1. EVALUATION OF RIGHT REALISM
TASK: On the left of this sheet are a number of criticisms of the RIGHT REALIST perspective on
crime. Can you, for any of these criticisms, find a good COUNTER EVALUATION (in other words
stick up for the RIGHT REALISTS).
CRITICISM OF RIGHT REALISM POSSIBLE COUNTER EVALUATION?
1 Right realism ignores wider structural causes
such as poverty, inequality, and economic
downturns.
2 It overstates offenders’ rationality and how far
they make cost-benefit calculations before
committing a crime. While this may explain
some utilitarian crime, it may not explain much
violent crime.
3 Its view that criminals are rational actors
freely choosing crime conflicts with its view that
their behaviour is determined by their biology
and socialisation. For example according to Lily
et al (2002), IQ differences account for less than
3% of differences in offending.
4 It is preoccupied with petty street crime and
ignores corporate crime and white collar crime,
which may be more costly and harmful to the
public.
5 Advocating a zero tolerance policy gives police
free rein to discriminate against ethnic minority
youth, the homeless etc.
6 It over emphasises control of disorder, rather
than tackling underlying causes of
neighbourhood decline such as lack of
investment, police labelling and selective
justice.
7 Roger Matthews (1992) argues that allowing
minor incidents to go unpunished like smashing
windows does not necessarily lead to more
crime.
8 Jones (1998) argues that crime prevention
strategies simply lead to displacement - as one
neighbourhood is cleaned up criminals simply
move their activities elsewhere. Jones (1998)
notes that right realist policies in the USA failed
to prevent the crime rate rising.