, and it increases the odds of
supervised violation by a factor of 12.7. However, risk scores like poverty status failed to predict
recidivism once poverty status was taken into account. The research also found out that
specifically among poor women offenders, providing state-sponsored support to address short-
term needs like housing reduces the chances of recidivism by 83%. Thus, community
corrections’ officers who help make state capital available promote empowerment for women
and reduce the odds of recidivism among women. Finally, after assessing the influence poverty
has on recidivism among women offenders, the researchers concluded that, economically
marginalized offenders should be made to benefit from state sponsored resources.
The article is very important because the researchers’ point to the fact that in 2001, over
half of all (52%) of the 32.9 million people (including children) living in poverty were women,
and a similar proportion (49%) of families living below the poverty line were headed by single
women. The researchers further added that, compared with both developed and transitional
economies, the United States has the highest poverty rate for female-headed households and the
largest gender gap related to poverty. The research also relates to an existing body of knowledge
about high rates of racial minority recidivism. Thus, this research seeks to explain why the
recidivism rates are very high among minorities. However, this research in particular focuses on
the high recidivism for three years among women felony offenders. The research was also well
framed and well communicated. The method used was appropriate and the sample size was
sufficient enough to justify the conclusion of the results. The research is replicable and
applicable to sociologists, criminologists, and policy makers in general. Personally, I see this
research to be very valuable to my own research because the results indicate that, poverty is a
major contributing factor to criminal behavior.
Hojman, D. (2003). Inequality, unemployment and crime in Latin American cities: Crime, Law & Social Change. pp. 33-51
This article talks about Inequality, unemployment and the incidence of high rates of
crime in Latin American cities, and how violent crime in particular is out of control. The writer
said many researchers and scholars have touched on the causes of crime in Latin American cities.
However, there is no consensus since others claimed that there is the lack of deterrence whilst
others debate that there is too much poverty and inequality within the society. However, there is
one thing that is agreed on, and that is regardless of the behavioral parameter values, deterrence
does not work in Latin America due to official incompetence and corruption of law enforcement
personnel, a weak judiciary and a problem ridden prison system. Another important factor the
writer touched on is diversity between and within cities. The author argued that in Latin
America.
The decision to commit a crime depends on deterrence and on any legal or legitimate
alternative. The former includes: (1) number of police available within the locality (2) the
probability that the crime will be detected and the culprit apprehended (3) the number of arrests
made in similar cases (4) and, how severely people were punished based on previous arrests. The
latter by: (1) When there is an economic growth rate which leads to more job creation and less
unemployment, people are less likely to commit crimes (2) How well people are paid for the
work, they do also influences one’s ability in Latin America to commit crime. (3) Massive
unemployment rates will eventually lead to the fostering of criminal activities (4) the poverty
rate is a major contributor to crime (5) the gap existing between the rich and the poor also
promotes crime. According to the author, historically, culturally, socially, economically, and
institutionally, Latin American cities do have similarities, which are different from the rest of the
world.
The first is that they all have worse levels and patterns of poverty and inequality. Poverty
and inequality in Latin American cities are specifically related to deficiencies in education, the
labor market, and inadequate macroeconomic stabilization and growth strategies plus
discrimination based on ethnic and geographical lines. Secondly, in Latin America there is a
widespread display of male chauvinism and related cultural attitudes. This, machismo, according
to the author is linked to other forms of intolerance, fanaticism, bigotry, contempt for
compromise, and the weakness of civil society and political democracy. The writer added that
the presence of machismo makes both violence and crime much more likely. Finally, the writer
touched on the drug trafficking business which he says is more of recent development but has
become an essential part of the economy with exports to several countries in the region. He
mentioned Columbia in particular and to a lesser degree Peru, Bolivia, and Mexico.
This article is very significant because it adds to diversified literature reviews of crime
and inequality around the world. The research adds to an existing body of knowledge about
crime, inequality, poverty, and the criminal justice systems in some selected countries in Latin
America. The research was well communicated and sufficient data was collected from all the
countries mentioned in the article. The samples collected were moreover, adequate to arrive at
such a conclusion. The study is, however, not universally applicable and there is in addition a
limitation which the writer himself had made clear. First, as the author pointed out, Latin
American cities are far more similar to each other historically, culturally, socially, economically
and institutionally. Secondly, the presence of wide-spread displays of machismo and male
chauvinism, are linked to intolerance, bigotry, fanaticism, and finally, cultural attitudes also
make both crime and violence more likely. Hence, results obtained in this research may not be
applicable in some other parts of the world. Thus, these countries have a lot in common yet
according to this author they are exceptionally different from the rest of the world. The author
also took many factors into consideration, like culture, ethnicity and class structures in Latin
American countries.
The article is very valuable to my research because I can draw an international correlation
between poverty and crime as indicated by this research to support my claim. The writer
cautioned European countries of the impending future similarities to that of present day Latin
America. The author outlined the following factors: (1) European cities growing racial and ethnic
composition (2) The increasing socio-economic divide, especially in the U.K (3) Failing
educational systems (4) New waves of immigration from the Balkans, Eastern Europe, Africa,
and many more places. Additionally, this study is equally significant for the United States as
well due to numerous researchers pointing to the fact that poverty and extreme poverty are a
leading cause of crime in most countries around the world. Thus, the growing gap between the
social classes would eventually lead to more crime regardless of how tough the sentencing
guidelines become.
Kent, L. S., & Jacobs, D. (2004) Social Divisions and Coercive Control in Advanced Societies: Law Enforcement .Social Problems; Aug 2004; 51, 3; ABI/INFORM Global. pp. 343-361.
The above research was based on the thesis of social conflict theory, which states that
economic stratification poses a threat to social order. Therefore, an increase in greater social
economic inequality should lead to greater capacity for coercive control by the police. The
primary objective is to find out if this hypothesis holds true in eleven industrialized countries
around the world including the United States. According to the researchers, the police are the
primary agency responsible for preserving order but besides the United States, little effect is
known about the impact of socio/economic divisions on levels of coercive control by the police
in other advanced countries. According to the researchers, the presence of large minority, high
unemployment rate, rapid economic development, urbanization, crime, and social
disorganization should be factors that should lead to greater coercive control from the police.
According to these authors, large minority presence explains police strength only in the
United States. However, the authors concluded that this positive correlation between large
minority presence and police strength across the United States may be due to the intense racial
conflicts in the Country. They argued that, these conflicts did not occur in the other nations in
the study. The results also concluded that, threats to internal stability due to economic
stratification are most likely to produce subsequent expansions of the police force.
The research question was not well framed and communicated for clear understanding.
However, the research is in line with the existing body of knowledge about the correlation
between the increase of minority presence and an upsurge in police force and coercion. The
theoretical framework of the study was adequate, appropriate, and the sample utilized size was
also sufficient. The research design and method analyzed eleven nations: Australia, Belgium,
Canada, Denmark, France, the Republic of Ireland, Italy, Norway, Sweden, the United
Kingdom, and the United States. The data used on the ratio of police employees to national
population was from 1975 to 1994 in most but not all the nations in the study due to missing
data.
The strength of the police was measured by the number of the police force by a
population of 100,000 with data from UN Survey of Crime Trends and Criminal Justice Systems.
There were no adequate control measures to prevent researcher bias, and even though the
research is replicable the results would not be universally applicable due to limitations on the
study. The conclusions of the study are justifiable but only to some extent since the results from
all the countries studied were not uniform and there were also missing data from some countries.
However, the results suggest that the United States due to intense racial conflicts was the only
country among the eleven advanced nations who view the presence of large minority group
presence as a threat to social domestic stability.
This article is very valuable to me because I have learnt that a large minority presence
could lead to an increase in the police force. Moreover, I also learnt that this only happened in
the United States due to intense racial conflicts, and to a lesser extent the United Kingdom, who
also increased their police force even though the crime rate was going down. This research
validates the conflict theory thesis advance forward, which suggests that economic stratification
poses a threat to an established order. Therefore, an increase in law enforcement and social
coercion is justifiable in order to preserve the status-quo.
Lurigio, J. A., Greenleaf, G. R., & Flexon, L. J. (2009) The Effects of Race on Relationships with the Police: A Survey of African American and Latino Youths in Chicago. Western Criminology Review 10(1) pp.29-41
This research is about a survey on African American and Latino Youths in Chicago about
the effects of race on relationships with the police. According to the researchers the majority of
studies done on race and perceptions of the police was mostly on the differences between
African Americans and whites and the emphasis has been on black-white comparisons, which
have left other important issues unaddressed; like differences in attitudes towards the police,
especially the difference between Latinos and African Americans. The research compared
African American and Latino youths’ attitudes, feelings, and behavioral intentions towards the
police. The independent measures used included pro-social values, commitment to school, and
contact with the police. The research findings concluded that there were several similarities
between Latinos and African American students on the dependent measures. According to the
research, both African Americans and Latinos are less likely to assist the police or believe that
the police care less about their neighborhood especially when they have been stopped and been
treated disrespectfully by the police before.
The above research question was not well framed and less significant even though it is
related to a large existing body of knowledge and has also made some contribution. The
theoretical framework of the study was not adequate but appropriate. The research method was
appropriate and the sample size used was sufficient because data was obtained from students
who were enrolled in 18 Chicago Public Schools in May of 2000. The project was also approved
by the Board of Education Legal Department. The survey was carried out anonymously and all
survey data from the schools were aggregated. The finding of this research, however, is very
important because it indicates how most minority youths perceive law enforcement officers.
Furthermore, minority youth willingness to assist the police will depend upon whether they
believe that the police care about their neighborhood or also whether on a previous encounter
with the police; they were treated disrespectfully or not. This research is very valuable to me
because it shows how racial minority youth feel about law enforcement officers working to
protect their communities.
Reiman, J. (2008) The Rich Get Richer and the Poor Get Prison. The Political Quarterly, Vol. 79, No. 1, pp. 1427-1450.
The author commented on an announcement by the British government to spend 1.2
billion Pounds Sterling to build new prison places by 2014 thereby increasing the prison capacity
from 81,500 to 96,000, an addition of about 10,500. According to the report, the current prisons
are overcrowded thus police are temporally using their cells to hold prisoners. The author said
the British government’s decision to build more prisons may be the only choice. The author
made reference to the fact that before 1914, the prison population was about 20,000 and fell
during World War 2 but gained momentum from the 1950’s to the 1960’s. By early 1980’s, the
figures had reached 40,000, and it keeps rising through the 1990’s to present. The report also
said Britain is nowadays putting more of its citizens behind bars than almost any other
democracy except for the United States. The author claimed that the view on building more
places in prisons has sharply divided the country, with one side echoing former Home Secretary
Michael Howard’s slogan that “Prison Works”. Michael Howard made his views clear that
prison should be for punishment and determent and to isolate offenders from hampering
society’s safety. According to the writer, some experts believe that it is cheaper to imprison a
person at an annual cost of 38,000 Pounds Sterling a year than to have a relentless offender on
the streets and in the community. There are about 100,000 persistent offenders. Therefore,
incarcerating them permanently could bring the crime level to zero.
The title of the article is very significant and provocative, and it also echoes on current
social facts existing in the criminal justice system. Much research on mass incarceration has been
carried out and this article in particular serves as a perfect prime example as to why this research
must be continued to ascertain the social and economic impact of building more prisons instead
of fostering strong social institutions to encourage rehabilitations. The article was well written,
and well communicated. There was no bias since the views of all the parties involved were
equally represented. The writer, however, wrote as a matter of current facts existing within the
British criminal justice system and the argument surrounding whether enforcing tougher criminal
laws versus getting tough on the causes of crime. The article is a very helpful because it reminds
us of the dilemma society faces when it comes to the issue of crime. The arguments that were
presented in the article also reflect the three social theories we have examined in the Breadth
component of this paper. This article is a very valuable source of information for the criminal
justice system in general but equally important for this research project. Moreover, it further
indicates how some advanced countries respond to crime.
Ruggiero, V. (2003) Fear and change in the city. City, Vol. 7, N0.1, Pp. 45-57.
This article talks about what needs to be done before a positive social change returns to
our cities. According to the writer current urban sociologists and sociologists of deviance do not
recognize the subjective decision-making processes at work in the representation of cities
through their work. According to the author early classical sociologists did recognize the notion
of social change as collective social forces with the potential power to bring about a social
change. However, the writer claimed that current researchers have abandoned the notion of
collective action and innovation as an analytical study of the city and instead instituted in its
place the study of fear, crime and, urban decay. The author said the current trend for urban
researchers is to identify cities as a transitional living nightmare with booming crime rates.
Additionally, they also separate the cities from the people who live in them and focus their
attention on anti-social behavior and disorders in the cities. Furthermore, the writer argued that
current urban sociologists and sociologists of deviance must redirect their attention and start
focusing on problems facing the urban centers by applying social conflict theories for social
change. Finally, the author believes that this would stimulate a positive and a pro-active debate.
This article is very significant because the writer indicated that current researchers who
should be bringing about a positive social change are rather at the opposite side of the aisle.
Thus, he argued that they need to be reoriented towards the concerns of our urban centers but
should not rather work against them. The article has also made a contribution to the existing
body of knowledge calling on current researchers not be concerned alone with the positivists and
structural functionalists’ approach to the study of the city but instead should be action oriented
and start thinking along the lines of a social conflict approach for a positive social change.
The writer used sufficient research materials to support his claims and also took into
consideration all the differing social and cultural issues relating to the research. The article is
moreover, very important because the writer dismisses some studies, which argued that the city
is at its decaying stages and in a sense dysfunctional, hence the next stage would only produce
violence and mobs instead of conscious social change. The article is a valuable source to my
research because it sheds more understanding to the plight of racial minorities and economically
disadvantaged people living in the inner cities. Equally important, I believe that this research will
be of help to criminal justice practitioners and social policy formulators in their effort to build a
fair and just society for all.
Stretesky, P. B., Schuck. A.M,. & Hogan, M.J. (2000) Space Matters: An Analysis of Poverty, Poverty Clustering, and Violent Crime. Justice Quarterly: Criminal Justice Periodical, 25 (5). pp. 817-841.
The purpose of the above research was to examine the association between poverty
clustering and violent crime rates. The researchers used data from 236 cities and for each city;
they computed a poverty cluster score that measures the proportion of contiguous high poverty
census tracts. The researchers claimed that there wasn’t much evidence to support a direct
relationship between the spatial clustering of high poverty tracts and murder, rape, robbery, and
assault. However, present was a strong correlation between the variable of poverty when it
interacts with poverty clustering and high homicide rates. The authors argued specifically that
economically disadvantaged people have a much stronger relationship to homicide in cities with
a high level of poverty clustering.
The research was well framed and significant because it expanded upon less known
research area of relationship between the spatial clustering of high poverty areas and violent
crime rates. Furthermore, it shed light on spatial dimensions of poverty as structural
characteristic of cities. The research further exposed that there is little or no evidence to support
a strong correlation between poverty clustering and violent crime tolls. The research is also
related to a broader existing body of knowledge in the area of poverty, urban crime and violence.
This article, therefore, makes an original contribution because contrary to the existing body of
literature, which claims a strong correlation between poverty clustering and violent crime. This
research, however, shows little evidence to support that claim.
The theoretical framework of the research was adequate because much literature relating
to poverty and crime was utilized. Furthermore, the data collected, and the methods employed
for the study was appropriate because there were 236 cities with a minimum population of
100,000 residents in the year 2000 involved in the research. The Data sources that were used for
the research were obtained from The Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) and the Census of
Population and Housing. The researchers also put in adequate controls to prevent bias. The value
of this research to me is that, it focuses on poverty and crime in the inner cities. Equally
important is that, it draws a correlation between extreme poverty and violent crimes.
This research is very significant because it calls for more research to be done in our inner
cities in order to understand the actual crisis facing our cities. The research is very important
because it persistently shows that poverty does have a strong correlation on crimes in our urban
centers. The research points to the fact that jobs lost in our urban centers like manufacturing
deprives poor communities of their economic resources. Furthermore, the authors argued that
spatial concentration and the isolation of high poverty areas prevented members of the
community from creating and maintaining the basic institutional structures and social controls
that prevent social problems, like violent crimes. Finally, this research is very valuable because it
is well in line with the various social change theories that have been examined in the Breadth
part of this paper.
Sharp, E. (2006) Policing Urban America: A New Look at the Politics of Agency Size. Social Science Quarterly, Volume 87, No. 2, Southwestern Social Science Association pp. 291-308.
The objective of the above article is to analyze competing explanations for variations
which contest that the size of a contemporary police force in larger U.S. cities is directly related
to the response of conflict theory. According to the researcher, conflict theory provided much
needed evidence for a racial threat thesis. The study shows that the size of contemporary police
forces is significantly shaped not only by the lessons of the 1960-1970 wave of racial unrest in
the United States, but also by reactions to racial disorders in the 1980s and 1990s in the United
States and by the prevalence of racial minorities in the current population. The research findings
concluded that a police department’s relative force size in 2000 is not only influenced by
incremental growth from the size attained by 1980, but is also significantly shaped by whether
the city experienced a race uprising from 1980-2000 and, to a minor degree, the size of minority
populations and the violent crime rate. The researcher found out that the wealth of a city has
fewer correlations and in addition there was no evidence to suggest that community ideology
plays a pivotal role in community policing matters.
The above research was not well framed because it was not defined well enough and
equally communicated. However, it relates to an existing body of literature in relation to the rise
of urban police forces in recent years. The research is also very significant because it specifically
touched on a conflict theory thesis as part of the bases for the rise in urban police forces. The
article did not make an original contribution. Nevertheless; it has contributed immensely towards
our understanding of the relationship existing between the presence of a large urban police force
and urban community arrests, prosecutions, and incarcerations.
The theoretical framework and methods for this study were adequate and fitting because
the research sample consists of 66 cities with a population of at least 250,000 in 2000.
Additionally, data for the research was also obtained from the Bureau of Justice Statistics,
Congressional Quarterly’ America Votes, US Census Bureau; and a regional news database from
Lexis-Nexis. The author considered the differing social and cultural issues relating to the study
which made the research conclusions justifiable. Furthermore, the research is replicable.
However, there may be limitations, which would affect the outcome not to be universally
applicable.
The research is very valuable to my project because it sheds light on a conflict theory
which posited that the presence of economic stratification poses a threat to an established
structure hence to counteract this threat, there is the need for a greater coercive control from law
enforcement. Thus, it validates the current treatment of racial minorities and economically
disadvantaged offenders under the criminal justice system. This research would also help urban
police departments to address issues relating to a structural functional theory which calls for
order and stability, thus requiring the full coercive force of the police to carry out that duty.
Turner, K. B., & Johnson, James. B. (2005) A comparison of bail amounts for Hispanics, Whites, and African Americans: A single County analysis American Journal of Criminal Justice, Vol. 30 No 1, pp. 35-55. Southern Criminal Justice Association
This research is based on bail amounts for Hispanics, Whites, and African Americans in a
single County analysis from a district court in a Midwestern jurisdiction. The authors, used
bivariate and multivate analyses to examine for significant differences between Hispanic and
other racial and ethnic groups in the dependent variable, bail amount set by judges for Hispanics
and other defendants. According to the researchers, to predict differences in the bail amount,
multiple regression control of two independent “legal” variables, prior arrest, and seriousness of
the instant offense, and “extra legal” variables of age, gender, and type of attorney, residency,
and race were utilized.
The finding, according to the authors, suggests that Hispanics receive higher bail amount
than Whites or African Americans. Furthermore, the results also cast doubt on “functional
theory” and “formal rationality theory”, variously known as the doctrine of “legal theory,” as a
model for explaining why members of racial or ethnic minorities receive harsher treatment at
various stages of the criminal justice and juvenile justice system.
The research question was well framed and the research was also very significant
because, according to the authors “a search for literature on race and bail suggests that few
studies have investigated judges’ decisions regarding the assignment of bail” (p.38). This
research also relates to an existing body of knowledge about the treatment of racial minorities
and the economically disadvantaged offenders within the criminal justice system. This research
has also made an original contribution to the existing body of knowledge because, according to
the authors, “Asian Americans and Hispanics have been neglected as a single unit of analysis”
(p.36). According to the authors, most research engaged in “racial lumping” that is normally
putting African Americans and Hispanics into one category and refers to them as “minorities.”
The theoretical framework for the study was not adequate, however it was
appropriate. The theoretical framework was not adequate because the authors stated that, “U.S.
government categorizes Hispanics into four groups: Mexican Americans, or Chicanos, Puerto
Ricans, Cubans, and “others” (a diverse group made up of those with roots in Spain, the
Philippines, and various Central and South American Countries)” (p.37). These categorization
means the Hispanics population could be too broad to analyze effectively. The research was also
communicated clearly and fully. However, I believe there could have also been a way to find out
some answers without necessary doing the research. For instances, in some jurisdictions, racial
minorities are still broken down into ethnic groups to know the actual numbers for each
grouping.
The data for the study was obtained from the District Court files of Lancaster County,
Nebraska, which includes Lincoln, the state capital and second largest city in Nebraska. The data
obtained for 1996 contains information on all White, African American, and Hispanics persons
accused of felony offenses who are eligible for bail. The total number of people involved in the
research was 812. There were 524 Whites, 233 African Americans, and 55 Hispanics. The
research also had adequate controls to prevent bias. The research is replicable because according
to the authors, data analysis from Connecticut concluded that courts systematically set bail for
Hispanic male and African American males 35% higher than set for Whites. Additionally, when
it comes to drug cases, the research found that several Connecticut cities have an average bond
four times higher than the bond for Whites. Furthermore, for women with no prior record, the
average bond for Hispanic women was 197 % higher than for White women. The finding of this
research cannot be applicable nationally and the conclusions cannot be justified for two
important reasons, first, the size of the Hispanic population involved in the study. Secondly, the
research was done in only one county.
This research is very valuable to me because, it has shed light on a significant topic
relating to judicial decisions about racial minorities and the criminal justice system, especially
Hispanics Americans. This is important because, according to the 2000 Census, Hispanics are the
fastest growing racial or ethnic group in United States, over taking African as the largest
minority group (p.37). Furthermore, this research will help people to be very careful when
categorizing racial and ethnic minorities. According to the authors “Mainly this practice hides
differences among groups and limits our understanding of the effect of these important decisions
on the individual groups” (p.49).
Twomey, J (2004) ed., Race, Gender and Class, Race, Gender & Class Volume 11, Number 1(3-5), downloaded from www.suno.edu/sunorgc/
This article was edited and compiled by Jane Twomey, and it focuses on race, gender,
and class in America. According to Twomey, it is very important for society to remember the
1992 Los Angeles riots even though it has been more than a decade since they occurred.
Twomey argued that remembering would teach us valuable lessons from our past and help us
make a conscious effort in building better race relationships in America. She asserted that the
1992 Rodney King riots were one of the most devastating examples of urban unrest in the 20th
century. She, furthermore, cautioned that even in our post 9/11 era our biggest and most
important challenges are still not to be found in Iraq or Afghanistan but instead in our urban
centers in America.
She reminded us that any quest for social justice must begin at home and with all of us.
She also made it clear that there would be no future regardless of how hard we work, if we are
not guided by the lessons of the past. To keep the 1992 Los Angeles riots alive in our memory,
Twomey, in addition, introduced us to nine short articles written by various scholars on the
lessons of the 1992 Los Angeles riots. Austin Scott-Long, the first full time African American
reporter for the associated press has covered many of the major urban periods of unrest of the
20th century.
In Scott-Long’s article, Understanding Race, Class and Urban Violence: Why Journalist
Can’t Do More to Help Us Understand, he discusses some basic ideological premises and
practical realities that limit the ways in which journalists deal with complicated issues, and the
impact this ultimately has on their ability to tell the real story of race and class in America.
William Solomon contributed an article, Images of Rebellion: It examined how the press and
journalists reported Rodney King’s beating. Solomon concluded that this was a symbolic logic of
a capitalistic modern society that supports physical and structure violence against the underclass
and people of color. In the religious community, Jeffrey Brand also contributed with an article
called, Assurance from the Pulpit. This shows how some churches in the Los Angeles area
responded to the crises the Sunday after the riots. Brand, found that church leaders used special
message techniques which he claimed are worth studying due to their impact on helping
communities to deal with crisis.
Bill Yousman also took a socio-psychological approach to understanding the 1992 riots
and community crisis. In his article, “Can We All Get Along?” The Los Angeles Uprising,
Classical Theories of Social Psychology and Dialectics of Individual Action and Structural
Inequality, Yousman used three theoretical perspectives in social psychology-the theory of de-
individuation, scapegoat theory of prejudice, and realistic group conflict theory to call for a
social dialectical understanding for the events of the 1992 uprising. Additionally, Jane Twomey’s
contributing an article, In Searching for a Legacy: The Los Angeles Times, Collective Memory
and the 10th Anniversary of the L.A “Riots” also examines how the Los Angeles Times
negatively worked hard to shape the collective memory of the events of the 10th anniversary of
the 1992 Los Angeles uprising back into the minds of people. According to Twomey the Los
Angeles Times does have the power to frame collective memory as with the case of the 10th
anniversary commemoration coverage thus vividly bringing back strong images of the 1992
riots. This, she claims also helps to support existing racial structures and prejudice.
James Spencer’s article also examined how the neighborhoods that experienced the 1992
riots have fared economically after 10 years. His article, Los Angeles Since 1992: How Did the
Economic Base of Riot-Torn Neighborhoods Fare After the Unrest? Spencer found out that, the
deep economic divisions existing prior to and which may have enabled the 1992 riots was still
present. Spencer drew the conclusion after using recently released zip code-level economic data
from the US Census Bureau to estimate the density and per capital levels of manufacturing, retail
and service jobs in riot areas prior to and after the riots. Nevertheless, Spencer called on
researchers and social policy formulators to focus their research into the deep seated economic
inequalities existing within the localities where the study was done. Max Herman also
contributed with the article, Ten Years after: A Critical Review of Scholarship on the Los
Angeles Riot.
According to Herman, after the Los Angeles riots, three major perspectives have
emerged in the work one is the empirically driving positivist view, a multicultural ethnographic
approach, and a postmodernist critique of prevailing ideological discourses. Herman argued that,
although these are all radically different yet they do complement each other to enhance the
overall understanding of the events of 1992. Tiffany Dyan, Kuniko Monroy, and Daniel Meyers
also wrote a contributing article as a stepping stone towards a broader research on rioting, titled;
In Fanning the Flame: Riot Commissions and the Mass Media. The authors examined whether
the media critique contained in the Kerner and McCone Commission Reports of the 1960s
actually led to changes in the media coverage of subsequent urban unrest. Dyan, Monroy, &
Meyers finding indicates that there has been a significant shift on the side of the media by
responding to critiques about the way social protest and race are reported. The researchers
admitted that their findings were mixed and much work is needed to be done. However, they
acknowledged that the media are moving towards the right direction.
Finally, In Remote Control: How Mass Media Delegitimize Rioting as Social Protest.
Shannon Campbell, Phil Chidester, James Bell & Jason Royer, claimed that contemporary media
cover riots as an ineffective, illogical protest against an established order, and they in addition do
not see riots as agents for progressive and social change. According to Campbell, Chidester, Bell,
& Royer, this represents a significant shift from the social protest of the 1960s thus having an
important implication for contemporary race relations
The above articles are very useful for examining race relations in America. Additionally,
the Los Angeles uprising offers a glimpse into America’s dark side as far as social inequality and
poverty are concerned. These articles would furthermore be useful in shaping people’s views of
what happens in a society experiencing the social conflict of racial discrimination and social
inequalities. The article, Race, Gender & Class is very valuable to my research because it
addresses the concerns of our cities and also sheds light on the current social inequalities still
existing after the 1992 riots in Los Angeles. Moreover, the authors collectively could show
patterns of social injustice and inequalities through their articles.
Additionally, their collective writings suggest that structural functional theory system
existed in an America whose duty it is to protect the rich and powerful thus, any attempt to rebel
through riots and social disobedience would be crushed. The articles also noted how some
powerful media outlets can use their establishment to distort and create stereotypical images of
people who are engaged in a collective action towards a positive social change.
Valier, C. (2003) Foreigners, Crime and Changing Mobilities. The British Journal of Criminology 43 (1); Criminal JGustice Periodicals pp. 1-21
The above writing is based on the significance of changing mobilities to theories of crime
and punishment through the critical work of the scholars of the Chicago school of sociology. The
author claimed that, the scholars at the Chicago school of sociology whose published work on
social disorganization, differential association and culture conflict in the 1920s and 1930s was
very discriminatory through their concept of identifying and depiction of different people as
inferior, dangerous, criminal, and amoral. Furthermore, the author argued that, the concepts of
social disorganization, differential association, and cultural conflict are part of the colonial and
national histories of the United States of America.
She asserted that, the concepts have played a crucial role in bringing about modern
interconnections between racial differences, criminalization, and national citizenship.
Additionally, the writer said the distinctions that were created by the Chicago school are still
undergoing complex transformations thus, bringing into question the basis and validity of the
long held concepts and paradigms. According to the author, “ It is important to examine the
Chicagoan understanding of the new mobilities of early twentieth-century America, and to
consider in what respect contemporary mobilities might render their concepts obsolete” (p.2)
The article is well written and the sources provided are sufficient to justify its conclusion.
Additionally, the article also makes an original contribution to an existing body of knowledge by
questioning and challenging the premises of the work of the Scholars at the once famous
Chicago school. This article is very significant because it indicates in part the intellectual source
of racial and ethnocentrism in America. Valier asserted that, the Scholars at the Chicago School
distant themselves from the concept of the “melting pot.” The notion of new Americanism,
because, they believe it will lead to the submergence of separate ethnic identities. Furthermore,
one of the scholars, Stonequist (1937) later points out that, “it was the members of minority
groups that were generally expected to do most of the melting; the dominant group did not
expect to have to adjust themselves to others” (p.11). Valier in addition argued that, the Chicago
Scholars rather preferred the notion of incorporation than absorption. According to Valier,
Parks, one of the Chicago scholars wrote that, “…an unassimilable remainder, the sign of black
and yellow skin, was an effective barrier to integration” (p.13).
This article is also very valuable to my paper because it I have learnt from the author that,
the Chicago Scholars embarked on token analysis of institutional discrimination. Furthermore,
they ignored the weight of racism in housing and employment and they overlooked the role of
racial discrimination practices in the criminal justice system. Valier stated that, a number of
infamous criminal trials stirred debates about racial prejudice within the criminal justice system,
especially the trial and execution of Sassco and Vanzetti in 1920. The author concluded that, “Of
the 25 race riots throughout the United States in the ‘Red Summer’ of 1919, Chicago saw the
greatest number of casualties” (p.16).
West, A, D. (2005) Horton the Elephant is a Criminal: Using Dr. Seuss to Teach Social Process, C...Journal of Criminal Justice Education; 16.( 2); Criminal Justice Periodicals. pp. 45-55.
The above article is based on the work of Theodor Geisel popularly known as “Dr.
Seuss”. The article explores his work, Horton the Elephant is a Criminal, through the eyes of
sociological and criminological theories. The author analyzed several of Theodor Geisel’s works,
but settled on using one, Horton Hears a Who, to show the consequence of social stratification
and the nature of crime, punishment, and rehabilitation. The primary purpose of the analysis is to
help teach students through the film, Horton Hears a Who, about the theories of crime and
criminality. In, Horton Hears a Who, Geisel claimed that the story of the Horton and the Who’s
simply means that everyone in a society matters, “A person’s a person, no matter how small”
(p.345). Another important point the author also made was that, the story is also a cautionary tale
against racial prejudice and discrimination. West said Horton the elephant, was perceived
“different” by the jungle residence. Hence, Horton was “labeled” by Mrs. Jane Kangaroo who
has assumed the role of a “moral entrepreneur,” telling everyone that Horton was an outcast. The
author asserted that the story is also an indictment of oppressive government policies and the
tendency for political power to stem from social and economic power. Additionally, the writer
stated, “This represents the common refusal of individuals to broaden their scope of awareness;
reluctance to see beyond their borders; a type of ethnocentrism and egotism, as well as fear of the
unknown” (p.346).
The above article is very significant and powerful to the study of current research on
racial minorities and economically disadvantaged people in America, especially within the
criminal justice system. Because, according to the writer, the story of Horton Hears a Who could
also be in relations to the anti Japanese sentiments that gripped the nation after the bombing of
Pearl Harbor on December 7th 1941. Thus, any person of Japanese ancestry including individuals
born in the United States was seen as a suspect. This article makes a special contribution to the
existing body of knowledge because it is the first time someone has attempted to interpret the
work of “Dr. Seuss” from a sociological and criminological perspective thus, making an original
contribution to our understanding of the creation and application of laws, the impact of social
stratification, the pervasive and dangerous influence of social and political power.
The article is very valuable to my research because it has taught me and broadened my
understanding about social differentiation and segmentation in structural functionalism.
Additionally, I will also be able design a similar project in a future research. The article has
furthermore, shown how some members of society response to a perceived threat to the social
order or the status quo, by emphasizing on racial differences, prejudicial attitudes, stereotyping
and discrimination. According to the author, sometimes perceived threat may also lead to a total
genocide of innocent minority groups. The author furthermore, stated that, the lessons that we
can learn from Horton is that, we should not be afraid when engaging in social activism .We
should continue to urge the powerless to work together and not be afraid of social integration.
The author in addition, stated that Jane Kangaroo represents a powerful community
leader. She is also elite who uses her position to elicit societal consensus around her beliefs. Her
son, Joey Kangaroo, represents people in our society who are mindless and follow authority
blindly without the ability to make independent decisions of their own. For instance, West
argued that, Mrs. Kangaroo could be representing a powerful interest group. She could also be
representing judgmental society (closed-minded, set, opposed to change, the status quo). She
may also represent the isolationist and prohibition. The writer pointed to the role of the media as
an example of Mrs. Jane Kangaroo.
This article is very powerful because it shed light on some important issues relating to crime
control and law enforcement. The author concluded that, through government messages that
perpetuate fear of crime and feelings of increased risked can control the location of the
population (whites in certain areas, minorities in certain areas), crime control may be simplified.
She asserted that, “If a particular racial/ethnic group also happens to be concentrated in that area;
it is the logical target of enforcement. This perpetuates the stereotype that more crime is
concentrated in the minority communities, leading to more white light…” (p.353).
Literature Review Essay
Social Change, be it positive or negative has been the driving force behind societal
development. Theories of social change and how they relate to poverty and social inequality
have been identified and discussed in the Breadth component of this KAM. Current research
about positive social change relating to minority and economically disadvantaged offenders
within the criminal justice system has also been examined through the annotated bibliographies
above. After carefully analyzing all the evidence presented in the literature to ascertain whether
there have been any significant development or progress as to how racial minorities and
economically disadvantaged people are treated in America and within the criminal justice system
in particular, the verdict shows that little gains have been made within the criminal justice system
and much more work remains to be done.
The evidence in the literature reviews point to the fact that the United States is still
widely polarized: white and people of color, and rich versus poor. Additionally, due to centuries
of immigration, America’s population is extraordinarily diversified culturally, compared to other
high-income nations in the world thus it has also led to a weaker national social fabric. Theories
of classical social change examined in the Breadth component indicate that social change should
lead to progress and development of the human race. However, current research evidence shows
otherwise for the racial minorities and economically disadvantaged people in American and
within the criminal justice system in particular.
SOCIAL CHANGE IN CONTEMPORARY AMERICA
Positive social changes within the criminal justice system in America have been very
sluggish for racial minorities and the economically disadvantaged. This is not surprising because
current research into American literature on criminal justice indicates that social evolutional
theory and social structural functionalism are still being utilized towards the treatment of racial
minorities and economically disadvantaged people (Cole, 1999; Reiman, 2003; Western, 2006).
In other words, the theory of structural functionalism whose core belief is about law and order is
very prevalent and well entrenched in the criminal justice system. Nevertheless, unintentional as
it might seem, Robert Merton the notable contemporary sociologist called unintended
consequences, latent functions. Consequently, failure or omission to act, also constitute a guilty
plea. Hence, how could it be justifiable to say that America has actually reached the civilized
stage? For instance, what does it take a society to get to the civilized stage? America could be
considered a civilized society from an evolutional stages point of view, since it has progressed
faster than most countries in the world. However, America still lacks behind the rest of the
advanced countries because, America locks up a higher percentage of its citizens in jails than any
other advanced country in the world (Walker et al., 2002).
Social conflict theorists analyze and study social inequalities and poverty through the
ongoing social conflict between dominant groups and other various categories of minority
groups: The rich versus economically disadvantaged people and white people in relation to racial
minorities. Social conflict theory argues that all stratified societies have two major social
groupings made up of a ruling class who control, exploit, and oppress the working class.
Additionally, conflict theory also assumes that the existence of a structural differentiation is one
of the major sources of conflict in a modern society (Macionis, 2003; Kent & Jacobs, 2004).
Current research, moreover, shows that, there are structural differentiations in our
societies, especially when it comes to the treatment of racial minorities and economically
disadvantaged offenders going through the criminal justice system (Ruggiero, 2003).
Importantly, current research in the literature has revealed that more work needs to be done
within the criminal justice system in order to build a fair and just society in America (Reiman,
2004). Most of the issues and themes identified above in the current literature reviews are
consistent with the theories examined within the Breadth component of this KAM. However, a
full analysis of these issues and themes generated would help shed more light on the prevailing
condition in America in light of positive social change and development that has taken place in
every aspect of the American way of life. Additionally, social change in the 1990s within the
criminal justice system rather led to the building of more prisons at an alarming rate. Current
social change has also led to the reduction in the crime rate, because an additional two million
more people are now incarcerated than there was in 1990 (Reiman, 2004).
Contemporary U.S. Sociologist Robert K. Merton had asserted that some social functions
are more obvious than others. He pointed to manifest functions as the recognized and intended
consequences of any social pattern. For instance, the obvious function of this country’s criminal
justice system is to protect its citizens from crimes and also to discourage further crime through
retribution, deterrence, and the rehabilitation of offenders. However, these functions may not
always be in the best interest of society because, criminals tend to bond, and criminal attitudes
and skills are strengthened over time. Once people are incarcerated their social ties to the outside
world also dissolve, which make it difficult for them to gain meaningful employment once they
are released. Therefore, the likeliness of a released offender committing more crime becomes a
possibility (Mann, 1993; Shannon et al., 1991).
The literature reviews have shed light on some important themes which I believe have
contributed to the lack of positive social change in America as far as minorities and the
economically disadvantaged are concerned. The literature reviews have also indicated that the
structural functional system is the mode of operation in America and to some degree this resulted
in social inequality, tension and divisions among the classes; white people versus racial
minorities, ethnic and gender discriminations. However, a large portion of the research literature
has pointed to conflict theory as the compromising system that should be employed in order to
create balanced societies in America. Finally, some of the most visible deficiencies and themes
discovered in the literature reviews are in the following areas:
1. Racial Minorities, Economically disadvantaged people and Law Enforcement
Officers
2. Fear, Mistrust, and Tension between the Races,
3. Mass Urban Poverty
4. Theoretical Perspectives on Inequality and Crime
5. Inequality in the Criminal Justice System
6. Large Racial Minority Imprisonment
RACIAL MINORITIES AND LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS
The fragile relationship between racial minorities, economically disadvantaged people
and law enforcement officers could be explained in Elaine Sharp’s (2003) Policing Urban
America: A New Look at the Politics of Agency Size, argued that, a conflict theory thesis of a
racial threat is one of the reasons why the size of urban police forces continues to rise although,
crime continues to go down. Sharp (2003) employed a conflict thesis data, from the 1960s and
1970s, to drive her point across. According to the thesis, racial minorities are seen as a threat
therefore, the police force size is proportional to the scale of minority group presence. Sharp, in
the year 2000, conducted her research in 66 cities across the United States, with a population of
at least 250,000. The results indicated that the size of a contemporary urban police force is not
only shaped by incidents of the 1960-1970 racial unrest in America but also racial uprising in the
1980s and 1990s and the rise of current racial minorities in the cities in addition to violent
crimes.
Sharp has asserted that, the size of the police force is due to how politicians and local law
enforcement agencies have publicized crime events. She claimed they use rhetoric, and the
misrepresentation of crime figures to convince the public that crime has become a major problem
that needs to be giving attention through the expansion of the police force. Sharp also used the
Inequality Thesis to support her claim that economic inequality in a community is the source of
the threat, rather than the presence of large racial minorities. Thus, the wealthy class would seek
to protect themselves from the economically disadvantaged people thereby protecting the status-
quo by enhancing the police ability to maintain law and order. Furthermore, Sharp argued that
the Racial Disturbance Thesis also explains why apart from the size of racial minorities and their
economic inequality, there could still be an increase in the size of the urban police force. Hence,
the Los Angeles riot of April 29-May1, 1992 serves as a prime example when law enforcement
officers involved in beating Rodney King were acquitted because, the riots required the
mobilization of 14,000 additional law enforcement officers beyond the boundaries of the city
(Sharp 2003).
FEAR, MISTRUST AND TENSION BETWEEN THE RACES
The presence of fear, mistrust and tension between racial minorities, economically
disadvantaged people and law enforcement officers has led to a negative if not a less favorable
attitude between urban citizens and law enforcement officers in urban centers. Sharp (2003) had
already indicated through her research that the increase in size of a minority population is also an
indication of a threat to the dominant class to maintain the current status-quo. Racial minorities,
who live in the inner-city areas, are, by and large, also economically disadvantaged and poor.
Therefore, they may in addition become victims of the attentions of a larger police presence. In
other advanced countries according to the current research review (Kent & Jacobs, 2004) police
also use social divisions and coercive control techniques to control ethnic minorities and the
economically disadvantaged. This is because social conflict theory suggests that, economic
stratification also poses a threat to a well established order.
Kent & Jacobs’ (2004) research titled Social Divisions and Coercive Control in Advanced
Societies: Law Enforcement ... Social Problems, hypothesize that, an increase in greater social
economic inequality should lead to greater capacity for coercive control by the police. The
primary objective is to find out if this hypothesis holds true in eleven industrialized countries
around the world including the United States. According to the researchers, the police are the
primary agency responsible for preserving order but besides the United States, little effect is
known of economic divisions on police size in other advanced countries. According to the
researchers, the presence of a large racial minority group, high unemployment rate, rapid
economic development, urbanization, crime, and social disorganization should be factors that
should lead to greater coercive control from the police. The results of the findings suggest that it
is only in the United States that the presence of large racial minority groups led to greater
coercive police control.
The results also concluded that, threats to internal stability due to economic stratification
are most likely to produce subsequent expansions of the police force. Eleven Nations were
involved in the study: Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, the Republic of Ireland,
Italy, Norway, Sweden, and the United States. However, the results indicate that the police in
America to some degree do use more coercive force to control their urban population than do the
rest of the countries involved. Furthermore, the research also indicates that it is only in the
United States that the presence of a large racial minority group, and the economically
disadvantaged that have led to an increase in the strength of a police force. This to some degree
shows why many urban residents or racial minorities are less likely to have favorable opinions of
law enforcement officers in the inner cities.
Racial minorities and economically disadvantaged people’s frustrations and anger could
also be evident in the Racial Disturbances Thesis, put forward by Elaine Sharp in relation to the
1992 Los Angeles riot. Another important article that, additionally, focuses and shares similarity
on minority frustration and anger with law enforcement is, Race, Gender, & Class (2004) edited
by Jane Twomey. The article made it clear that we should be learning a valuable lesson from the
1992 Los Angeles disturbances because they were some of the most devastating urban unrests of
the 20th century in America.
The article also featured an article written by William Solomon: Images of Rebellion
where the author examines how reporters covered Rodney King’s beating as a symbolic image,
one which reflects the perverse logic of a modern capitalist society, sanctioning physical and
structural violence against a racial minority group. Solomon argued that the news media
portrayal of Rodney King’s beating represents the deep sited divisions within the society with
structural functional theorists who see the riots themselves as unacceptable and a waste of time,
and social conflict theorists who, on the other hand, see the riots as a justifiable response to
oppressive and abusive law enforcement organization.
The fear, mistrust and tension between racial minorities, economically disadvantaged
people continues to rage on and was recently captured in a research paper by Lurigio, Greenleaf,
& Flexon (2009) "The Effects of Race on Relationships with the Police: A Survey of African
American and Latino Youths in Chicago.” The research compared African American and Latino
youths’ attitudes, feelings, and behavioral intentions towards the police. The research findings
concluded that there were several similarities between Latinos and African American students on
the dependent measures. According to the researchers, both African Americans and Latinos are
less likely to assist the police or believe that the police care about their neighborhood, especially
when they have been stopped and disrespected by the police before.
Racial minority groups do have a similar perception of the police even though historically
they have nothing in common. However, racial minorities do share similar feelings like fear of
crime in their communities, safety of their children and generally how they are all treated by law
enforcement officers. The study points to the fact that African Americans of all ages have a less
desirable attitude towards the police than whites. The research also indicates that, African
Americans are more likely to become victims of crime than any other racial group. Additionally,
African Americans are further likely to have negative contact with the police. Moreover, they are
also disproportionately stopped, harassed, and mistreated than the rest of the population.
Consequently, they are also less likely to report incidents of crimes or cooperate with law
enforcement officials.
Racial minorities and economically disadvantaged people in urban centers direct their
fear, mistrust and frustrations on law enforcement officers and people who do occupy high
positions. They believe these people have advanced knowledge on social issues and could bring
about positive social change, but believe that most of these intellectuals work against them. In
Claire Valier’s article, Foreigners, Crime and Changing Mobilities, she explored the theories of
crime and punishment through the work of the scholars from the Chicago School of Sociology.
Valier argued that the concept of social disorganization, differential association and culture
conflict are part of colonial and national histories of the United States of America.
The author claimed that these distinctions help perpetuate stereotypes against racial
minorities. Thus, people of different ethnic backgrounds were depicted as inferior, dangerous,
and criminals. She argued that the writings of these notable men in the 1920s and 1930s divided
people, created fear, hatred, and cultural conflict in America. According to Valier, for the great
men of the Chicago School the word cosmopolitanism means contradistinction to ethnocentrism,
and xenophobia. Valier asserted that, this particular point is important and relevant because it has
had a great impact on current scholars of urban sociology, who, nevertheless, do not focus on
social movements as a vehicle for collective social change. As an alternative, they rather explore
fear, crime and the dangers that could be found in today’s cities. (Valier, 2003) Valier, further
said the Chicago Scholars interpreted cultural conflict as an individual problem which needed
adjustments.
Valier, referred to the work of one of the students of the Chicago Scholar, Everret
Stonequist (1937) to show how discriminatory the Chicago Scholars were. Stonequist developed
the concept of the marginal man as an immigrant faced with the dilemma of having a mixed
blood. According to Stonequist, the marginal man even- though free from the power of social
control through his ability to move freely from one locality to another still finds himself a victim
of uncertainties and stigmatizations.
Stonequist also hammered his point across by drawing on the work of the prominent first African
American sociologist, W.E.B. Du Bois, who wrote The Soul of Black Folks (1903). Stonequist
joked that the blood mix that Du Bios described, is subject to both racial prejudice and cultural
conflict thus, feeling the pressure of being pulled and pressure from both sides thereby producing
an ambivalent attitude of pride, shame and love and hate of oneself. Stonequist asserted that, Du
Bios could make an adjustment to his predicament by becoming a minority group leader.
Furthermore, Stonequist claimed that people with similar problems became withdrawn
and isolated, while for others, it becomes only temporarily resolved, leading to personal
disorganization, expressed in delinquency, crime, suicide, and mental instability (Valier, 2003).
Stonequist, once again, drew on a chapter in Du Bois’ book, The Souls of Black Folk who
attacked the passiveness of Booker T. Washington of the Tuskegee Institute for allowing his
program to be used for a gradual assimilation approach without demanding the voting rights for
minorities. Du Bios concluded that such a strategy and conciliatory approach amounts to the
acceptance of the inferiority complex of the Negro race (Du Bois 1903/ 1989:43).
Other scholars who added their voice to the criticism were Chicago based Jane Addams
and Edith Abbott, who also pointed to several factors as being the reason why black people or
racial minorities have fears, mistrust and frustration of the existing social system. They pointed
to discrimination in the workplace, housing segregation, economic exploitation, and racial
segregation seen in the city (Valier, 2003). Another important point Valier’s article made is that,
between 1917 and 1919, 26 black homes were destroyed with fire bombs in formerly all-white
neighborhoods. Furthermore, realtors who sold houses for blacks also became targets of hate
crime (Valier, 2003).
Today few things have changed because the melting pot often talked about in America is
more for racial minority groups to start doing the melting to meet the standard of the dominant
group who is not required to do any adjustment of their own
(Valier, 2003) Modern day assimilation means racial minority groups must conform to
specifically Anglo-Saxon tradition. The final argument made by Valier’s article was that, the
Chicago Scholars’ view of American nationality should be one that is made up of a mosaic rather
than a single entity, thus, the absorption of the melting pot concept is the denial of one self, and
the Chicago scholars would have rather preferred incorporation (Valier, 2003).
Fear, mistrust and tension between the races have additionally, been captured in
Vincenzo Ruggiero’s article titled, Fear and Change in the City (2003) wherein the author called
for the reorientation of all scholars involved with urban sociology and the sociology of deviance
in an urban context. Ruggiero argued in the article that something needs to be done if a positive
social change is to return to our cities. Since current urban sociologists and sociologists of
deviance have forgotten the fact that they have to recognize the subjective decision-making
processes at work in the depiction of urban centers in their work. According to the author, early
classical sociologists do recognize the notion of social change as collective social forces with the
potential power to bring about social change. However, current researchers have abandoned the
notion of collective action and innovation as an analytical study of the city. Additionally, they
have instead instituted in its place the study of fear, crime and, urban decay.
The author said the current trend for urban researchers now is to portray cities as a
transitional living nightmare with booming crime rates and fear. Furthermore, current researchers
also separate the cities from the people who live in them and focus their attention on the anti-
social behavior and disorders in the cities. The writer argued that contemporary urban
sociologists and sociologists of deviance must redirect their attention and start focusing on
problems facing the urban centers by applying the social conflict theories for social change.
Finally, the author believes that this would stimulate and generate a positive and a pro-active
debate. In a nutshell, the research shows that only few contemporary researchers have been re-
oriented towards a social conflict theory, to enable positive social changes in the cities.
Moreover, this attitude towards the city’s problems have made people start casting doubt on
whether our urban centers have the ability to bounce back once again, or if even there is a real
hope for a true revival of the American inner cities.
According to the author, students of urban sociology were faced with the choice of either
focusing on the illegitimate activities like, urban crimes or instead focus on social conflict and
change in the city. However, the author said some chose to focus on the city as a frightening
aggregation of individuals and concentrated on fear for the gathering of people and different
groups in the urban environment including the wave of increasing immigrants with their cultural
diversity. According to the writer, this is how the sociology of deviance started independently
(Ruggiero, 2003). Ruggiero argued that many contemporary urban sociologists and sociologists
of deviance were influenced by the work of classical writers like Tonnies, who classified urban
life as mechanical, and rural life as organic thus, making the city appear dysfunctional that
produced only devastating mobs, instead of people with the ability to come together for a social
change.
Ruggiero also said, sociologists of the Chicago School were additionally influenced by
the work of Simmel on the ideal of extreme phenomena, generated by the city life, and this,
furthermore, attests to their selective nature of thinking and orientation. The writer argued that,
the sociologists of the Chicago School, took Durkheim’s ideas of crime, but broke away from the
positivist tradition of studying individual pathologies or groupings as objects of social
conditions. By so doing, the so called transitional areas inhabited by a succession of the migrant
group were also classified as criminal activities generating centers. Thus, little efforts were
devoted into how to mobilize collective action in this area for a positive social change.
MASS URBAN POVERTY
Social change is a collective effort, and it involves all stake holders. It is moreover,
important for scholars and students of sociology, and urban studies to focus on a social conflict
theory when studying problems facing the inner cities, and the criminal justice system. The
majority of the people who become victims of the criminal justice system are also victims of
their own neighborhoods. Poverty has also been indicted as one of the causes of crime in urban
centers across the United States. Furthermore, poverty has equally been the main culprit in most
crimes committed in Latin American Countries. According to Hojman, D. (2004) Inequality,
unemployment and crime in Latin American cities, crime rates are very high in Latin American
cities, especially in places where there is diversity between and within the cities.
Hojman (2004) asserted that, the causes of the crime wave have been attributed to
poverty and social inequalities, and unemployment. Some experts think that poverty and social
inequality in Latin America are too deeply rooted. However, there is one thing both sides agreed
on, and that is regardless of the behavioral parameter values, deterrence does not work in Latin
America due to official incompetence and corruption of law enforcement personnel, the judiciary
and personnel in the prison system. This is largely what makes the Latin American urban
problem different from the urban problems in the United States. In America, there is less
corruption within the police force in comparison to many Latin American countries. The law
enforcement officials are competent, and the court and prison systems are all well equipped.
Hojman (2004) concluded that poverty and inequality in Latin American cities are
related to deficiencies in education, the labor market, and inadequate macroeconomic
stabilization and growth strategies plus discrimination based on ethnic and geographical lines.
However, there are similarities in the causes of a crime in Latin American countries and the
United States. First to top the list as this research has shown is poverty, and social inequalities.
Furthermore, in the United States, most of the poor people are also racial minorities, who had
been subjected to past racial segregation, housing and job discrimination. Moreover, racial
minorities and economically disadvantaged people in America, additionally, face the same
problem of an inadequate and ineffective school system. Therefore, their chance of getting
equally good education and a well paying job is also affected. Equally important is the fact that,
most minorities living in the urban centers are either unemployed or are engaged in low paying
jobs thus, continuing the urban cycle of poverty.
Poverty and social inequalities in American inner cities has also contributed largely to
urban violence and crime. In the Breadth component of this KAM, many theories of social
change and societal development were examined and social conflict theory argued that the
existence of stratification and social inequality in a society lead to a social conflict. Thus,
poverty and social inequality in American inner cities would undoubtedly lead to a social conflict
in the form of deviance behavior, and different types of illegal activities. This also explains why
there are disproportionately large number of racial minorities and economically disadvantaged
people incarcerated under the American criminal justice system. The research conducted by
Stretesky, Schuck, & Hogan (2000) examined the association between poverty clustering and
violent crime rates.
The researchers used data from 236 cities and for each city; they computed a poverty
cluster score that measures the proportion of contiguous high poverty census tracts. These
researchers claimed that there was not much evidence to support a direct relationship between
the spatial clustering of high poverty tracts and murder, rape, robbery, and assault. However,
there was a strong correlation between the variable of poverty when it interacted with poverty
clustering and high homicide rates. The researchers argued that more research needs to be done
in our urban centers in order to understand the actual crisis facing our cities. Some previous
studies done on urban poverty and crime seek to down play the strong correlation between the
problems facing urban centers and the causes of crimes.
Nevertheless, a recent research project titled, Reassessing Nonlinearity in the Urban
Disadvantage /Violent Crime Relationship by Lance Hannon and Peter Knapp (2003) seeks to
correct the discrepancies caused by methodological bias from log transformation about the urban
disadvantage and violent relationship to the attention of sociologists and criminologists who are
becoming increasingly worried about the nonlinearly and interaction effect. The authors claimed
that some research and studies suggest positive correlation between neighborhood disadvantage
and violent crime; whereas other research also indicates that there is a negative relationship
between neighborhood disadvantage and violent crime. According to these writers, these
inconsistencies are due partially to the lack of logarithmic transformation in criminological
research.
The authors, claimed that though, logarithmic transformation has lots of benefits, there
are also drawbacks. The authors asserted that, a recent research done by Krivo and Peterson
(1996:620) supported their idea that there is a positive correlation between socioeconomic
disadvantage and crime which disadvantages neighborhoods. Additionally, there was also an
unusually high crime rate in comparison to neighborhoods with a relatively moderate or low
level of socioeconomic disadvantage.
Poverty and social inequality have also led to high recidivism rates among racial
minorities and economically disadvantaged offenders. Holtfreter, el al. (2004) argued in this
research that poverty does have a strong bearing on women offenders once they are released
from prison. According to the writers, this eventually leads to recidivism thus costing the State
more money. The study focuses on the effect of poverty and state aid to women offenders and
recidivism. The researchers used 134 female felony offenders from the community correctional
facilities in the State of Oregon and the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul, Minnesota to do a self
report of re-arrest and probation or violations over six- months time periods.
According to the researchers, the results of the study based on logistic regression
analyses indicate that poverty status increases the probability of re-arrest by a factor of 4:6, and it
increases the odds of supervisory violations by a factor of 12:7. However, risk scores like
poverty status failed to predict recidivism. The research also found out that specifically among
poor women offenders, providing state-sponsored support to address short- term needs like
housing reduces the chances of recidivism by 83%. Thus, community correction officers who
help make state capital available promote empowerment for women and reduce the odds of
recidivism among women. Finally, after assessing the influence poverty has on recidivism
among women offenders the importance of this study is to draw the attention on the role poverty
in general plays and why it is important to reduce its effect on everybody.
Thus, being poor increases your chances of engaging in a criminal wrong doing than
when you are part of a middle and upper class group. Additionally, the authors stated that, the
United States has the highest poverty rate for female-headed households and also the largest
gender gap related to poverty (Holtfreter et al 2004).
THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVE ON INEQUALITY AND CRIME
In a theoretical perspective of crime and social inequalities, Theodor Geisel popularly
known as “Dr. Seuss” uses his work, Horton the Elephant is a Criminal to explore crime/social
disadvantage through the eyes of sociological and criminological theories. The author analyzes
several of his works but used, Horton Hears a Who to show the consequence of social
stratification and the nature of crime, punishment, and rehabilitation. According to the author,
the primary purpose of this analysis is to help teach students through the film, Horton Hears a
Who about the theories of crime and criminality. West (2005) argued that this method of
teaching is also very valuable because it shows us what goes on within our society,
unconsciously, everyday, which might constitute social conflict and labeling theory, social
differentiation, and segmentation in structural functionalism. The article shows that some
members of society respond to a perceived threat to the social order or the status quo by over
emphasizing racial differences, prejudicial attitudes, stereotyping and discrimination. Hence,
racial minorities and economically disadvantaged people once again become the victim of the
vicious cycle of poverty. According to social conflict theory, poverty and social inequalities
thrive in a capitalist society because the laws and norms reflect the interest of the powerful
members in the society. Thus, those who threatened the very foundation of the system are
considered to be deviant.
Conflict theory also asserted that the social injury caused by society’s elites is less likely
to be considered criminal due to their social standing. However, when racial minorities and
economically disadvantaged people caused social injury, they are generally labeled as deviants
and criminals. Understanding urban poverty and social inequalities from a theoretical perspective
helps us treat the less unfortunate ones in our society with the same respect and dignity accorded
each member of the society. Urban poverty has increased because jobs and industry that were
once located in the cities are now being located in suburban industrial and office parks leaving
many large inner city residents without jobs (Walker, Spohn & DeLone, 2002).
Most inner city residents also do not have transportation to enable them get to these
suburban businesses. Thus, the geographical shift of employment had as well affected the job
quantity and quality available to racial minorities and economically disadvantage people living in
urban centers. Moreover, the effect of the economic loss to these urban centers has had a
devastating impact on neighborhoods. These distressing impacts include high unemployment
rates, persistent high crime rates, as well as increasing levels of physical violence. Additionally,
the fear of physical harm and crime makes other law abiding people move out thereby increasing
the concentration of the unemployed and consistent offenders (Mann, 1993; Shannon et al.,
1991).
Furthermore, due to safety, inability to secure insurance and loss of revenue many small
businesses also move out of the cities. Because there is no competition for the remaining
businesses in the cities, they tend to increase their prices on goods and services. Finally, drug and
drug life activity becomes the dominant trade in the inner cities with most customers coming
from the suburbs. Children in the process are exposed to gangs and the illegal activity of drug
peddling but due to peer pressure, they cannot resist the temptation (Walker, Spohn & DeLone,
2002. Western, 2006)
INEQUALITY IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM
Due to the above discussed problems, racial minorities and economically disadvantaged
offenders are disproportionately arrested and formally arraigned through the criminal justice
system. This point has been validated through the work of Walker, et al 2002. The authors
utilized most recent research documents on patterns of criminal behavior and victimization,
police practices, court processing and sentencing, the death penalty, and correctional programs
for the study. The authors quoted the great African American scholar W.E.B. Du Bois, who said
the problem of the twentieth century is nothing but race and racial discrimination, and to some
extent the authors consider that, race is still the problem in this twenty first century considering
the current treatment of racial minorities under our criminal justice system.
The authors supported their claim by citing data which suggested that, although, African
Americans represented only 12% of the US population in 1996, they made up about 49.4% of the
prison population. Additionally, the rates of incarceration for African Americans were seven
times more than Whites. Moreover, about 40 percent of people who were on death row, and
about 53 percent of all executed inmates since 1930 were Black. The authors stated that racial
minorities are treated more harshly than whites at some point in the criminal justice system,
especially when it comes to the death penalty. The evidence of systematic racial discrimination,
according to Walker et al., (2002) precedes the civil rights movements which were characterized
by open discrimination directed against African Americans and other racial minorities at all
stages of the criminal justice system.
They also argued that despite all the significant changes made in the criminal justice
system, racial inequities still exist and African Americans and other racial minorities silently
continue to suffer both overt and subtle discrimination at the hands of the police. Furthermore,
racial minorities are more likely to be shot and killed by the police than whites, and they also
suffer being arrested, and being victimized by excessive physical force. The authors additionally
point to current statistics to show that there is still compelling evidence that discrimination exists
within the criminal justice system when it comes to bailing, charging, plea bargaining, jury
selection, and juvenile justice processing. They, furthermore, noticed discrimination in
sentencing, and additionally, found out that some judges in some jurisdictions continue to
impose harsher sentences on African American offenders who murder or rape whites. However,
these same judges are more lenient on whites who victimize African Americans.
Discrimination against racial minorities and economically disadvantaged offenders has
been reviewed in the literatures by current criminologists and sociologists. David Cole’s book,
No Equal Justice: Race and Class in the Criminal Justice System was reviewed by Dennis
(2001). According to Dennis, the book certainly makes a strong argument for the inequality
existing in the American Criminal Justice System. The author, David Cole argued that the
criminal justice system is based on two systems, one serving the rich and the other serving the
poor. O.J. Simpson’s case was a typical example of how one could be a member of a racial
minority, yet financially powerful enough to make White America realized that it has two
criminal justice systems.
To indicate that there is no equal treatment for racial minorities and the economically
disadvantaged within the criminal justice system; Cole cited the case of Florida v. Bostwick, to
show how discriminatory the system is when it comes to administering equal justice. According
to Cole, Bostwick was searched in a bus and the police found one pound of cocaine and arrested
him. However, in Terry v. Ohio only probable cause was allowed, yet Terry was carrying a
weapon. Cole’s point was that, both Bostwick and Terry should have been subjected to equal
treatment under the law. But because Bostwick was black and a racial minority, his appeal for
equal treatment fell on deaf ears. The court threw out his argument of the probable cause, and
said the police have the right to search at will. However, Terry who rather happened to be
carrying a weapon was allowed to invoke the probable cause which prevents the police authority
to search him at will.
Cole, additionally, cited pre-arrest profiling, inadequate counsels and very harsh
sentencing given to racial minorities as some of the existing evidence of discriminatory practices.
Furthermore, Cole suggested that the legitimacy of the criminal justice system is vital if minority
confidence in the system is to develop. One way of doing this is to eliminate double standards.
Positive social change within the criminal justice system has been a very slow process.
Therefore, a large number of racial minorities and economically disadvantaged offenders find
themselves being sentenced to terms of imprisonment.
In reviewing the literature, it also came to light that 38% of all black adult men in the
State of Oklahoma have been convicted of a felony. K.C. Moon the Commissioner stated that the
finding was not due to racism or unjustly treatment of blacks, but instead it is due to poverty.
Furthermore, he admitted that the result was due to socio-economic problems than racial
discrimination. Additionally, he said blacks are statistically poorer than whites (Anonymous,
2006). Western, (2006) also added his voice against the massive imprisonment of racial
minorities and economically disadvantaged offenders under the criminal justice system in his
book titled, Punishment and Inequality in America. Western asserted that mass incarceration of
poor African American men leads to the breakdown of the society units within racial minorities
and economically disadvantaged families. The author also claimed that there are numerous
consequences that await incarcerated racial minority and economically disadvantaged men once
they get back from prison. Thus, with labels attached to them, they have little prospects in
finding any meaningful employment. Additionally, these men also do not have any income to
support a family. The author challenges traditional assertions of incarceration as a means of
dealing with crime because it also broadens the scope of social inequalities.
According to the author, the book is not just about crime and deviance but on a larger
canvas it is more a story about race and poverty in a great, rich country. Western stated that
towards the last decades of the twentieth century the American criminal justice systems was
uncertain about prison rehabilitation projects that were first attempted in New York and
Pennsylvania. As a result, prison has become exclusively for incapacitation, deterrence, and
punishment. According to the writer, research has shown that between 1970 and 2003, state and
federal prisons grew seven times to accommodate 1.4 million convicted felons serving at least
one year behind bars. Offenders held at county jails, awaiting trial or serving short sentences
added another seven hundred thousand by 2003. The researcher also noted that, 4.7 million
people were under probation and parole supervision.
The author, as well, maintained that information obtained from the Bureau of Justice
Statistics reports of 2004 recorded that over 12% of African American males, aged twenty-five
to twenty nine were behind bars, prison or jail. The report also stated that, about 30% of black
men born in the late 1960s without a high school level education had served time in prison, and
60% of them who may be in their mid-thirties have a prison record. Furthermore, the author
argued that by 2000, over one million black children – 9% of those under eighteen - had a father
in prison or jail. The author added that, although it has been argued that incarceration may
prevent those who are locked up from committing further crimes in the society. But once they
are released, they have only few resources to start with and fewer chances of gaining any
meaningful employment, even to an extent of getting someone to marry. Hence, crime and
opportunistic criminal behavior becomes inevitable or an inviting alternative (Western, 2006;
Mann, 1993).
LARGE RACIAL MINORITY IMPRISONMENT
Based on the above current literature reviews one could clearly observe the social
inequalities existing within American society, especially within the criminal justice system. It is
assumed that social change and societal development tend to bring upward mobility and equal
and fair chances to all members in the society regardless of the racial and economic background.
The American criminal justice system still operates within the context of structural
functionalism. Structural functionalism is also practiced unconsciously in societies where
stratification and segmentation exists.
In Reiman’s, (2008) The Rich Get Richer and the Poor Get Prison, the author
commented on an announcement by the British government to spend 1.2 billion Pounds Sterling
to build new prison places by 2014 to increase the prison capacity from 81,500 to 96,000.
According to the report, the current prisons are overcrowded thus police cells are temporarily
being used. The author said, the British government’s decision to build more prisons may be the
only choice but, it also clearly points to the new direction the criminal justice system is
embarking on. That is people who breaks the law must be punished through incarceration. The
report stated that, Britain is as well putting more of its citizens behind bars than almost any other
democracy except the United States. The Former British Home Secretary, Michael Howard was
the first to use the slogan, “Prison Works”, to signal the departure from rehabilitation to
punishment. Today, proponents of additional prison places have also taken to the same slogan.
According to Reiman (2008) some experts in Britain believe that it is cheaper to imprison
a person at an annual cost of 38,000 Pounds Sterling instead of having a persistent offender on
the streets. Interestingly, Jeffrey Reiman’s (2004) book, The Rich Get Richer and the Poor Get
Prison: Ideology, Class, and Criminal Justice, also wrote that, the aim of the criminal justice
system is to protect the American public from the threat of crime from the poor but not to
prevent it, and neither is it there to provide justice to all. The author claimed that the failure of
the justice system to eliminate crime is by design, to convince all stakeholders for their
justification in holding and imprisoning a large proportion of underprivileged criminals. The
writer said the source of crime, in our inner cities has long been known to include, poverty,
slums, and unemployment. However, no step has been taken to improve the livelihoods of inner
city residents. Reiman argued that, based on current research, it is no longer a secret that,
poverty, exacerbates criminality behavior and people quest for property accounts for 90% of the
crime rate.
Society is additionally aware that prison undermines human dignity and ex-convicts do
not have job opportunities due to stigmatization. Many inmates come back from prison with high
hopes of getting integrated into their communities, and also with the hope of living productive
lives. However, society is less receptive to former prison inmates which make it very difficult for
them to gain any meaningful employment. As a result, most poor racial minorities become
disillusioned about society and many return to their old lifestyles to make a living. Furthermore,
economically disadvantaged people are more likely to get arrested than are the rich for the same
offence. Additionally, the economically deprived people are more likely to be charged than the
wealthy. Moreover, they are also more likely to be convicted. Once they are convicted, they are
equally more probable to be sentenced to prison than their rich counterparts or members of the
middle and upper classes. Thus, the composition of the American prison system is made up, by
and large, by racial minorities and economically disadvantaged people (Reiman, 2004).
As part of his book introduction, Professor Jeffrey Reiman said, it is his view that the
social order is responsible for most of the social crimes prevailing in our society. He argued that,
due to the nature of American individualism and its economic competitiveness, the poor are
pressured to enhance themselves or achieve an economic position by every means available to
them. Furthermore, this social competition degrades and humiliates the losers who are more
likely to be, from the economically disadvantaged, or a racial minority.
GLOBAL PICTURE OF POVERTY AND INEQUALITIES
In conclusion, the plight of racial minorities and economically disadvantaged people in
America must be clearly understood. Therefore, it would be better to appreciate the global
picture of poverty and social inequality, and the impact it has on people’s lives across the world.
Mackenzie, (2006) broadened our horizon to the international level, to understand the role
poverty and social inequality play around the world. Mackenzie’s article is relevant to our
understanding of poverty and social inequalities as it relates to racial minorities and
economically disadvantaged offenders within the American criminal justice system.
Additionally, it may contribute towards the building of a fair and just society in America.
Furthermore, there are important points and lessons we can draw from this article. The article
will also challenge those of us who believe that American is not in the position of solving the
problems of its racial minorities and the economically disadvantaged.
Mackenzie’s article began with the G8 summit held in Gleneagles in July 2005. The
meeting was attended by representatives of the 8 richest countries in the world chaired and led by
the United States. On top of their agenda was to forgive 100% of all the debt of about 40 billion
dollars owed by 18 of the world’s poorest countries. In return, these countries would implement
and maintain macroeconomic, poverty reduction and structural reform policies satisfactory to the
World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. The first question we should ask is why they
gave the 40 billion dollars? Secondly, is there any particular reason why they have decided to
forgive this debt? According to the author, in total, 38 countries were considered Highly
Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC). The importance of this move to forgive the debt of these poor
countries is the realization that poverty creates a hardship and also many lives would be saved
since part of the money could be diverted into other social programs to alleviate hardships in
those countries.
To understand the magnitude of hardship these poor countries go through, Mackenzie
(2006) provided us with the staggering statistical figures. According to him, 47% of the total
world population earns one-quarter percent of global income. One- quarter percent is different
from one-quarter of the world income. Mackenzie (2006) reminded us that, one-fifth of the world
population still lives in poverty and out of the 6 billion human beings, 2.8 of them live on less
than $2 a day. According to the author, more than 880 million people lack access to basic health
services, and 2 billion people have no electricity. Additionally, he asserted that, over 1 billion
more have no adequate shelter. The author maintained that, roughly one-third of 50,000 deaths in
a day are poverty related, which could be prevented through better nutritional care, safe drinking
water, vaccines and cheap re-hydration packs and antibiotics (Mackenzie 2006, pp.1-2).
This article in brief, has shed light to the power of money and the detriments of poverty
from an international or global perspective. However, the most important lesson from this article
should be the fact that the world’s richest countries forgave 100% of the debt of 18 of the
world’s poorest nations. In return these countries must implement macroeconomic, poverty
reduction and structural reform policies satisfactory to the World Bank and the International
Monetary Fund.
The 8 richest countries have realized that there is a vast international social inequality
existing between the rich nations and the poor nations based on the statistics presented above. If
the measures put in place by the rich countries are an attempt to build better societies in these
poor countries, then it can also be argued that America have not done a better job with its inner
cities. America must double its investments that are necessary for social growth and development
in the inner cities. Social conflict theory thesis argues that, the existence of vast social structures
is also the source of social conflict. There are vast social structures in the American society
which has kept racial minorities and the economically disadvantaged from gaining equal access
to opportunities. America, as the leader of the free world must also demonstrate to the United
Nations and the International community that, they are leading the way in reducing social
inequality and poverty from their society.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
The evidence of systematic discrimination against racial minorities, especially African
Americans precedes the civil rights movements. The great African American scholar W.E.B. Du
Bois attributed the problem of the twentieth century to be race and racial discrimination but the
problem of the 21 century should not be based on racial minorities and economically
disadvantaged people. Thus, the election of a racial minority President to the White House is a
positive sign for social change in America and, a victory for racial minorities and the
economically disadvantaged people. However, there is more room for improvement in our
society and the criminal justice system in particular. America is a progressive country, and there
is no reason why we should have 38% of racial minority adult men in Oklahoma with a felony
record. Such trends must not go unchecked, because, the consequence would be obviously the
widening gap between racial minorities and the economically disadvantaged, and the rest of the
population.
Based on current research, it could be said that the criminal justice system needs a
makeover through the help of a positive social change. What can be done to remedy the disparity
which is evident within the criminal justice system? Learning from social disorganization theory,
we can tell that the problems facing American inner cities are real. Furthermore, they contribute
immensely to the problems we have in our society in general and the criminal justice system in
particular. Social disorganization theory has been used to indicate the outbreak of violence
within local communities, and we have already seen enough violence in our inner cities to wait
any longer. Additionally, the presence of a concentration of economically disadvantaged people,
ethnic heterogeneity and residential instability are all indicators that social disorganization is
likely to exist.
Moreover, such neighborhoods have the lowest incomes, increased rates of unemployment,
lack of institutional investment, inadequate resources and financial support. Currently, these
problems are still present in our urban centers, and we are not doing enough to remedy the
situation until it gets worse before we respond with our law enforcement agencies. However,
correcting these social problems will further lead to the reduction of excessive arrest and
incarceration rates within the criminal justice system. In 1996, African Americans represented
only 12% of the US population, however, they accounted for about 49.4 percent of people in
prison (Walker et al., 2002; Reiman, 2004).
As agents of positive social change, we must strongly confront these figures. These figures
speak volumes about structural functionalism. In America, the racial group, you belong is closely
related to your social standing. Therefore, under-privileged racial minorities in the midst of
affluence see society as unjust by not providing a fair means to achieve equal opportunities. For
this reason, most urban youth turn to criminal activities to achieve the same goal, but reject the
approved means of achieving it. Thus, it is also not unconventional for more racial minorities
than Whites to be arrested, and victimized by excessive physical force or even shot and killed by
the police.
America has finally elected an African American President of the United States; African
American first Lady, and an African American Attorney General. How could we say positive
social change has not yet come to America? How unfair is such a criticism? Well, first, we have
to look at the broad look at the American canvas. Secondly, we should inspect the paintings
relating to social inequalities. Thirdly, we should look at the images of the American criminal
justice system. Finally, the plight of racial minorities and economically disadvantaged people
behind bars sums up all the paintings. Social change leads to conflict and without conflict
nothing would have been won in America. Therefore, all the victories won by racial minorities
were won in the context of social change. The fight for social change in America started from the
American Revolution, the Civil War, the Emancipation Proclamation, the Equal and Civil
Rights, Desegregation and Affirmative Action. Consequently, every change we are witnessing
today constitutes the forces of societal change and development, and its theories will continue to
shape and perfect society forever. However, just as Karl Marx accurately asserted, the existence
of social stratification and social inequalities are the sources of all conflict in every society.
So what can be done to correct the situation existing in the American criminal justice
system? How do we make people aware of these vast discrepancies existing in our society?
What do current researchers think of these theories of social development?
The Application portion of this KAM which is the production of a manual booklet to assist
young professional within the criminal justice system will shed more light on the answer.
Application
SBSF 8130: Professional Practice and Societal Development
Introduction
This portion of KAM 1 is the application section. The project consists of two parts.
The first part of the project is the production of a training manual in a form of a booklet. The
purpose of this manual will be to assist and sensitize all stakeholders, especially those within the
criminal justice system; towards the need for a more professional and informed approach to the
treatment of racial minorities and economically disadvantaged offenders. The manual can be
used as the basis for a training seminar for those entering the criminal justice profession and a
ready reference document for professionals in the field.
The second part of the paper will be about ten pages integrating the ideas, themes, and
theories examined in the Breadth and Depth portions of this KAM project
PART 1
A FRAMEWORK FOR UNDERSTANDING RACIAL MINORITIES & ECONOMICALLY
DISADVANTAGED OFFENDERS IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM
The working title of the project manual is: A Framework for Understanding Minorities and
Economically Disadvantaged Offenders in the Criminal Justice System.
INTRODUCTION
The manual will be about 76 pages in length and will be divided into seven chapters, starting
with four pages of preface and introduction. The introduction will explain why a manual is
necessary and its value as a training and education resource with the potential to promote
positive social change under the current criminal justice system. The introduction pages will
address the segment of the population that may benefit from the book. These groups will
primarily consist of, students, all newly employed and existing staff of the criminal justice
system; including Judges, Court Personnel, Correctional Officers, Law Enforcement Officers,
Policy makers, Social Service workers and Legal and Para-Legal Professionals with the desire to
see a positive social change in the Criminal Justice System. The introduction will also talk about
how the manual came into being and thank all those involved in its production.
Each chapter in the book will be about ten pages. Additionally, another two pages will be
devoted to References and Bibliography.
SOCIAL CHANGE: RACIAL MINORITIES AND THE ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED
IN AMERICA
Chapter one, will be titled, Social change: Racial Minorities and the Economically
Disadvantaged in America. The chapter will identify and discuss the definitions and meanings of
Social Change, Racial Minorities, and Economically Disadvantaged offenders and how they
relate to each other. A brief history of social change in America will also be examined together
with its impact on every aspect of American life, especially for minorities and the economically
disadvantaged. The chapter will also briefly discuss the evolution and development of criminal
justice in America starting from 1831 when America took the lead among social reformers in
Europe by offering a new approach to the public management of criminals at Auburn State
Prison in New York and, Eastern Penitentiary in Philadelphia. Historical examination will also
include the impact of the President’s Crime Commission of 1965, and subsequent key events in
the evolution of the criminal justice system.
THE CLASSICAL AND SOCIAL THEORIES OF CRIME
Chapter two will be titled, The Classical and Social Theories of Crime: The focus of this
chapter will be on the classical and social theories of crime and the sources of crime in our
society. Therefore, it will explore and examine the classical and current theories of crime and
criminal behavior of minority and economically disadvantaged offenders, from a multi-
disciplinary perspective. The chapter will also introduce and discuss various types of crimes
including, White-Collar Crime, Street Crime, Victimless Crime and Over Criminalization and
Decriminalization.
RACIAL MINORITIES, ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED OFFENDERS AND LAW
ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS
Chapter three will be titled, Racial Minorities, Economically Disadvantaged Offenders
and Law Enforcement Officers. The chapter will focus primarily on how racial minorities and
economically disadvantaged offenders interact with law enforcement officers. Moreover, the
chapter will include police subculture regarding racial minorities and economically
disadvantaged people, and their neighborhoods. In addition, evidence that supports claims that
there are routine police practices of authoritarianism and abuse, brutality and unnecessary deadly
use of force against racial minorities and economically disadvantaged people, especially those
living in urban center ghettos will be presented and evaluated.
RACIAL MINORITY, ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED OFFENDERS AND THE
COURTS’ SYSTEM
Chapter four will be titled, Racial Minority, Economically Disadvantaged Offenders and
the Courts’ System. This chapter will explore the evidence which supports claims about the
unfair and unequal treatment of racial minorities and economically disadvantaged offenders
under the court’s system. First, claims that the Prosecution team intentionally seeks to undermine
the rights and liberties of racial minorities and the economically disadvantaged offenders will be
examined. Secondly, this chapter will examine the effectiveness of Court Appointed Counsels
and Public Defenders on racial minority and economically disadvantaged offender cases.
Thirdly, the chapter will discuss the use of Plea- Bargain by both the prosecutor and the public
defender and if this acts to the detriment of the minority and the economically disadvantaged
offender. Finally, the chapter will discuss how trial and jury selections can impact on racial
minority and economically disadvantaged offenders.
SENTENCING AND INCARCERATION FOR THE MINORITY AND THE ECONOMICALLY
DISADVANTAGED OFFENDER
Chapter five will be titled, Sentencing and Incarceration for the Minority and the
Economically Disadvantaged Offender. In this chapter, disparities of sentencing and
incarceration will be discussed and the purpose of sentencing and incarceration will also be
explored and examined, especially in relation to the current policies concerned with the
sentencing and treatment of minority and economically disadvantaged offenders. Major points
that will be highlighted and discussed will include Retribution, Incapacitation, Deterrence,
Rehabilitation, and their impact on the racial minority and the economically disadvantaged
offender.
MODERN DAY CRIMINAL JUSTICE IN AMERICA
Chapter six will be titled, Modern Day Criminal Justice in America. Chapter six will
argue that, despite the millions of dollars that has been poured into the criminal justice system,
for reform and fair treatment of minority and economically disadvantaged offenders, the system
is far from realizing its goal. Therefore, the aim of this chapter will be to examine the failure of
the criminal justice system by reference to the current research findings of experts, and those
with authority in criminal justice whose expertise is concerned with racial minority and
economically disadvantaged offenders and the American criminal justice system.
TOWARDS A POSITIVE SOCIAL CHANGE FOR MINORITIES, ECONOMICALLY
DISADVANTAGED OFFENDERS AND THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM
Chapter seven will be the concluding chapter, and it will summarize and highlight all the
major points discussed in the manual. The title of chapter seven will be, Towards a Positive
Social Change for Minorities, Economically Disadvantaged Offenders and the Criminal Justice
System. This chapter will challenge the reader to become an agent of positive social change.
Additionally, the chapter will ask readers to re-examine all the evidence presented in support of
the plight and predicaments of racial minorities and the economically disadvantaged people in
our society. Equally important, will be, to remind readers about the frustrations, racial minorities
and the economically disadvantaged go through; especially those who frequently become subject
to the criminal justice system. Finally, the chapter will talk about specific measures and
recommendations needed to be taken to address the social inequalities within the criminal justice
system. The last two pages will be devoted to references consulted when the manual was being
written.
DISCUSSION
The development of this manual for young professionals and operational members within
criminal justice agencies is the first step towards positive social change within the criminal
justice system. In addition, and having examined the evidence presented previously in the
manual it will be open for those who use the manual to take a different approach when they deal
with people from the minorities and socially disadvantaged in the community. Thus, the manual
will become a small but important supplemental educational tool to assist them to better
understand the population they are serving.
PART 2
To achieve the goal of social change it is necessary to understand how poverty and social
inequalities began in the midst of societal change and development during earlier times.
Therefore, it is important to understand the connection between the works and thoughts of
classical and contemporary writers, and researchers and the realities of modern, professional
criminal practice. Particular links that need to be understood can be traced through the key ideas
of a line of original thinkers.
Jean Rousseau (1712-78) was a prominent forerunner in the fight against social
inequalities and poverty. In a work entitled Discourse on the origin of Inequality, he asserted
that humans and society can be studied systematically, since it will also make room to examine
the innovative nature of humankind. Additionally, he said, it will indicate that, originally,
humans have depended on nature solely for their upkeep rather than the social and political
organizations currently in place, which has brought about the contemporary social inequalities
(Patterson, 1999).
Rousseau used the term amour-propre to denote a love for one self and the desire to be
superior to others and be respected and cherished by them. He claimed this to be the beginning of
social inequality. Rousseau asserted that, the structure of social inequalities was not of general
concern throughout human history. However, it became of more concern with the development
of mechanical agriculture. Rousseau added that, people began fencing agricultural lands as their
private properties. This, according to Rousseau, partly gave birth to personal richness and
powerful landlords. Eventually, it also led to the destruction of people’s natural liberty, because
powerful and rich landlords subjugated the poor and landless workers to constant physical labor,
slavery and human misery (Patterson, 1999).
Thus, the picture being painted above by Rousseau is not so much a total absence of
social inequalities and private poverty in societies before the advent of the industrial revolution,
but the industrial revolution brought more rapid social changes which additionally, deepened the
social stratification, inequalities, and poverty already existing.
In an attempt to explain poverty and social inequalities from the classical literature,
social evolutional theorists like Spencer (1892) acknowledged that, the process of societal
evolution followed inevitable laws of nature, which eventually leads to social progress.
Therefore social inequalities and poverty are part of social evolution. Additionally, structural
functional theorists also explained social inequality and poverty as a valuable part of the social
stratification system based on meritocracy that keeps society operating. Furthermore, structural
functionalists believe that, society as a whole benefits when greater rewards are linked to
important social positions. Structural functional theorists further argued that, social stratification
matches people’s ability and talents to appropriate occupational positions, which they consider
very useful and inevitable.
Based on the above explanation and reasoning given for the existence of social
inequalities and poverty one can easily see that the United States would deems to exist with
social inequality based on meritocracy. Therefore, it should not be a surprise that American
society is deeply divided reflecting the extent of its social stratification. Additionally, being a
racial minority or economically disadvantaged person in America is a consequence of
institutional evolution.
Structural functionalists claim that, values and beliefs that legitimize social inequality are
widely shared throughout society (Macionis, 1999). How could this be true for racial minorities
and economically disadvantaged people in America? What choice do racial minorities and the
economically disadvantaged people have, considering the oppressive and suppressive historical
experiences of African Americans in particular? Talcott Parsons (1964) also added that, social
systems are made up by individuals in a society, and for that reason any transaction involving
individuals may also be complicated with their ability to make choices. Regardless of the
difficulties involved, people must still respond to these choices as part of their personal
responsibility. Parsons again reminded us that, society functions and behaves just like the
biological system with all its natural counterparts. Therefore, social and biological evolution all
follows the same logical pattern (1964). Parsons concluded that modern societies can have a
greater capability to adapt to societal changes in comparison to earlier generations.
In short, Talcott Parsons is referring to, “Social Darwinism, and the survival of the
fittest.” Parsons made his position very clear: First, he believes that people have the right and a
choice to enter into mutual dealings with each other. Secondly, the present generations are far
more capable of handling stress and pressure than are previous generations. Finally, Parsons does
not believe that government should get involved to make rules to protect the weak, the strong or
against each other. Because, he believes firmly that non-governmental intervention truly
embodies the essence of social evolution; and people will have the ability to adapt and change
over time. Just like Spencer, Parsons also believed that social differentiation and stratification are
all a natural social outcome.
In other words, Parsons would not see anything wrong with the kind of social inequalities
that we currently have in our society, especially with the criminal justice system. Many people
including experts share the same view with Parsons and structural functional theorists about the
non intervention policy for government in social issues. For this and other reasons our society is
now at the crossroads in terms of race relations and social inequalities. Comte (1915)
argued that, the new science of positivism should be able to eradicate human suffering especially
poverty. Comte also stated that social problems can be studied scientifically through the study of
sociology. However, Comte, like Spencer and Parsons also stated that, civilization has
progressed through a natural and a logical unavoidable course of human organization and has
become the supreme law of all practical phenomena. Comte, like Marx was also worried about
the poor and their working conditions. However, he also does not believe in government
interference because, he had stated clearly that, human civilization has progressed through a
natural and an unavoidable course of human organization (Comte, 1915). Based on the above
thoughts of Comte, it should not be difficult for one to determine which cause of action Comte
would have taken. Comte, clearly ascribes to social evolutional theory and structural functional
theory (In today’s America, he would be called a liberal conservative).
Writing this manual is very important because most of today’s social researchers strongly
ascribe to either, the theoretical explanations of Comte, Spencer, or Parsons. However, there are
others like myself, who believe that, to create an equitable society, we must use Karl Marx and
the social conflict theory’s approach. Current social and urban researchers, regardless of their
theoretical orientation, must still take into consideration the agonizing history of racial minorities
in this country, especially African Americans. Thus, it is worth noting that, African Americans,
who, by and large, now live in our inner cities, are also a product of social change and
development. Furthermore, most African Americans migrated from the rural, agricultural south,
where most worked on the plantations (Shannon et al, 1999).
Macionis (1999) noted that, between 1870 –1930, tens of millions of people from other
countries came and settled in the northern industrial cities of the United States, and there was
also an internal migration from the rural southern agricultural producing areas to the newly
industrialized cities. Therefore, the consequence of these migrations is cultural diffusion, and the
decline of southern communities and the urbanization of American cities into metropolis. As a
result, this change in demographic patterns has led to social change and African American’s
escaping poverty and subjugation from the south only to become victims in the north.
Social Change according to Karl Marx (1955) is brought about by conflict. However, the
absence of physical conflict does not constitute an absence of conflict. Social conflict is also
brought about by the existence of social structures as conflict theory has asserted (Marx, 1955).
There are certain institutional structures in our society which have created a vast gap between the
rich and the poor. Slavery for example is partly responsible for the current social inequalities
existing in the country. Smith (2000) wrote in a work entitled, Investigating Difference: Human
and Cultural Relations in Criminal Justice, “The history of African Americans is a story of
inequality, injustice, and exclusion, beginning with slavery; widespread belief in the natural
inequality/inferiority of blacks (i.e., racist ideology) helped underpin discriminatory policies and
actions” (p.73).
Additionally, most of the very poor people in this country are by, and large, from racial
minority groups. As a result, it is not easy to separate racial minorities from economically
disadvantaged people in America. For example, during the civil and equal rights era, both
women and racial minorities, especially, African Americans joined forces to fight for their rights
to vote and to be equally integrated in the American society.
This manual is very important because it will also argue that, instead of our society
moving towards greater equality and opportunity it has rather moved backward. This would be
done by referring to important statistics showing the large economic gap between white
Americans and racial minorities. Additionally, it will refer to unemployment rates among
African Americans, which have been twice as high as those for Whites for decades (Walker et
al.., 2002) Current research also indicates that the lack of employment opportunities for racial
minorities and the economically disadvantaged in the urban centers is partly responsible for the
illegal drug sales and property crime rates in the inner cities (Walker et al.., 2002; Western,
2006).
In America, an individuals’ social class is usually measured by the level of their income,
education, occupational prestige, or from a combination of some of these factors. Robert Agnew
(2006) pointed out in a work entitled, Pressured into Crime: an Overview of General Strain
Theory that, current social research indicates that racial minorities and the economically
disadvantaged are more likely to engage in crime, particularly serious crime than members of the
middle and upper-classes in society (p.142). Agnew (2006) asserted that people in the lower
class of society who have been very poor for a long period of time are more likely to engage in
criminal activities. Furthermore, economically disadvantaged people, including poor racial
minorities are more likely to experience tensions which contribute to crime and to cope with
tension and stress in a criminal manner (p.142). Finally, Agnew (2006) observed that, “Parents
who are poor are more likely to experience a range of stressors, including financial problems,
unemployment, work in “bad” jobs, housing problems, health problems , and residence in high-
crime communities” (p.143).
Many racial minorities and economically disadvantaged people are in prison today partly
because of their status in society. However, the predicament of racial minorities is made even
worse because, once they are incarcerated their social ties to the outside world are also severed,
which makes it difficult for them to gain meaningful employment once they are released.
Therefore, the likeliness of the racial minority or economically disadvantaged person to commit
further crime becomes greater and a possibility (Reiman, 2004).
During the 1990s, the social changes that took place within the criminal justice system
were influenced by evolving criminal justice policies. The changes however, led to the building
of more prisons at an alarming rate. Currently in America, social change has also led to the
reduction in the crime rate, but at the cost of building more incarceration centers and adding
more than million people to prisoner numbers than there was the in 1990 (Reiman, 2004).
Therefore, social change has not led to the reduction of prison construction or the incarceration
of more people. For this reason, it is imperative to write the manual to alert stakeholders of the
impending danger of mass incarceration without a suitable alternative.
History of classical social change theories has indicated that, social change is also
brought about by conflict in a society or the lack of natural harmony between the systems.
Currently, social inequalities and discrimination are very prevalent in our society, especially
within the criminal justice system. Hence, there is a conflict of interest between racial minorities
and the dominant social group. Because racial minorities who become victims of the justice
system believe that they are being unfairly targeted. On the other hand, the dominant group, to
some extent, believes that most of the social problems; including crime and drugs are all
generated by racial minorities. Secondly, there is a lack of spontaneous harmony between all the
systems in our society. Therefore, there is always friction and tension waiting to explode. Hence,
there is the need to create harmony and to reduce the incidence of inequalities in our society
especially within the justice system.
In Investigating Difference: Human and Cultural Relations in Criminal Justice, Perry
and Nielsen (2000) discussed the specific issues of prevention and treatment for racial minorities
in the criminal justice system (p. 283). For example, the authors referred to Newark, New
Jersey’s, Soul-O-House Drug Abuse Program as a culturally specific program because, it
involves varieties of strategies that included, parent meetings, after school care, athletics, and
most importantly participants were counseled from an African American Perspective.
The authors, in addition, argued that, although racial minorities, especially youth are over
represented in the criminal justice system, little has been done to incorporate cultural strategies
in the numerous crime prevention strategies currently available. Perry and Neilson (2000)
asserted that, most racial minorities are offered alternative crime prevention programs without
specifically taking their cultural orientation into consideration. Moreover, they maintained that,
when racial minorities, especially the youths, are equipped with the knowledge of their past, this
arouses in them a cultural pride, which will help them refocus on successful community building.
In America, one’s racial identification is closely related to one’s social standing; therefore, racial
minorities living in the midst of affluence see society as unjust, by not providing a fair means to
achieve equal opportunities. For this reason, most urban youth turn to criminal activities to
achieve the same goal but reject the approved means of achieving it. Thus, it is not unusual for
more racial minorities than whites to be arrested, and victimized by excessive physical force or
even shot and killed by the police.
This manual is important for professionals working for the criminal justice agencies
because they need to understand that not all people charged with a crime are guilty. Sometimes
one’s guilt may be due to circumstances beyond his or her control. Western (2006) wrote that, “if
the prison does not underbid the slum in human misery, the slum will empty and the prison will
fill.” (p.54). Western additionally, observed that,” By 2000, over a million black children- 9
percent had a father in prison or jail.” (p.5). Based on this fact, it will be very wise for
stakeholders to work together and reduce the excessive minority incarcerations based on racial
discrimination. Western (2000) has also argued that, the mass incarceration of racial minorities
and the economically disadvantaged does not necessarily lead to inequality between blacks and
whites in America however; it slows down the upward mobility and deflates hopes for racial
equality (p.7). Finally, Western asserted that there are also more variations in imprisonment
across the fifty states than between the United States and Europe. This means that some States
have sentencing guidelines and others do not. According to Western (2006) there were only two
states with sentencing guidelines in 1980. By1990 the number has gone up to ten, and by the
year 2000 there were seventeen states. Furthermore, in 1980, as many as seventeen states
abolished or limited the use of parole, and by 1990 there were twenty one states in total; by the
year 2000, the number has jumped to thirty three states.
In 1980, there was nothing like the, “Three-strike laws”, and by 1990 there was still no
law like that. However, by the year 2000, twenty four states have adopted the law (Western,
2006. p.65). These statistics suggest that, social change has been a mixed blessing for racial
minorities and the economically disadvantaged offenders under the criminal justice system. For
instance, the three-strike laws had sent many racial minorities and economically disadvantaged
offenders to prison. Western (2006) stated that, “…Ochoa was on parole at age fifty- three and
was caught supplying false identities for food stamps and emergency shelter vouchers; the
welfare fraud, valued at 2,100, earned a sentence of 326 years at the New Folson supermax
prison” (p.64). Cole (1999) argued also that, there is still racial discrimination in jury selection,
though the Court has made strong pronouncements about equality. According to Cole, the court
has not backed them up with meaningful implementation. Cole admitted that to achieve equality
within the criminal justice system is extremely difficult. However, the courts must still be held
accountable for perpetuating and facilitating discrimination.
There are many factors leading to the arrest of racial minorities and the economically
disadvantaged people in our society. Raymond J.Michalowski (2000) wrote in Investigating
Difference: Human and Cultural Relations in Criminal Justice, that the rich have the power to
exert direct influence on the making and implementation of laws and government policies.
Additionally, they can also shape the content of the mass media. However, the poor, who are
nearer to the bottom of the social ladder, on the other hand, earn very little, have no wealth, and
have little influence over government and media. Furthermore, their style of speech, their
dressing, and the way they conduct themselves in public is seen as unstable, unconventional, or
“dangerous” by those from advantaged sectors of the society (p.113).
Michaeowski (2000) stated that, “The criminal justice system’s focus on the crimes of the
poor to obscures the far greater harm done by white-collar and corporate criminals” (p.118).
Michaeowski additionally stated that, the United States historically controls its surplus
populations by first, resorting to police arrest and imprisonment through the criminal justice
system, and secondly, through the social welfare system in the form of jobs programs and cash or
in-kind assistance (p.124).
Mann, (1993) in a work entitled, Unequal Justice: a question of color, wrote that, Blacks
have been kept at the bottom of the society since they stepped onto this land. First, they were
kept as slaves for cotton-based southern states. Secondly, after reconstruction, they become
marginal tenant farmers and domestic service workers. Then finally, they became the last
immigrants to the central cities. She argued that, historically, white people have seen all people
of color as inferior, controllable, and usable. Racial minorities are seen as surplus populations
(p.250).
The Chicago school of sociology used to be in the forefront for the study of crime and
punishment through their critically acclaimed published works on the concepts of social
disorganization; differential association and cultural conflict in the 1920s and 1930s. However,
Valier, C. (2003) Foreigners, Crime and Changing Mobilities’ gave a far different insight as to
how these notable scholars at the Chicago School may have partly contributed to our societal
problems. Today, based on this study done by Valier, we can now conclude that these writings
were very discriminatory. The scholars at the Chicago School developed their own concept of
identifying and depicting people of different cultures and race. According to Valier (2003) these
concepts and depiction led to the labeling of different groups of people as inferior, dangerous,
criminal, and amoral.
Thus, the lessons we can learn from this, are that while great effort is being made to build
a fair and just society, there may be certain intellectual elements in our society or within the
criminal justice system whose writings and ideology may not be to the best interest of society at
large. Therefore, it is important that facts are presented to all stake-holders. Additionally, the
writing of the manual is very significant because the targeted groups may have already read
many scholarly books relating to racial minorities and disadvantaged people in our society or
even within the criminal justice system. However, we may not know who the writers were,
whether they are proponents of social evolutional theory, structural functional theory, or they
ascribe to social conflict theory’s approach. These distinctions are very important because they
all explain racial minority problems and the causes of urban poverty differently.
Larry A. Gould (2000) in, Investigating Difference: Human and Cultural Relations in
Criminal Justice, wrote a contributing article titled, Cultural Awareness Training for Criminal
Justice. In it, he asserted that, in developing strategies that are particular to justice personnel, it is
necessary to understand who they are and, to some extent, how they have been socialized (p.
231). Again, this explains why it is very important for us to understand that, how justice
personnel had been socialized or oriented will influence his or her thinking. Furthermore, Gould
(2000) observed that, “For the most part, justice system personnel are businesslike and, if forced
to choose between tact and truthfulness, they usually choose truthfulness; likewise, justice
system personnel are usually not convinced by anything other than reasoning based on solid
facts” (p.31).
Ruggiero’s (2003) article Fear and change in the city argued that, early classical
sociologists do recognize social change as a collective social force, with the potential power to
bring about a positive societal change and development. However, current researchers have
abandoned that spirit of collective social change. Additionally, current urban researchers now
categorize cities as central living nightmares, with an alarming crime rate. Based on Ruggiero’s
article, it can be concluded that some of what we read about racial minorities and the inner city
problems may be exaggerated.
Kent & Jacobs (2004) also presented us with a conflict theory thesis which suggests that
economic stratification poses a threat to social order. Therefore, an increase in greater social
economic inequality should lead to a greater capacity for coercive control by the police.
According to the researchers, the presence of a large minority, high unemployment rate, rapid
economic development, urbanization, crime, and a social disorganization all lead to greater
coercive control from the police. The results of these findings suggest that, there is high
unemployment rate among racial minorities, rapid urbanization, high crime rate, and the
presence of social disorganization. Thus, it is not surprising that we have a large number of
minority group incarcerations.
Based on the above information, it must be noted from a social conflict theory analysis
that, racial minorities and economically disadvantaged people do pose a threat to a system of
government where less than 5% of the population controls over 50% of all the resources in the
country. Thus, the argument presented above so far should be the underlying bases for the
writing of this manual. Furthermore, if America is really concerned about a positive social
change in the criminal justice system, then this manual will be acknowledged in a good faith, and
welcomed as a small contribution to an already existing body of knowledge about the plight of
racial minorities and economically disadvantaged people within our society.
CONCLUSION
The problems facing the criminal justice system could not easily be corrected just by
rebuilding our inner cities, and providing racial minorities and economically disadvantaged
people with equal opportunities for education and employment. The factors working against
racial minorities are embedded in the social structures. Therefore, correcting these problems will
entail dismantling most institutional barriers and structures. First, we need to revisit our policies
on crime control, which tend to disadvantage racial minorities. Secondly, the criminal justice
system must eliminate double standards in differential sentencing, as pointed out by Professor
Cole. Thirdly, correction facilities should include education and training in addition to
incarceration and retribution. As an alternative, inmates must be helped through programs that
seek to successfully rebuild their lives for their return to society. Fourthly, we must abide by the
creeds that this nation was founded upon.
Finally, we must continue to owe this truth in the criminal justice system to be self-
evident that, not all of us are treated equal. Nevertheless, this manual is not intended to make
excuses for racial minorities or economically disadvantaged people but rather to present the facts
which have been informed by the research done in the Breadth and Depth components of KAM1.
References
Agnew, R. (2006).Pressured into Crime: An Overview of General Strain Theory. Roxbury Publishing Company. Los Angeles
Anonymous (2006 December) Oklahoma: 38% of adult blacks have felony records. Corrections Digest; Dec 1, 2006; 37.( 47); Criminal Justice Periodicals PP.6-7.
Button M. D. (2008 spring). Social disadvantage and family violence: neighborhood effects on attitudes ab...American Journal of Criminal Justice: AJCJ; 33, 1; Criminal Justice Periodicals Pp. 130-150.
Cole, D. (1999). No equal justice: race and class in the American criminal justice system New York, NY: The New Press
Cole, G, F. (1992) The American System of Criminal Justice. (6th ed.) Brooks/Coles Publication Company. Pacific Group, California
Comte, A. (1915) The Positive Philosophy. London: George Bell
Dennis, H, S ( 2001 May). No equal justice: race and class in the American criminal Justice System Contemporary Sociology; 30, (3); Research Library Pp. 290- 293.
Duncan, D. (1908) The life and Letters of Herbert Spencer. Online edition
Elwick, J.(2003) Herbert Spencer and the Disunity of Social Organism. History of Science 41, Pp. 35-72.
Hannon, L; & Knapp, P. (2003 November).Reassessing Nonlinearity in the Urban Disadvantage /Violent Crime Relationship Criminology; 41, (4); Criminal Justice Periodicals Pp. 1427-1448
Herber, Lewis. (1965) Crisis in our Cities. Prentice- Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, N.J
Holtfreter; K.; Reisig, M,D; & Morash, M .(2004 March). Poverty, State Capital, and Recidivism among Women Offenders. Criminology & Public Policy: Criminal Justice Periodicals 04;( 3), 2; Pp.185-208.
Hojman, D, (2003 November). Inequality, unemployment and crime in Latin American cities: Crime, Law & Social Change. Pp. 33-51.
Investigating difference: Human and cultural relations in criminal justice (2000).
Kent. L S; & Jacobs, D (2004) Social divisions and coercive control in advanced societies: law enforcement ... Social Problems; Aug 2004; 51, 3; ABI/INFORM Global. Pp. 343-361.
Lurigio, J, A., Greenleaf, G, R; & Flexon, L, J.(2009). "The Effects of Race on Relationships with the Police”: A Survey of African American and Latino Youths in Chicago." Western Criminology Review 10 (1) Pp. 29-41. (http://wcr.sonoma.edu/v10n1/Lurigio.pdf).
Macionis, J. (2003). Society: The Basics. (7th ed.). Prentice Hall, New Jersey
Mackenzie, S. (2006) Systematic Crimes of the Powerful: Criminal Aspects of the Global Economy Social Justice; 33,1; Criminal Justice Periodicals. Pp.162-183
Marx, K. (1847/1999). The Poverty of Philosophy.Retrieved March 19, 2008, from Marx/Engels InternetArch:http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/ poverty- Philosophy/index.htm
Marx, K. (1955) the Communist Manifesto. New York: Appleton
Marx, K. (1959). Basic Writings on Politics and Philosophy New York: Doubleday
Marx, K. (1964). Selected Writings in Sociology and Social Philosophy. (T. Bottomore, Trans.) London: McGraw-Hill.
Mann, C, R. (1993). Unequal Justice: A Question of Color
Parsons, T.(1954). Essays in Sociological Theory. New York: Free Press
Parsons, T. (1964) The Social System. New York: Free Press.
Patterson, P. C. (1999). Change & Development in the Twentieth Century: Oxford International Publishers. Oxford. New York
Reiman, J. (2003). The Rich Get Richer and the Poor get Prison: Ideology, Class, andCriminal Justice (7th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Ruggiero, V (2003 April) Fear and change in the city. CITY, VOL 7, NO.1, Pp. 45-55.
Shannon, R, T,. Kleniewski, N; & Cross, M, W.(1991).Urban Problems in Sociological Perspective. (2nd ed.). Waveland Press, Inc.
Sharp, E (2006 June) Policing urban America: A new look at the politics of agency size. Social Science Quarterly, Volume 87, Number 2, / 2006 (Southwestern Social Science Association). Pp. 291-308.
Spencer, H (1892) Sociology. New York: Appleton & Company
The criminology theory reader (1998). New York, NY: New York University Press.
Stretesky, P. B; Schuck. A.M; & Hogan, M. J (2000 December) Space Matters: An Analysis of Poverty, poverty clustering and violent crime. Justice Quarterly: Criminal Justice Periodical, 25 (5). PP. 817-841.
Toffler, A & Toffler, H.( 1995) Creating a New Civilization: The Politics of the Third Wave Turner Publishing, Inc. Atlanta, Geogia.
Twomey, J, L. (200) Race, Gender & Class: Volume 11, Number 1 (3-5) Race, Gender & Class Website:www.suno.edu/sunorgc/..
Valier, C (2003 winter) Foreigners, Crime and Changing Mobilities. The British Journal of Criminology 43 (1); Criminal Justice Periodicals Pp. 1-21.
Walker, S., Spohn, C., & DeLone, M. (2002).The Color of Justice: Race, Ethnicity, and Crime in America (2nd ed.) Belmont, CA: Wadsworth
West, A, D. (2005 October) Horton the Elephant is a Criminal: Using Dr. Seuss to Teach Social Process, C...Journal of Criminal Justice Education; 16. (2); Criminal Justice Periodicals. Pp. 340-382.
Western, B. (2006). Punishment and Inequality in America: Russell Sage Foundation: New York
Recommended