Neoliberalism as social and political regression (2015) (original) (raw)

Crime Policy and Welfare Policy

This essay provides a synthesis of criminological and social welfare theoretical frameworks, along with empirical data illuminating the links between crime policy and welfare policy. It also reviews current debates regarding the extent to which European countries are undergoing a shift toward more punitive welfare or crime policies. Building upon Gøsta Esping-Andersen’s classic typology of welfare regimes, current scholarship ties liberal welfare regimes to punitive penal ideologies and high rates of incarceration and social democratic welfare regimes to lenient attitudes toward punishment and low incarceration rates. Research also underscores the significance of economic and social inequality in the production and outcomes of crime and welfare policies. Comparative empirical data supports the persistence of penal-welfarism in Europe, particularly in social democratic states, exemplified by Sweden, while indicating more punitive policies targeting marginalized sectors of the population, notably immigrants.

The Neoliberal State: Then and Now

Scott, D. and Sim, J. (eds.) Demystifying Power, Crime and Social Harm. London: Palgrave (In Press)., 2024

This chapter explores Steven Box’s contribution to our understanding of the neoliberal state, both when Power, Crime and Mystification (1983) was published, and today. After situating the book in political context and establishing a working, if orthodox, definition of neoliberalism, we go on to unpack the text’s eponymous subject matter – power, crime, and mystification – as each relates to the neoliberal state. Having given Box a fair reading and highlighted a number of key contributions he makes, we argue that his concept of mystification provides an underdeveloped account of power, whether applying it to ‘crime’ and social harm then, or now. If Box’s ‘mystification’ does not adequately account for power, then we might similarly conclude that his text fails to accurately theorise the state as an underlying relation determining a range of possibilities for social action rather than directly setting them on course. However, an important caveat we conclude with is the disciplinary environment in which Box was working. Set against orthodox, administrative, or mainstream accounts of crime and criminology, Power, Crime and Mystification kept alive a radical agenda, rendering the state and its agents legitimate and intelligible as critical criminological research objects. In sum, Box’s contribution to our understanding of the neoliberal state can, and should, be read two ways: as an intellectual project with strengths and flaws, and as a political project with a practical and enduring legacy for as long as his concerns are echoed by contemporary scholars, activists, teachers, and students.

Neo-liberalism and criminal justice policy: Law and order under the market system’

University of San Carlos Graduate Journal, 2006

Abstract Neo-liberalism has influenced the entire public sector, including the criminal justice system, which includes policing and law enforcement. At first glance they may not seem to lend themselves to Neo-liberal principles, but the minimisation of government in public services has reached this far, creating far-reaching consequences for criminal justice policy. The treatment of crime as a rational economic activity instead of a form of moral and social aberration and the criminal as a rational person seeking to maximise gain instead of a social deviant has begun to change the nature of criminal justice. Policing is becoming less about law enforcement, as it is more about risk management in modern society. Society itself is becoming a risk society as levels of trust are reduced, and law enforcement is changing into the provision of security rather than the prevention and treatment of crime. This essay argues that increasing government involvement in criminal justice policy could actually address some of the extreme consequences of Neo-liberalism without negating its better qualities. This assumes that government is democratic and that crime is a moral issue that a democracy needs to address, as it is a system predicated on people being responsible for each other’s well being.

Neo-liberalism, Crime and Punishment

A considerable body of research argues that one of the principal effects of neo-liberalism upon criminal justice has been to encourage penal expansionism and more generally harsher sanctions. This is done to encourage people to adapt to the austere conditions of a neo-liberal economy. This chapter suggests that if neo-liberalism is operative in the criminal justice sphere, it may be through the pragmatic management of criminal incidents, often through a price mechanism typical of a 'market logic', rather than through the stigma of harsh public punishment. Taking the case of the Republic of Ireland, this chapter investigates two examples, traffic violations and organized crime, which are dealt with on the basis of 'market logic'. The chapter concludes by speculating on how a more efficient model of control for both kinds of crime might be developed in the future.

Crime and modernity: continuities in left realist criminology

International Journal of the Sociology of Law, 2003

different within these communities and compared to those living in Lahore, Indonesia or the Gulf States because of the ways in which Islam combines with factors and influences in utterly different contexts. While in a short review I have focused on those aspects of the collection that most interest this reviewer, the other chapters are all informative and mostly insightful. Crime and modernity: continuities in left realist criminology John Lea; Sage, London, 2002, pp. 224, price d60 hardback, d17.99 paperback The culture of control: crime and social order in contemporary society David Garland; Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2001, pp. 307, price d19.99 hardback

Images from a Neoliberal City: The State, Surveillance and Social Control

Critical Criminology, 2004

Smith (1996: 230–232) characterized the late twentieth century crusade for a “new urban frontier” as akin to the Wild West of nineteenth century America. In the last ten years, not only in the North American context but in Europe too, extending the boundaries of the urban frontier – economically, politically, and culturally – has galvanized powerful urban coalitions in the task of re-taking – both ideologically and materially – city spaces from the visible and symbolic elements of urban degeneration. The project of urban reclamation has not been neutral but has been formulated within a post welfare, neoliberal politics that has promoted a ideology of self responsibilisation within a climate of moral indifference to increasingly visible inequality. These ideological shifts have been fuelled by, and consolidated in, an evolving form of state ensemble that, as a rapidly moving target (Hay 1996: 3), has been largely neglected in criminological analysis. It is the contention of this paper that the agents and agencies of the neoliberal state are constructing the boundaries and possibilities of the new urban frontier while simultaneously engaging in a project of social control that will have far-reaching consequences for how we understand the meanings of public space, social justice and the parameters of state power.