The Marxist concept of criminogenic capitalism

Marxism is a sociological perspective that views society as shaped by economic systems, particularly capitalism, which creates class divisions between the rich (bourgeoisie) and the poor (proletariat). In the context of crime, Marxists argue that the capitalist system itself generates criminal behaviour. This leads to the idea of criminogenic capitalism.

Criminogenic capitalism

Criminogenic refers to something that causes or is likely to cause criminal behaviour. Marxists, such as David Gordon, propose that capitalism is criminogenic because its core values and structures naturally produce crime as an inevitable outcome. This occurs because capitalism promotes a culture where self-interest and inequality drive people to break laws, rather than crime being solely the result of individual failings.

As a result, crime is not just a problem of 'bad' people but a systemic issue rooted in how capitalism operates. This perspective shifts the focus from blaming individuals to critiquing the economic system.

How capitalist inequalities lead to working-class crime

Capitalism creates significant class inequalities, where wealth, income, and opportunities are unevenly distributed. This disparity affects the working class the most, pushing them towards crime as a logical response to their circumstances.

David Gordon's explanation of working-class crime

David Gordon, a Marxist sociologist, argues that the inequalities inherent in capitalism make crime a realistic and rational choice for those at the bottom of society.

Impact of poverty and deprivation:

• Many working-class people face low wages, unemployment, poor housing, homelessness, debt, and reliance on food banks.
• These conditions are normalised under capitalism but create daily humiliations.
• In this environment, crime becomes a way to survive or cope, making them sensible reactions to systemic unfairness.

The influence of capitalist values on crime across all classes

Capitalist ideology - the set of beliefs and values that support the system - encourages criminal behaviour not just among the poor but in all social classes. This ideology prioritises personal gain over collective well-being, creating a 'criminogenic environment' where breaking rules is normalised.

Chambliss and Gordon - How capitalism fosters attitudes that lead to crime

• Competition, selfishness, and greed - Chambliss argues that capitalism is built on ruthless competition. This 'dog eat dog' mentality shapes attitudes, making selfish actions acceptable.
• Shift from community to individualism - Values like individualism (prioritising personal needs), materialism (obsession with wealth and possessions), and consumerism (constant buying) have overtaken community, co-operation, and altruism (helping others without expecting reward). Media promotion of celebrity lifestyles and material success reinforces greed and self-interest.
• Crime in the upper classes - Even the rich are encouraged to commit white-collar crimes (offences by professionals, like fraud) and corporate crimes (illegal acts by businesses, like tax evasion). The drive for profit and self-enrichment justifies bending rules.
• Culture of envy and non-economic crime - Among the poor, growing inequality can breed resentment, leading to a 'culture of envy' that fuels hostility, grievance, and violence. Daily failures and humiliations under capitalism may also contribute to non-economic crimes, such as drug addiction or domestic violence.

These values create a society where crime is an expected byproduct, affecting everyone from the unemployed to the elite.

Social class differences in reactions to deviance

Social class not only influences who commits crime but also how authorities respond to deviant behaviour. Deviance refers to actions that violate social norms, which may or may not be criminal. Marxists argue that the system protects the middle and upper classes while punishing the working class more harshly.

William Chambliss's study of the Saints and Roughnecks

• Background - William Chambliss conducted an observational study comparing how two groups of young men from different social classes were treated for similar deviant acts. He followed middle-class boys (the 'Saints') and working-class boys (the 'Roughnecks') to show class bias in authority responses.

• Participants - The Saints: Middle-class young men with good reputations and family status. The Roughnecks: Working-class young men from poorer backgrounds.

• Procedure - He observed both groups engaging in similar deviant acts, then noted how authorities reacted.

• Results - The Saints often escaped punishment by using their status to negotiate or talk their way out of trouble. They were seen as 'good kids' making mistakes. The Roughnecks faced constant surveillance, harsher treatment, and more frequent arrests for the same behaviours. They were labelled as troublemakers due to their class.

• Conclusions - Class shapes perceptions of deviance: middle-class status provides protection, while working-class status leads to greater scrutiny and punishment. This reinforces capitalist inequalities by maintaining control over the lower classes.