Chapter 5: Labelling Perspectives in Criminology

Overview and Emergence

Labelling perspectives in criminology emerged during the social, political, and economic
changes in the 1960s and 1970s, particularly in the United States. This era was marked by the
crumbling of societal consensus and the challenge to conventional values by several social
movements, including:

Youth culture and the birth of rock and roll.

Gay and lesbian rights.
Women’s liberation movement.
Civil rights movement.
Resistance to the Vietnam War.

These changes led to a pluralistic view of society, acknowledging diverse groups and classes,
each with distinct interests. This shift had profound implications for understanding crime and
deviance, emphasizing the fluidity and relativity of these concepts based on societal reactions
and the power dynamics of labeling.

Defining Crime and Deviance

Crime as a Social Process: The understanding that the definition and labeling of crime or
criminal behavior depend significantly on who holds the power to label. Thus, crime and
deviance are not static concepts but are subject to societal reaction and interpretation.
Stigmatization: The process and consequences of labeling someone as 'criminal' or 'deviant' are
central to the labelling perspective. Stigmatization can profoundly impact an individual's self-
concept, social opportunities, and even foster the development of criminal subcultures.

Key Concepts and Theories

Self-Fulfilling Prophecy: The notion that individuals might internalize the labels assigned to
them and begin to act in accordance with these labels. This concept highlights the active role of
labels in shaping individual behavior and identity.
Subjectivity: Labelling perspectives stress that deviance is not an inherent aspect of any act but
is the result of the application of rules and sanctions by others. This point of view emphasizes
the relative nature of deviance and the critical role of societal reaction.
Primary and Secondary Deviance: A distinction made to understand the progression of deviant
behavior. Primary deviance refers to initial acts of deviance that do not alter the individual's
self-concept, while secondary deviance occurs as a response to the societal reaction and often
results in a new, deviant identity.

Cultural Criminology
Cultural criminology is an extension of labelling perspectives, integrating it with cultural studies
to understand the lived experience of crime and the emotional state of the offender. It
emphasizes the importance of emotions and states of arousal in understanding criminal
behavior and seeks to explore the symbolic and interpretative aspects of crime and criminality.

Reflection and Application

Diversion and Decriminalization: From a labelling perspective, the criminal justice response
should aim to minimize the negative impact of labelling. This might include diversion programs
to keep individuals, especially first-time offenders of minor crimes, out of the formal criminal
justice system and strategies to decriminalize certain non-predatory activities.
Critiques of Labelling Theories: Despite their contributions, labelling theories face criticisms,
such as their failure to explain primary deviance, overemphasis on societal reactions, concerns
about 'net-widening' effects of diversion policies, and the need for critical evaluation of
concepts like diversion.

Conclusion

Labelling perspectives have significantly influenced the field of criminology, bringing attention
to the social reaction process, the subjective nature of crime and deviancy, and the effects of
power and societal dynamics in labeling. It calls for a continued critical examination of how
labels are applied and the implications of these labels for individuals and society.

A Marxist perspective views history as a succession of different ‘modes of

production’ that encompasses:

• Forces of production (e.g. tools and techniques)

• Relations (e.g. lord-serf, capitalist-proletariat/working class)
• Social institutions (e.g. monarchy, parliamentary democracy)

The central dynamic of class-based societies is that each involves the

expropriation of surplus resources from those who produce to those who
own the means of production. Therefore, economic exploitation and class
struggle are central to a Marxist view. Examples include the work of Willem
Bonger (1905) who argued that:

• ‘Criminal thought’ is generated by the conditions of want and

misery foisted on sections of the working class
 • And is also the result of the greed that underpins the capitalist
competitive process
In addition, during the 1960s and 1970s, American criminologists Richard
Quinney and William Chambliss drew a clear line between conservative and
radical views of crime and law enforcement. They argued:

• Crime is socially constructed in relation to an individual or group’s

class position
• The powerful shape the process of criminalization in order to
protect its class interests:
o Shoplifting constructed as a crime whereas false
advertising considered a violation of trade practices
o Industrial homicide considered as negligence rather
than murder (think of the Ford Pinto case)

Figure 6.5: Image Attribution: economicsforeveryone.ca

While Marxist criminology provided new and exciting ways to think about
crime and criminal behaviours its appeal waned during the 1980s due to a
wide range of factors that included:

• The rise of postmodernism as a perspective

• The demise of Stalinism
• The demise of Marxist-oriented political parties
• The emergence of broader and more inclusive approaches of
critical criminology
• The development of more liberal strands of criminology (e.g. Left
Realism, Republican theory)

Never-the-less, Marxist criminology has had a significant influence on

scholarship and remains academically visible. In the next section, we will
explore contemporary applications of Marxist theory in criminology.

As stated above, Marxist criminology has had a tremendous influence on

scholarship and criminal justice policy and remains visible and viable today.
It has a broad appeal for those who study, are interested, or involved in:

• Labour, anti-globalization, anti-poverty movements

• Social justice and collective human rights activism
 • Environmental activism
Take a Moment
The above list is far from complete and you may be able to identify many other areas that
incorporate Marxist perspective into their research or work. Can you list some?

An example of incorporating a Marxist perspective into research is found in

Rob White and John van der Veldon (1995)’s article Class and Criminality,
which posits that:

• One’s wealth and power determines the kind of crime one might
engage in
• Crimes of the powerful have significant structural effects in terms
of lives lost and financial impacts
o Crimes are usually directed against other capitalists or
against the rules governing the marketplace
• Crime of the less powerful tend to be highly visible and subject to
wide-scale intervention involving the police, welfare workers,
society security officials, tax department officials, the courts,
prisons, etc.
o Crimes tend to be individualized and have a discrete
impact

Other examples of Marxist theory being practically applied can be found in

the work of Bittle and Snider (2018) located in the ‘Theory in Current
Research’ box in your textbook and should be carefully read to facilitate an
understanding of the depth and breadth of work in this area.

Like all theoretical perspectives, Marxist theories have received their share
of criticism. The critiques tend to be focused in the following areas:

• How do Marxists actually define crime?

• If crime is based on harm, then what sorts of harms are criminal
and what sorts are not?
• Marxism may have conspiratorial overtones (e.g. there are laws
that do, in fact, exist to constrain the activities of capitalists)
• The nature of the state is vague and unclear. Does the state
serve individual capitalists or capital in general?
 • One can not reduce crime to a simple equation between poverty
and alienation. For example, why doesn’t everyone living in
poverty commit crime?
• Not all criminal laws can be defined a ‘class-based’ laws, some
deal with class-neutral issues like sexual assault or domestic
violence

These critiques suggest that power may not be totally located or explained in
simple terms of clas

The strength of Marxist criminology can be found in its attempt to locate

social actions – including crime - within a structural context with a focus on
class divisions within society. This has elevated the importance of issues of
inequality, power, and control in criminological inquiry. To sum up the
foundational arguments put forward by Marxist criminology we must
remember:

• The concentration of economic power into fewer hands is

apparent on a world scale (the chart provided earlier that
illustrates the small number of food companies provides just one
example to consider)
• Internationally and at the national level, the number of poor is
growing and the rich are getting richer
• This concentration of wealth and power into a small capitalist
class has ramifications for:
o Definitions of crime
o Responses to crime
o The role and nature of state intervention
• The existence of the rich and the poor, the divide between first
world and third - world countries are symptomatic of processes of
polarization that fundamentally determine the distribution and
definition of crime

For a Marxist, then, the fundamental questions revolve around the

implications of such divisions for the nature and causes of crime and for the
manner of state interventions into people’s lives.

Figure 6.7: Marxist Framework.