Suchergebnisse

Cover -- Half Title -- Title Page -- Copyright Page -- Contents -- Acknowledgements -- Introduction -- PART I : LAW ENFORCEMENT -- 1 Drug Enforcement Strategies -- 2 Under Pressure: Policing and Demand Management -- 3 Principle or Pragmatism? Debating Drug Legalisation -- PART II: DRUG REFERRAL -- 4 Drug and Arrest Referral in Trafford, Merseyside and Southwark -- 5 Drug Referral Schemes: Local Case Studies -- PART III: OFFICIAL AND MEDIA REACTIONS -- 6 Agony and Ecstasy: Drugs, Media and Moral Panic -- 7 High Anxiety: Crack and Social Reaction -- 8 In Living Colour? Representations of Yardies -- Bibliography -- Index

Recent scandals have once again highlighted ongoing failings in the Metropolitan Police force, for which yet more urgent reforms have been proposed. While police denialism of institutional racism continues to be a problem, the institutional failure that creates the recurring cycles
of crisis goes beyond the Met. It is also rooted in a stunted mediascape, and, more seriously, a failing political culture that is addicted to the sugar rush of immediate political news, and mired in an authoritarian and zombie politics of law and order that seeks to manage dissent through
producing first shock and then amnesia. This institutional permacrisis underlines the failures of all three institutions to recognise and address institutional racism. It is symptomatic of a failure to go beyond the facile assumption - in the face of decades of evidence to the contrary-that
deeply embedded structural problems can be solved through the fix of culture-change programmes or the appointment of a heroic new leader. Recent reports have also found the Met to be marked by institutional misogyny and institutional corruption. This extension of the idea of systemic failure
seems unlikely to prompt the kind of systemic and structural change that is needed.

What is the legacy of Stuart Hall for criminology, beyond just Policing the Crisis? In this article I highlight two other engagements by Hall in race and policing one in the 1980s through an independent inquiry, the other in the 1990s through a major public inquiry. Beyond bringing this work to light, this article shows how these engagements reveal Hall's unique style of theorizing the concrete politics of the present through his stress upon conjunctures and context, and via the concept of articulation. Hall's interventions in these two cases underscore an analytical and theoretical stance in public forums that made him more than a 'scholar-activist' but rather a 'theorist-activist' who drew on theory for strategic and 'applied' purposes. The ways in which he did this can, I suggest, point to different ways of 'doing race' in a critical criminology.

Institutional and structural racism are sociological explanations for racism as more than individual prejudice, and as a deep‐seated and ongoing force in contemporary societies that produce racially structured patterns of inequality that recur in spite of equality before the law and antidiscrimination policies. Such patterns can be seen across many aspects of society, such as employment, housing, and law enforcement. Institutional/structural racism is also evident in ideologies at national and global levels through "color blind" perspectives as well as Eurocentrism. In theory and in practice they are best thought of as working through an interacting and intersecting combination of individual/group, cultural, and structural processes and forces.

This paper draws on selected explanatory accounts of rioting that occurred in England in 2011 for the purpose of illustrating the ways in which scholarly critiques frame quite different senses of what kind of 'crisis' the riots represented. On one side the riots are understood within a 'race and policing' frame placing in a line of continuity with events across time and space and in an on-going crisis of racial subjugation. In direct contrast, another side treats the riots as a crisis of post-politics, in which nihilism has replaced purposive political action. While different types of politics are centred in both approaches, they differ remarkably in relation to racism, with the latter treating race as epiphenomenal. These frames are instances of how critical scholarly understandings draw on events, and it is argued they miss potentially far reaching senses of 'crisis' that can be drawn out of some aspects of rioting.

Purpose– The purpose of this paper is to examine the inter-relationship between target setting, racial categories and racism via the case of a race employment target set for the police. Drawing on and extending public administration and governmentality perspectives, the work explores the shifting politics of enumeration and categorisation within a set of organisational manoeuvres.Design/methodology/approach– The data are qualitative and mainly based on interviews with senior figures involved in managing the organisational response to the target, as well as some documentary sources.Findings– The discussion reveals that both racial enumeration and categorisation are contested rather than fixed, but that debates about it ebb and flow in variable and uneven ways. They are the subject of manoeuvring around the number itself and of what counts as race. This indicates the complexity of governing race targets, which appear set but are made fluid in various ways.Research limitations/implications– The research is based on interviews with senior and prominent figures involved in governance who spoke "off the record", as described in the paper. These conversations are not in the public domain and the justification for using them is that they reveal the thinking behind the public debate about the black and minority ethnic (BME) target, as well as a process of negotiation and manoeuvring.Originality/value– The BME target has been the subject of considerable media and political attention, plus some academic research. The paper presents a new and unique account of the target as it was implemented. It is of value to researchers interested in racism and policing interested in the organisational background that shaped the public debates about the target.

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine the inter-relationship between target setting, racial categories and racism via the case of a race employment target set for the police. Drawing on and extending public administration and governmentality perspectives, the work explores the shifting politics of enumeration and categorisation within a set of organisational manoeuvres. Design/methodology/approach – The data are qualitative and mainly based on interviews with senior figures involved in managing the organisational response to the target, as well as some documentary sources. Findings – The discussion reveals that both racial enumeration and categorisation are contested rather than fixed, but that debates about it ebb and flow in variable and uneven ways. They are the subject of manoeuvring around the number itself and of what counts as race. This indicates the complexity of governing race targets, which appear set but are made fluid in various ways. Research limitations/implications – The research is based on interviews with senior and prominent figures involved in governance who spoke "off the record", as described in the paper. These conversations are not in the public domain and the justification for using them is that they reveal the thinking behind the public debate about the black and minority ethnic (BME) target, as well as a process of negotiation and manoeuvring. Originality/value – The BME target has been the subject of considerable media and political attention, plus some academic research. The paper presents a new and unique account of the target as it was implemented. It is of value to researchers interested in racism and policing interested in the organisational background that shaped the public debates about the target.

This article considers academic engagements with policy and politics and, inparticular, race and racism through two case studies. Contextualising such engagements within wide ranging debates about the relationship between academics, research, and policy and politics, two dimensions are utilised to analyse the examples presented. These are, firstly, the inside/outside (the location and extent of academic engagement) and, secondly, the link between knowledge and politics. These are applied to two examples or cases from the UK, both of which concern racism and the police. The first was a public inquiry in which the idea of institutional racism was powerfully resurrected; the second was an employment tribunal alleging racial discrimination - so the same idea may have been expected to be raised but was not. In part the abstract is concerned with this striking difference between the cases. In the two cases the author has been equivalent to an 'observer' and a 'participant', and the article sets out some dilemmas for academics when acting in public roles or arenas. The main argument is that in spite of the tenuousness of the dichotomies between theory/practice and observation/participation, as well as the ones between insider/outsider roles and instrumental and critical knowledge, they can all be significant in terms of how politics plays out and policy is fashioned.

This article reflects on the role of a chief officer and in particular the former Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police Sir Ian Blair. The overlapping political structures in London that he found himself working under led to an expressed wish for simplification. However, the hoped for outcomes can be seen as leading directly to his removal from office; it also forms the context for actual and proposed changes in police governance. His wider involvement in politics leads him to argue that a chief officer should be able to speak in public as a neutral expert. I question that because of the ways in which all kinds of expert knowledge claims are subject to challenge. With wider changes in political control possible or likely, the skill and judgment of chief officers in engaging with politics will become an even higher-profile concern.