Suchergebnisse

Kramer, Michalowski, and Chambliss (2010) have recently made a case "for" a public criminology of state crime. A public criminology would bring criminology into "a conversation with publics, understood as people who are themselves involved in a conversation" (Burawoy, 2007: 28). This article will analyze certain challenges that such a public criminology can mount to the bombing of civilians; it may contribute to the public discourse about how to resist this form of state crime. A public criminology of state crime can: (1) challenge the denial and normalization of the aerial bombardment of civilians, (2) challenge the political impunity and legal immunity of the state officials who commit these war crimes, and (3) challenge empire, one of the primary structural contexts within which state criminality occurs. Before these challenges can be analyzed, however, it will be helpful to sketch a theoretical narrative of how the area bombing of civilian populations evolved during World War II and became normalized, that is, accepted and approved within American political culture. Adapted from the source document.

Recent school shooting incidents have served to highlight the social problem of lethal violence by young people in the US. While many factors need to be considered, it is argued here that broader social & economic forces (eg, poverty, inequality, & social exclusion) shape most of the problem of youth violence. These structural factors tend to foster violence indirectly through their impact on the close-in institutions of the family, school, & community. The organizing concepts of social support & informal social controls are drawn on to examine theory & research on the connections between economic inequality & social exclusion, the close-in institutions of family & community, & violent youth crime. It is argued that structural forces reduce the ability of families & communities to provide the social support & informal social control needed to prevent youth violence. Policy implications are briefly discussed. 35 References. Adapted from the source document.

Illustrates the problem of state violence, identifies its different forms, & describes the connections between state crime & traditional violent crimes. Of the three levels of violence defined, the state is directly involved in structural & institutional violence & indirectly involved in personal violence. Structural violence & state terrorism are linked to crimes of interpersonal violence through common social conditions, eg, economic marginality, mass social deprivation, community breakdown, & the US culture of militarism. L. Nguyen

A review essay on books by: Stuart L. Hills (Ed), (Corporate Violence: Injury and Death for Profit, Totowa, NJ: Rowman & Littlefield, 1987); & Francis T. Cullen, William J. Maakestad, & Gray Cavender, (Corporate Crime under Attack: The Ford Pinto Case and Beyond, Cincinnati, Ohio: Anderson, 1987 [see listings in IRPS No. 53]). These works address corporate crime & damage caused by corporate irresponsibility, & discuss social movements in the US opposed to corporate wrongdoing. Cullen et al argue that criminologists have played a major role in the social movement against white-collar crime, while Hill contends that criminologists need to extend their involvement. Hills also describes corporate offenses & heightens awareness of the harm caused by the illegal actions of US business executives. Cullen et al analyze the process of criminalization with regard to corporate crime, & assess efforts of social control directed at corporate offenders. 18 References. F. S. J. Ledgister

Cover -- Series Page -- Title Page -- Copyright -- Dedication -- Contents -- Foreword by Rob White -- 1. "This Was a Crime": Climate Change as a Criminological Concern -- 2. "Beyond Catastrophic": The Climate Crisis, Carbon Criminals, and Fossil Capitalism -- 3. "When Did They Know?": Climate Crimes of Continued Extraction and Rising Emissions -- 4. "The Politics of Predatory Delay": Climate Crimes of Political Omission and Socially Organized Denial -- 5. "Slowing the Rise of the Oceans?": Obama's Mixed Legacy and Trump's Climate Crimes -- 6. "Blood for Oil," Pentagon Emissions, and the "Politics of the Armed Lifeboat": Climate Crimes of Empire -- 7. The "Climate Swerve": Hope, Resistance, and Climate Justice -- Acknowledgments -- References -- Index -- About the Author.

Since its attacks on Hiroshima & Nagasaki (Japan) during WWII, the US has used nuclear weapons to achieve its political ends at least a dozen times, including Harry Truman's threat against Iran in 1946, Dwight Eisenhower's offer to "protect" Indochina in 1954 & his threat against North Korea & China during the Korean War, John Kennedy's several threats against the USSR in the early 1960s, & Richard Nixon & Henry Kissinger's threat against China & North Vietnam during the Vietnam War. Yet, US political ends violate the UN Charter, the Genocide Convention, & the Nuremburg Principles, which means that US nuclear policies over the past fifty years amount to nothing less than nuclear terrorism & state criminality. M. Maguire