• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Explain & Evaluate Functionalist, Marxist & Interactionist Theories of Crime & Deviance

Extracts from this document...


´╗┐Explain & Evaluate Functionalist, Marxist & Interactionist Theories of Crime & Deviance This essay will examine the different theories that three major sociological perspectives have on crime and deviance. The functionalist view of crime sees crime as being inevitable as well as universal, which produces potential positive functions for society e.g. uniting society to condemn wrongdoers suggesting not all crime, is negative. In contrast Marxists view crime as being inevitable due to capitalism and the inequality it produces suggesting that it?s ?criminogenic? and most crimes are directly a response to the exploitation by the ruling class. Interactionists view crime differently from the two structural theories by looking at how interactions between individuals lead to crime e.g. negative labels being attached to an individual which could result in deviant behaviour. Functionalists see crime as normal as it is an integral part of all healthy society and the main reasons why crime is in every society is due to not everyone being equally effectively socialised into the shared norms and values of society so their prone to deviance; known as anomie. The other reason is due to different values in subcultures that deviate from the dominant views of mainstream society. The positive functions that Durkheim suggests that crime has on society are boundary maintenance; where crime produces a reaction from society uniting its members in condemning wrongdoers and reinforcing a shared value consensus. ...read more.


however a lot of working class people experience a lot of strain but don?t commit crime, also middle class people don?t experience a lot of strain but still commit crime. This links to another weakness of Merton?s theory as he takes official statistics at face value which over represent petty working class crimes and underrepresent white collar crime so there is a potential lack of validity. Marxists would also argue against Merton for ignoring the power that the ruling class has to make and enforce laws that criminalises the poor and benefits the rich. Marxists theories of crime suggests that in society crime is inevitable as capitalism is criminogenic suggesting that the very nature of capitalism causes crime, as crime may be the only way to obtain the consumer goods that are constantly advertised in capitalist society, Marxists would also suggest that crime for working class people is a way to express their status frustration through crimes such as violence and vandalism. Marxists such as Chambliss (1975) suggests that law making and law enforcement only serve the interests of the capitalist class; Chambliss (1975) argues that laws to protect private property are the cornerstone of the capitalist economy; this benefits the ruling class as all assets that are privately owned are literally untouchable. Snider (1993) would also agree with Chambliss (1975) and suggests that the capitalist state is reluctant to pass laws that regulate the activities of businesses or threaten their profitability, ...read more.


Stan Cohen?s concept of ?Folk devils? (Cited in Giddens 2009) and moral panics can be applied to this as the negative labels constantly shared in the media may result in a group of people being classed as folk devils where they are often seen as dangerous and deviant to wider society, so they may internalise these labels and commit crime as that is what they?re accused of doing in the first place. However labelling theory can be criticised for being too deterministic and ignoring the fact that people tend to reject the negative labels attached to them and could potentially use these negative labels as a source of motivation. Another weakness of the labelling theory is that it suggests that without labels there is no deviant behaviour, however some acts can be universally looked at as being deviant or wrong even without the label e.g. paedophilia. Overall Functionalism, Marxism as well as Interactionism make interesting points on explaining why crime happens, but all fail to consider other factors that influence crime e.g. gender, age & structural factors for Interactionism. However Marxism is the best explanation for crime rates as the perspective considers why some crimes often committed by the ruling class are more likely to be underrepresented in official statistics, whilst working class crimes tend to be over represented. Marxism also considers why crime is committed by the working class as it?s down to capitalism, which explains a range of crimes e.g. violent crimes, theft etc. which other perspectives don?t give a convincing explanation for. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Crime & Deviance section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Crime & Deviance essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    Evaluate the Functionalist explanations of Deviance.

    4 star(s)

    According to Merton, people turned to crime and deviance in this situation because there is a tension between what people have been socialised to desire and what they are able to achieve through lawful means. Merton argued that the strain between wanting "success" and the relative lack of legitimate opportunity

  2. Assess Marxist theories of crime and deviance.

    Right Wing theories say that laws reflect the collective conscience but Marxists argue that people are in a false consciousness. Haralambos' study of the abolition of slavery supports this theory. It appeared as though people, such as Malcolm X, had helped to change the law when really it was industrialisation

  1. Sociological Theories on Crime and Deviance

    Conformity is likely to occur when the goals are accepted by the individual and the means toward attaining the goals are made available to the individual via the social structure. If this does not occur, then cultural-structural strain exists and at least one of four possible dorms of deviance is

  2. Critically Compare and Contrast Functionalist and Traditional Marxist Perspectives On Crime.

    I was Emile Durkheim who began the study that gave birth to functionalist approaches to crime. Merton brought about further study when he developed his 'strain theory' in the 1930's during the 'great depression' where there were large amounts of unemployment and changes occurring at that time in the US.

  1. Assess Interactionist theories of crime and deviance.

    Becker goes on to say that when a person is labelled as deviant it becomes their master status, this then affects their self-concept, which leads them onto a deviant career that thereby becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. Interactionists believe that agents of social control amplify deviance.

  2. describe four studies relating to crime and deviance - each from a different perspective. ...

    (Haralambos, 2000, page 356) If the social structures become intolerant to any crime or deviance - society would become stagnant. Ironically, crime can therefore offer positive improvement within society. As a result of crime - the method of implementing and enforcing the law has evolved and improved.

  1. Free essay

    Assess the view that crime and deviance is the result of labelling, the media ...

    it enabled the state to extend its powers beyond criminal offences involving the young, in so-called 'status offences' such as truancy. This shows that the labelling in society can cause a dispersion of groups such as the juveniles that caused different sanctions in the court room.

  2. Evaluate Functionalist Theories of Crime and Deviance

    Faulty or "bad" socialization results in individuals being unaware of the social consensus, with the resulting consequence of crime or deviant behaviour as individuals engage in self-interest rather than pursue behaviour to the advantage of society as a whole. This view is partially backed by Wilson and Herrnstein who claim

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work