Cultural criminology: criminality as the product of culture.

This essay will explore how cultural criminology is used to explain criminality as a product of culture. It will examine different approaches and theories within the field, including Edwin Sutherland’s differential-association theory, Albert Cohen’s status frustration theory, Richard Cloward and Lloyd Ohlin’s subcultural theory, and Jeffrey Reiman’s anomie/strain theory. Each of these theories provides a distinct perspective on how culture can influence criminal behavior. The essay will then analyze the implications of each approach for crime prevention and law enforcement policies. Finally, it will consider moral issues raised by cultural criminology such as poverty reduction and social justice. Through this exploration, it will be possible to gain insight into the ways in which culture shapes criminality and influence our understanding of crime.

Criminality is often assumed to be caused by individual traits such as morality or willpower, but cultural criminology challenges this assumption by looking at how culture contributes to criminal behavior. Specifically, cultural criminology focuses on the role of social structures and shared values in shaping crime and deviance. To understand criminality within a cultural context, it is important to examine different approaches and theories within the field.

One significant approach to understanding criminality through culture is Edwin Sutherland’s differential association theory. This theory suggests that criminal behavior is learned through exposure to different social influences within one's environment. According to Sutherland, individuals are more likely to engage in criminal activity when they have been exposed to messages that promote it. He argued that these messages can come from both conventional and criminal sources.

Another approach to cultural criminology is Albert Cohen’s status frustration theory. This theory suggests that individuals who feel rejected or disrespected by the dominant culture may be driven to commit crimes as a way of expressing their frustration with it. The theory argues that these individuals are more likely to be attracted to criminal behavior, since they cannot access social status through legitimate means.

Richard Cloward and Lloyd Ohlin’s subcultural theory also deals with criminality within a cultural context. This approach suggests that some criminals form subcultures, or distinct groups of crime-prone individuals, in order to facilitate illegal activities. These subcultures can exist anywhere but the most common forms occur in inner cities where people feel disconnected from mainstream society.

Jeffrey Reiman’s anomie/strain theory is another example of an approach to cultural criminology. This theory suggests that criminal behavior can be a response to social strain or the inability to reach desired goals through legitimate means. It argues that when individuals cannot fulfill their ambitions due to lack of resources or opportunity, they may resort to crime in order to achieve them.

Each of these approaches provide a different perspective on how culture shapes deviance and criminality. They also have implications for law enforcement and crime prevention policies. For example, Sutherland’s differential association theory suggests that education initiatives focusing on teaching positive values could help reduce criminal activity by exposing individuals to more positive influences. Cohen’s status frustration theory, on the other hand, suggests that policies designed to reduce social inequality could help reduce criminal behavior by eliminating sources of frustration and alienation.

Finally, cultural criminology also raises moral issues that need to be considered. For example, reducing poverty or increasing access to resources and opportunity might reduce crime in the long run, but it would require a significant commitment from society. It is important for policymakers to weigh these considerations when developing strategies for preventing and responding to crime.