Capitalist Justice: Reinforcing or Challenging the System?

According to Karl Marx, punishment is intended to reinforce the capitalist system and oppress working-class people. He argued that offenses committed by wealthy individuals are often ignored or lightly punished, whereas working-class individuals face harsher punishments. Marx believed that prisons serve as a dumping ground for the working class and that restorative justice is not viable due to the inherent conflictual nature of class relations under capitalism. Therefore, strict legislation is required to impose appropriate punishment on offenders, creating awareness among society to prevent such activities.

Criminology-
Punishments and
penology
1

ESSAY: Critically discuss the differences and
similarities between both Durkheim's and Marx's
perspectives of punishment.
2

In perspective of criminology, punishment can be termed as the sense of a sanction
imposed by legislation of the culprit for criminal offense conducted by them. Punishment must
involve the unpleasantness to the victim for offense which is actually or supposed to be
conducted (Ashworth and Roberts, 2013). Provision of punishment has been introduced by
criminal law to set an idle example to discourage the individual for getting engaged in such kind
of acts. Sociology of the punishment provides better framework for the analysis of penal
institutions in order to provide more realistic account instead of considering punishment as an
approach used for control of crime. For this aspect, punishment is considered as complicated
social institutions by the sociological perspectives. This institution is formed by the ensemble of
historical and social forces which have drastic impact on the population of offenders.
Concept of punishment is supported by different theoretical approaches given by
different criminologists. In this aspect, main theories are given by Durkheim's and Marx's
perspectives of punishment (Brooks, 2012). Émile Durkheim and Karl Marx had different
perception regarding punishment due to difference in their viewpoint regarding the society.
According to the perspective of Durkheim, punishment is morally affirming. Along with this, it
is grounded by the mechanism of solidarity production. On the other hand, study of Karl Marx
depicts that punishment is economically conditioned state apparatus (Wright, Tompkins and
Mohammad, 2012). As per the approach of Marx, it plays a political and ideological role for the
ruling of dominating class.
However, they both were concerned about the emergence of modern capitalism in the
society while describing their perspective towards punishment (Easton and Piper, 2012). In
accordance with their point of view, criminal activities are highly influenced by evolution in
market society and modern system of division of labor. Both Émile Durkheim and Karl Marx
had developed their perspectives by considering the impact imposed by spread of market
relations on reproduction ability of the society (Ashworth and Roberts, 2013). Due to this aspect,
they both were engaged in the causes and implications of key development in the British society
regarding Industrial Revolution such as French Revolution.
Approaches given by Durkheim and Marx have important similarity that these
sociologists do not consider punishment and criminal offense as aberrant. As per his point of
view, punishment serves positive function for the society (Jewkes and Johnston, (eds.) 2006).
3

Along with this, it reinforces social solidarity and strengthens common value. In addition to this,
society reacts actively to severe criminal actions such as pedophilia and murder. For this aspect,
Durkheim had outlined a change to restitute justice from retributive justice.
In accordance with the viewpoints of traditional functionalists, people are quite similar to
the each other due to which society responds to crime more severely. Thus, Durkheim had
recommended that penal code should help criminals to reform their attitude or to make them
repay for the society (Simon and Sparks, 2013). According to them, punishment is a power that
can be used by authorities for the construction of larger social order. As a consequence, they do
not make direct link of criminal offense with the punishment. They consider the theory of
punishment within context of greater economic and social environment (Ashworth and Roberts,
2013). Second major similarity in both the perspectives is that both these theorists were skeptical
for the aspects which are outright dismissive on the ground of justification. Durkheim and Marx
had shown their keen interest in the philosophical ramifications in order to make viable changes
in the traditional provisions of penal practices.
However, despite of having common objectives, there were certain differences between
their theories because of variances in their opinions about the society and environment.
4

Durkheim had rejected the contention of punishment in The Division of Labor in Society (1893)
(Easton and Piper, 2012). As per his point of view, punishment should have wider scope
regarding vengeance and in providing of emotional satisfaction. Further, they had described that
social function of punishment is required to provide effect to the emotional outrage of a society
whose norms are not complied by offender by committing the offensive act (Easton and Piper,
2012). According to the Durkheim, criminal offense can be defined as an action which affects
the social consciousness in an adverse manner. As a consequence, criminal functions are used to
define the ethical and moral boundary of social group (Freiberg and Gelb, 2014). By considering
this aspect, punishment is used to provide reciprocal impact of society's moral generating,
maintaining and outrage a solidarity that society cannot readily do without.
In the theory given by Durkheim, there is one contemporary manifestation regarding calls
for restorative justice. Due to this manifestation, this theory is focused on the injuries and
requirement of community and victim as a whole instead of considering criminal action or
criminal at the core of the punishment. In addition to this, an offender is said to be obliged to
these victims and part of penalty provided by them must include aspects such as apology to
victim, contribution to community and direct restitution (O’Mahony, 2012). Objective of this
provision was to provide appropriate initiative to the procedure of restoring the solidarity and
trust which is breach by the criminal action. Along with this, approach of restorative justice act
on both the aspects i.e. therapeutic consequentialism and retributivism. Further, it also provides a
clear alternative to these theories by focusing on the harmed relationships by the virtue of
criminal action (Easton and Piper, 2012).
Analysis done by Marxist on the crime is mainly focused on political economy of
penology. Theory of punishment given by Marxist sought to clarify the practices of punishment
by considering the justification provided by their juridical. He had continuously researched on
the legal matters. In addition to this, he had criticized the failure of penal theory for consideration
of social factors such as poverty and economic inequalities (Wright, Tompkins and Mohammad,
2012). By considering the research framework given by Marx, Georg Rusche and Otto
Kirchheimer, they have examined the development of various forms of crime in their paper of
Punishment and Social Structure. By considering the social context of crime, Marx had also
challenged the unequal distribution of punishment on the basis of racial factors by pointing out
5

the disproportion in number of racial minorities in the statistics of individual imposed to the
imprisonment.
As per the perspective of Marx, punishment is intended to reinforce the capitalist system
and for the oppression of working people. According to him, offenses committed by the wealthy
people are generally ignored or they are lightly punished (Punishment - From Justification To
Explanation, 2015). However, working class has to face harassment and injustice practices. As a
consequence, prisons work as a dumping ground for the working class people. Marx has also
been considered as critique of the political economy. He had provided an attempt to undermine
the claim that capitalist organizations and division of labor are merely the outcome of general
human tendencies to activities of production and exchange (Wright, Tompkins and Mohammad,
2012). Lifelong objective of Marx was to provide refutation to the approach of division of labor
with his narrative scope of capitalism. For this aspect, he had promoted the account of change in
society in order to dismiss the abstract instead of naive individualism underlying in the political
economy (Garland, 1991). In addition to this, he had also provided an attempt to show the class
relations are inherently conflictual and on the basis of this aspect, he had proved that capitalism
mode of production makes systematic exploitation of one class by another. Thus, according to
him, restorative justice is not viable to provide relief to the victim. Due to this aspect, legislation
is required to adopt strict practices for the imposition of appropriate punishment to the offender.
In addition to this, it will also create awareness among society by which individuals would not
get engaged in such kind of activities.
In accordance with the present report, various similarities and dissimilarities have been
identified. This study shows that Émile Durkheim and Karl Marx do not consider that
punishment is not directly associated with the criminal activity. They both have wider approach
regarding punishment as they were focused on social and environmental factors. However,
punishment perspective of Emile was more lenient in comparison to Karl. It is because, Emile
believes that members of a society are in consensus with another and they all have common
objective. As a consequence, he had supported restorative justice instead of providing
punishment by considering criminal act or criminal. On the other hand, viewpoint of Karl depicts
that society is not a peaceful place because there is constant increase in the activities of
contradictions and conflicts. According to him, upper class people exploit lower class in order to
6

attain undue advantage. Henceforth, criminals should be punished with severe punishment by
which ideal example can be set for society in order to prevent such kind of actions in the future.
Their point of view has been considered in the legal reforms in order to provide better justice to
the criminals and to prevent such kind of activities from the society.
7

REFERENCES
Books and journals
Brooks, T., 2012. Punishment. London, United Kingdom: Routledge.
Easton, S. M. andPiper, C., 2012. Sentencing and punishment: The quest for justice. Oxford,
United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.
Jewkes, Y. and Johnston, H., (eds.) 2006. Prison readings: A critical introduction to prisons and
imprisonment. Cullompton, United Kingdom: Willan.
Rusche, G., Kirchheimer, O. and Melossi, D., 2003. Punishment and social structure. New
Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Simon, J. and Sparks, R., 2013. The Sage handbook of punishment and society. London, United
Kingdom: Sage.
Ashworth, A. and Roberts, V. J., 2013. Sentencing Guidelines: Exploring the English Model.
Oxford University Press.
Easton, S. and Piper, C., 2012. Sentencing and Punishment: The Quest for Justice. Illustrated.
Oxford University Press.
Freiberg, A. and Gelb, K., 2014. Penal Populism, Sentencing Councils and Sentencing Policy.
Routledge.
O’Mahony, M. B., 2012. Accused of murder: supporting the communication needs of a
vulnerable defendant at court and at the police station. Journal of Learning Disabilities
and Offending Behaviour. 3(2). pp. 77-84.
Wright, N., Tompkins, E. N. C. and Mohammad, Z., 2012. Cross examination of clinicians at
coroners' inquests following deaths in custody. International Journal of Prisoner Health.
8(3/4). pp. 92-98.
Online
Garland, D., 1991. Sociological Perspectives and Punishment. [Pdf]. Available through: <
http://www.umass.edu/legal/Benavides/Fall2005/397G/Readings%20Legal
%20397%20G/8%20David%20Garland.pdf>. [ Accessed on 16th October 2015].
Punishment - From Justification To Explanation. 2015. [Online]. Available through: <
http://science.jrank.org/pages/10922/Punishment-From-Justification-Explanation.html>. [
Accessed on 16th October 2015].
8