英语论文网

s gave rise to the emergence of four major prominent approaches; namely, left idealism, the new administrative criminology, right-realism and left-realism.
 
It was in the 1980's that the left-realist approach emerged [Lea and Young (1984), Currie (1985)]. It emerged not merely as a response to the failings of social democratic positivism, neo-classicism and individual / biological positivism, bust also as a critique of the new administrative criminology, right realism and left idealism.
 
As I have argued throughout this essay and have stated previously, Left-realists argue that these existing alternative theories were are too 'partial', and as such are incomplete approaches to the understanding of crime; the focus of these being on the victim or on the offender, on the social reaction to crime or on the criminal behaviour itself [Young, 1995, p 102], but never sufficiently all-embracing. The central, and in my opinion, admirable, tenet of the left-realist doctrine is to encourage criminal justice systems to synthesise various different criminologies, rather than just choosing one popular approach and basing all their initiatives on that one theory [as they have done in the past]. Left-realists argue that such synthesis would encourage analysis of all the aspects of crime and its process, and only through understanding its form and shape, its socio-context and its enactment / trajectory through space and time, will the whole process of crime ever be properly understood. Let us briefly consider each of these aspects in turn:
 
Left-realism encourages analysis of the 'form' of crime. This doctrine asserts that crime consists of two dyads, of a victim and an offender, and of actions and re-action. Crime rates are explained not merely by the interplay of these four factors but as social relationships between offenders, victims, state agencies and the public [Lea 1992]. It should be noted that such an assertion is merely describing the process [Young 1995 p 103]; i.e. crime rates are a product of changes in the numbers of offenders and victims, and the levels of control exercised by the official state agencies and the public.
 
As regards to the social context of crime, left-realism builds on the agenda as set out within The New Criminology [Taylor et al. 1973]; the immediate social origins of a deviant act should be set within its wider social context and such an analysis should encompass the actors, reactors, victims and the public to crime [Young 1995, p105]. This aspect of left-realism is in stark contrast with the ideas of the right-realist school in which causes of crime are seen as autonomous from the social structure [Wilson, 1975].
 
Left realism discusses the 'shape of crime' in terms of the network of relationships involved, and the resulting shape of the crime structure. For example, the crime of drug dealing has a well-known pyramidal shape, whereas the crime of assault may be a one off case. Left-realism also stresses the importance of analysing the internal nature of these relationships; for example, every step of the pyramid of drug use is consensual, whereas, with the crime of assault relationships are purely coercive.
 
As regards to the trajectory of crime through time, a left-realist approach breaks this down into six component parts, the first is the background cause of crime, the second relates to the moral本论文由英语论文网提供整理，提供论文代写，英语论文代写，代写论文，代写英语论文，代写留学生论文，代写英文论文，留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。