Pyrrhic Defeat Theory Connections Between

Pyrrhic Defeat Theory

Connections between terrorism and Pyrrhic defeat theory

Connections between terrorism and Reiman's Pyrrhic defeat theory

Connections between terrorism and Reiman's Pyrrhic defeat theory

According to Jeffrey Reiman's the rich get richer and the poor get prison, institutions ostensibly designed to fight crime often actually perpetuate crime. Reiman's Pyrrhic defeat theory of asocial behavior argues that the criminal justice system "only fights a portion of the crime, enough only to keep it from getting out of hand, and to keep the struggle of crime prominent in people's minds, but crime is never reduced substantially or eliminated. Therefore the criminal justice system benefits those in power, while making it look like all crime is the work of the poor" (Scully 2009, citing Reiman 1995:4-5). A good example of this is how white collar crime, including the crimes that gave rise to the current financial crisis (such as deceptive lending practices) went unpunished, despite more vigilant law enforcement of the petty crimes of the poor such as drug possession during that same time period. As a result of this focus on eradicating crime, rather than the symptoms of crime, poverty remains a problem and perpetuates the social symptom of crime,:"Society fails to protect people from the crimes they fear by refusing to alleviate the poverty that breeds them" and "by virtue of these and other failures, the criminal justice system succeeds in creating the image that crime is almost exclusively the work of the poor, an image that serves the interests of the powerful" (Scully, citing Reiman 1995: 8-9).

Reiman wrote the first edition of his seminal work in 1979, when issues of race and crime predominantly figured in the American consciousness. However, in an ironic turn of history, it is noteworthy that the Iranian hostage standoff was taking place at the American embassy during this time period. Iran was a poor nation that turned to Islamic fundamentalism as a way of articulating resistance against its dictatorial leader, the Shah. The Shah supported by the United States as an ardent anti-communist but was quite oppressive and did little to address the problems of poverty in his nation. This is an example of how the failure to alleviate poverty not only results in street crime, but also acts of radicalism and terrorism. The social network and support provided by terrorism gives a voice to the voiceless, and a sense of affecting larger society. "People turn to terrorism for social solidarity…people join terrorist organizations worldwide in order to be part of a community, much like the reason inner-city youths join gangs in the United States" (Schneier 2008). Often the cause is less important than the sense of solidarity a group conveys: "individual terrorists often have no prior involvement with a group's political agenda, and often join multiple terrorist groups with incompatible platforms…and often can't describe the political goals of their organizations" (Schneier 2008). They often are socially isolated or have close friends or relatives who are members of the group that recruits them.

The social mechanisms that promote terrorism are similar to those that perpetuate poverty and crime. Terrorists often feel marginalized and helpless, especially if other segments of society are enjoying prosperity and are becoming more Western in their attitudes. This was the case in pre-revolutionary Iran and in Egypt, which gave rise to many Palestinian radical movements. Poorer or less skilled individuals may feel as if they cannot compete in the new marketplace. In America, the social ostracism of Muslims can feel even more acute. Many Muslims may face discrimination: feared as terrorists, they turn to terrorism. The creation of the Department of Homeland Security, the widely-publicized abuses at the Guantanamo prison, all continue to foster this sense of social isolation of Muslims. These policies may have created a more fertile environment for terrorism, just as police violations of civil liberties and racial profiling have perpetuated crime in many American cities, according to Reiman. Injustice breeds injustice. And Reiman adds, if being 'tough on crime' is so effective, why does America have such a high crime rate, despite being one of the few democratic nations in the world to still use the death penalty? (Scully 2009).

Reiman writes: "We know that poverty, slums and unemployment are sources of street crime. We know that these things are a source of crime, even if we do not know how it causes crime -- yet we do virtually nothing to improve the life chances of the vast majority of the inner city poor. We know that unemployment has gone up and down, yet it has remained steady at the bottom of society, which is considerably worse than the national average" (Scully 2009). Crime and rises in nationwide unemployment are not necessarily perfectly correlated. But it is the culture of poverty and the creation of a permanent underclass that lead to crime amongst the poor. The poor, criminal element have no hope of struggling out of the confines of their crime-ridden inner cities or rural communities, Reiman also points out that the rise in urbanization and crime are not correlated, either, as once thought, rather it is the degree of the economic discrepancy between the lower and higher strata of society that leads to crime.