Notesdata:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/eb108/eb108e1225c6a34726896a3a71243e18df6f7721" alt="what is notes.io? What is notes.io?"
![]() ![]() Notes - notes.io |
Lea and Young claim that the official figures accurately depict the differences in crime rates across various racial and ethnic groups. They say that because society is discriminatory and stigmatises young men of colour, they are more likely to turn to criminal subcultures in an effort to succeed. This is further reinforced by the fact that ethnic minorities frequently face workplace discrimination, which makes it more difficult for them to find well-paying employment. Due to the media's promotion of materialism in recent years, the concept of relative deprivation has gained significance. This explains money orientated crimes, since ethnic minorities may be striving to enhance their wealth and resort to violent crime as a method of expressing their discontent. Lea and Young further suggest that since 90% of crimes are recorded, the police's prejudice cannot be included in official statistics. Finally, they say that because black people are an ethnic minority and commit crimes at a greater rate than Asians, the police are not likely to be acting in a discriminatory manner on a general basis.
However, Lea and Young are critiqued for a number of reasons, the first of which is that the criminal justice system has multiple stages. Although the public does play a significant role in helping the police solve crimes, the decision to proceed with the conviction and arrest ultimately rests with the police. Due to police prejudice, crime numbers may change as the criminal justice system progresses.
Lea and Young also fail to take into consideration the likelihood that the general public harbours racist beliefs, which might lead them to overreport ethnic minorities even when they have the smallest suspicion. Labelling theorists claim that because various ethnic minorities may be subject to different police stereotypes, black people are more likely to be stopped, searched, or arrested than Asian people, who are frequently stereotyped as being more compliant.
The neo-marxist Gilroy argues that racial biases have generated a narrative of black crime, despite the fact that black people are no more prone than other ethnic groups to offend. He claims that crime done by black people receives greater attention from the criminal justice system than crime committed by white people. He contends that ethnic minorities offend as a kind of political opposition to a racist society. Gilroy and critical criminologists believe that working class violence is an act of opposition to capitalism. Riots and other forms of protest against racism were common for many ethnic minorities who were born in British colonies, but when they used the same tactics in the UK because they were dealing with the same racism difficulties, the state penalised them.
Lea and Young, however, criticise Gilroy on a number of grounds, the first of which is that, like critical criminologists and working-class crime, Gilroy romanticises the crimes committed by racial and ethnic minorities as revolutionary when in fact they are not. They make this claim because they argue that since most crime is interethnic, ethnic minorities cannot possibly be involved in the battle against racism. First-generation immigrants were likewise found by Lea and Young to be relatively law-abiding. Therefore, it is quite unlikely that they conveyed any anti-colonialism sentiments. Finally, they suggest that Asian crime rates are comparable to those of white people. If Gilroy was right, then the police are exclusively prejudiced towards Black people, not Asians. However as both of these are ethnic minorities, this seems quite unlikely.
According to Hall et al, in the 1970s, a moral panic over black muggers was utilised to divert attention away from the capitalist system's slump, which was the real source of unemployment and excessive inflation. Black muggers served as a convenient scapegoat as the media started to link these muggings—which were falsely reported as a new crime but were actually just street robberies under a new name—with young black individuals. As a result, rather than representing capitalism, they came to represent the breakdown of the social order. Additionally, Hall says that capitalism marginalised young black people by fostering workplace racism, making it more challenging for them to find stable employment. Therefore, these young black men turned to petty offences for surivival.
However, Downes et al are quick to criticise this theory for being contradictory, since it claims that the increase in black muggings was caused by unemployment while also denying the increase and stating that the media was responsible for a moral panic. Other sociologists argue that there is no evidence to support Hall's claim that the moral panic of black muggers was a direct result of the capitalist crisis. Moreover, Hall is unable to offer solid proof that the general public is overreacting or blaming black people for these muggings.
Overall, neo Marxists say that the official figures do not accurately depict the situation, while left realists think that the difference in crime rates amongst ethnic minorities is in fact genuine. Neo-Marxists like Gilroy concentrate on the reality that the majority of ethnic minorities are fighting against colonialism in society, whereas Hall concentrates on how capitalism drives working class ethnic minorities into small street crimes like muggings. Left realism claims that ethnic minorities innovate more to get wealthy as a result of relative deprivation, which is aided by the media and consumerism, or act out in fits of rage that result in crimes like assault. To conclude, I believe that left realists make a stronger case for crime and racial minorities than neo Marxists do because they undervalue and exaggerate the impacts of capitalism.
![]() |
Notes is a web-based application for online taking notes. You can take your notes and share with others people. If you like taking long notes, notes.io is designed for you. To date, over 8,000,000,000+ notes created and continuing...
With notes.io;
- * You can take a note from anywhere and any device with internet connection.
- * You can share the notes in social platforms (YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, instagram etc.).
- * You can quickly share your contents without website, blog and e-mail.
- * You don't need to create any Account to share a note. As you wish you can use quick, easy and best shortened notes with sms, websites, e-mail, or messaging services (WhatsApp, iMessage, Telegram, Signal).
- * Notes.io has fabulous infrastructure design for a short link and allows you to share the note as an easy and understandable link.
Fast: Notes.io is built for speed and performance. You can take a notes quickly and browse your archive.
Easy: Notes.io doesn’t require installation. Just write and share note!
Short: Notes.io’s url just 8 character. You’ll get shorten link of your note when you want to share. (Ex: notes.io/q )
Free: Notes.io works for 14 years and has been free since the day it was started.
You immediately create your first note and start sharing with the ones you wish. If you want to contact us, you can use the following communication channels;
Email: [email protected]
Twitter: http://twitter.com/notesio
Instagram: http://instagram.com/notes.io
Facebook: http://facebook.com/notesio
Regards;
Notes.io Team