Left realism emerged in criminology from critical criminology as a reaction against what was perceived to be the left's failure to take a practical interest in everyday crime, allowing right realism to monopolize the political agenda on law and order. Left realism argues that crime disproportionately affects working-class people, but that solutions that only increase repression serve to make the crime problem worse. Instead they argue that the root causes of crime lie in relative deprivation, and that although preventive measures and policing are necessary, they should be placed under democratic control.
Overview Pat Carlen (1992) suggests that the main tenets of left realism are theoretical and political: Theoretical
'The basic triangle of relations which is the proper subject-matter of criminology [is] - the offender, the state and the victim' (Young, 1986) (since altered to include society at large, see The Square of Crime) Theoretical explanations must be symmetrical - there must be the same explanation for social action and reaction. 'Man is a creator of human nature' (Young, 1987), and therefore explanations of crime should not be deterministic and people should be seen as being responsible for their actions. Political
Crime is a real problem and especially to working-class people who suffer disproportionately from personal crime, such as robbery, assault, burglary and rape. The 'left' should attempt to develop a credible (populist?) approach to crime control in order to prevent the 'right' from having a monopoly of the 'crime problem'. The purpose of theorizing should be to make practical interventions into law and order issues. In order to reduce crime there is a need to achieve a higher level of cooperation between police and public, and this will be best achieved by a democratization of local control of the police."
Break with left idealism Left realism emerged from critical criminology taking issue with "the two major socialist currents in criminology since the war: reformism and left idealism", criticising 'the moral panics of the mass media or the blatant denial of left idealism'
Critique of establishment criminology Writing years later, Jock Young summed up critical criminology's criticism of establishment criminology by saying
The essential flaw of establishment criminology is, of course, the attempt to explain crime without touching upon reality, constantly to distance explanation from basic social and economic problems of a divided society.
Establishment of left realism Left Realism set down a marker in the United Kingdom with the work of Lea and Young (1984) as representative of a group of academics: Richard Kinsey, John Lea, Roger Matthews, Geoff Pearson, and Jock Young. The group saw themselves as facing up to the challenge thrown down by Ian Taylor in Law and Order: Arguments for Socialism for the left to take crime seriously. In What is to be Done About Law and Order? (1984), Young and Lea set out three main policies of left realism:
Demarginalisation "Realists would argue for alternatives to prison", they would advocate "measures such as community service orders, victim restitution schemes, and widespread release from prison" which would stop "the severance of the moral bond with the community. The institutions that are involved in controlling crime and criminals must epitomise justice"
Pre-emptive deterrence "Environmental and public precautions against crime are always dismissed by left idealists and reformers as not relating to the heart of the matter. Environmental and public precautions against crime distract us from the real concerns... On the contrary, the organisation of communities in an attempt to pre-empt crime is of the utmost importance"
Minimal use of prison "Prisons should only be used in those circumstances where there is extreme danger to the community... Life inside should be as free and as 'normal' as possible. Such a demand is not humanitarian idealism - it is based on the simple fact that the result of prison experience is to produce pitiful inadequates or hardened criminals" Left realism however, did not isolate itself completely from Critical Criminology. John Lea, for example, took issue with Stan Cohen's characterisation of retreating from previous theoretical gains.
Theoretical contributions
Crime statistics and local victimization surveys According to Young, "For Left Realism, the social survey is a democratic instrument: it gives a picture of consumer demand and satisfaction." Left realists argue that the national victimization research, such as the British Crime Survey, can be used to give an average risk rate that ignores the variations in crime between areas. Such studies can be used to view people's fear of crime as 'irrational'. According to Young, "The (local) victimization survey accurately provides a map of the problems of an area. Although based on public input, it delivers what any individual member of the public is ignorant of: that is how private problems are publicly distributed." Further more "at certain parts of the social structure, we have a compounding of social problems. If we were to draw up a map of the city outlining areas of high infant mortality, bad housing, unemployment, poor nutrition, etc., we would find that these maps would coincide and that further, the outline traced would correspond to those areas of high criminal victimization... Further, this compounding of social problems occurs against those who are more or less vulnerable because of their position in the social structure. That is, people who have the least power socially suffer most from crime." Left realists conducted local victimisation surveys in Islington, Hammersmith and Fulham, Broadwater Farm and Merseyside.
… excerpt ends here. Continue reading the full article.
