Critical Criminology

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As critical criminology or radical criminology (UK New Criminology ) a direction that is criminology , made up, in the 1960s, as opposed to the traditional ( etiological was formed) Criminology, which was referred to her as "legitimacy science."

Emergence

In the Anglo-American region, the critical criminology formed against the etiological criminal sociology , the first impetus coming from David Matza , who criticized in his 1964 book Delinquency and Drift that criminology (in the Anglo-American countries identical to the criminal sociology) the more recent developments in the I slept through social science, especially symbolic interactionism . The multi-factor approach of the Glueck couple , who carried out an internationally known longitudinal study and developed a forecast table from it, was particularly criticized . With Howard S. Becker's book Outsiders , critical criminology made a leap in quality towards the labeling approach . The questioning of social norms and the control bodies came to the fore of scientific interest.

In Great Britain a critical criminology of Marxist stripes developed around Jock Young , which derived criminalizations from class situations. Stanley Cohen rejected a Marxist criminology. Cohen stands for a critical criminology that follows the labeling of socially deviant behavior particularly closely.

In the FRG there was no sociological tradition of criminology worth mentioning at the beginning of the 1960s. Initial approaches, such as those that had taken place during the Weimar Republic , primarily due to Franz Exner's contributions , had largely been forgotten. Therefore, critical criminology starts here with a critique of the ideology of traditional criminology (dominated by law and psychiatry ):

“Conventional criminology is suspected of being ideological insofar as it is perpetrator-oriented, works with the concept of crime prescribed by criminal law, and sees crime as abnormal and pathological. The perpetrator orientation presents itself as an overemphasis on individual psychological and psychiatric explanations of crime. It thus leads to the exclusion of social reactions from the explanatory context of the crime. The perpetrator-oriented criminology thus obscures the selective mechanisms in the entire process of factual criminalization. "

Due to this reproach to the discipline of only dealing with what makes a perpetrator criminal, critical criminology claimed to cover the entire system of society, politics, lawmakers, justice and criminals as well as other actors such as the media, social sciences, and social work . The main object of investigation was to determine how society defines which behavior as criminal.

The German critical criminology had thus skipped the development of the criminal sociology and was concerned with the labeling approach from the beginning (in the version radicalized by Fritz Sack ).

In 1969 the Working Group of Young Criminologists (AJK) was founded, in which the critics of the conventional specialist discipline gathered. He publishes the Criminological Journal .

development

The American criticism of the etiological criminal sociology flattened out after a few years, and a moderate version of the labeling approach (secondary deviance) had entered the common theoretical canon. The British New Criminology was transformed into a social democratized criminological New Realism, which now corresponds to the international scientific mainstream.

In Germany, with the establishment of leading members of the AJK in the scientific field, the critical discussion ebbed from the early 1980s. The radical version of the labeling approach is no longer accepted, its protagonists such as Fritz Sack and Helge Peters have now retired, Heinz Steinert has passed away.

The criminologists who see themselves as critical continue to publish in the Kriminologische Journal, but have turned to other topics. Henner Hess and Sebastian Scheerer published 1997 under the title What is criminality? a constructivist theory of crime, with which they differentiated themselves from the labeling approach of Sack's expression and also made use of elements of traditional criminal sociology. Meanwhile, Hess and Scheerer are considered deviants.

In addition, Michel Foucault ( governmentality ), David W. Garland (culture of control) and Giorgio Agamben (homo sacer) are points of reference for the discussion in the criminological journal . Heinz Steinert and Reinhard Kreissl have been working on a “socio-neuro-scientific theory of action” since 2008 and have to put up with the reproach from Rüdiger Lautmann's own scientific environment : “Colleagues who have so far only investigated reactions to 'crime' should turn to them to address the cause. Bio-criminology is given this success as a gift: Critical criminology is finally assuming reason - it should be noted cynically - and is making the aetiological turnaround. "

Since the mid-1990s, individual, predominantly female representatives of critical criminology (Martina Althoff, Gerlinda Smaus , Lydia Maria Seus , Helga Cremer-Schäfer and others) have increasingly been concerned with the category of “gender” and have carried findings from the feminist discourse into critical criminology and expand their view.

See also

literature

  • Roland Anhorn (ed.): Critical criminology and social work. Impulses for professional self-image and critical-reflexive action competence. Juventa, Munich 2002
  • Martina Althoff, Sibylle Kappel (eds.): “Gender Relationship and Criminology”, 5th supplement to the KrimJ 1995, Juventa, Weinheim 1995
  • Howard S. Becker : Outsiders. Studies in the Sociology of Deviance , New York: The Free Press, 1963
  • Helga Cremer-Schäfer , Heinz Steinert : Punishment and repression. On the criticism of populist criminology . 2nd Edition. Westphalian steam boat, Münster 2013, ISBN 978-3-89691-680-8 .
  • Hilde van den Boogaart, Lydia Seus: Radical Criminology. Reconstructing two decades of British science history . 1991
  • Kai-Detlef Bussmann, Reinhard Kreissl (ed.): Critical criminology in discussion. Theories, analyzes, positions. Westdeutscher Verlag, Opladen 1996
  • Henner Hess , Sebastian Scheerer : What is crime. Sketch of a constructivist theory of crime . In: Kriminologisches Journal 2/97, pp. 83–155
  • David Matza : Delinquency And Drift , 2nd Edition, New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers, 1990, ISBN 0-88738-804-3 (first edition 1964).
  • Helge Peters and Michael Dellwing (eds.): Boring crime. Why criminologists find dealing with crime more interesting than crime , Wiesbaden: VS-Verlag, 2011, ISBN 978-3-531-17515-7 .
  • Fritz Sack , René König (ed.): Kriminalsoziologie . 3rd edition, Akademische Verlagsgesellschaft, Wiesbaden 1979, ISBN 978-3-400-00126-6 (first edition 1968).
  • Fritz Sack: Critical Criminology , in: Kaiser / Kerner / Sack / Schellhoss (ed.), Small Criminological Dictionary . 3rd edition, Heidelberg 1993, pp. 329-338, ISBN 978-3-8252-1274-2 .
  • Christina Schlepper / Jan Wehrheim (eds.): Key works in critical criminology , Weinheim: Beltz Juventa, 2017, ISBN 978-3-7799-3484-4 .

Web links

magazine

Notes and individual references

  1. ↑ See Dorothee and Helge Peters, Legitimationswissenschaft. On the social scientific criticism of criminology and an attempt to overcome criminological theories , in: Arbeitskreis Junge Kriminologen, Kritische Kriminologie. Positions, Controversies and Perspectives, Munich 1974, pp. 113–131.
  2. ^ Richard Hil: Facing Change. New Directions for Critical Criminology in the Early New Millennium? Western Criminology Review 3 (2). 2002
  3. ↑ The “Danger” and the “Right to Danger”: A legal sociological analysis using the example of the judgments of the Federal Constitutional Court on subsequent preventive detention and acoustic living space surveillance, María Laura Böhm, Universitätsverlag Göttingen, 2011
  4. ↑ cf. on this Thorsten Kruwinnus, The narrow and the broad understanding of the criminal sociology in Franz Exner. A comparative work-immanent preliminary study , Berlin 2009, p. 33 ff.
  5. ^ Working group of young criminologists, critical criminology. Positions, controversies and perspectives , Munich 1974, p. 7.
  6. ↑ After a study trip to the USA in 1968, Fritz Sack presented the main theories to the German specialist public in the criminal sociology published together with René König , but then denied them in a long final article in which he presented his view of the labeling approach.
  7. ↑ Your book contribution Radical boredom becomes by Helge Peters in the introductory text Boring Crime. Attempted a declaration labeled as oppositional. See Peters and Michael Dellwing (eds.): Boring crime. Why criminologists find dealing with crime more interesting than crime , Wiesbaden 2011.
  8. ↑ Rüdiger Lautmann: From 'Socio-Neuro-Science' to 'Civilization of Nature' " , in: Kriminologisches Journal, 4/2008, p. 294