Poor and the Powerless Conflict

¶ … Poor and the Powerless

Conflict theory relies on the role of coercion and power to explain inequalities in social class. This theory explains the existence of social order as the result of a person or group's ability to exercise control or influence over others. Social order is a function of society where each individual or group tries to maximize his or her personal benefits. A society is in continuous struggle as those that are low in the social order attempt to improve their situation. The lower classes are never satisfied with their position, while the upper classes struggle to maintain their position.

The top echelon of society dictates the rules and the accepted morality to the remainder of the society. The upper class dictates their own security by declaring anything that challenges their power to be deviant or immoral. Conflict theory can be applied to large social orders, such as the government, or to a micro level, such as with clubs or communities. Conflict theory examines the techniques used by those in power to make certain that they stay in power. Competition for the necessities of life is the most basic conflict from which social order arises. Conflict theory states that individuals are more concerned for their individual well-being rather than for that of the group as a whole. The criminal justice system in the United States is a prime example of conflict theory at work. This study will support the theory that the criminal justice system is simply a tool used by the upper class to control the poor and make certain that they maintain their position. It will use the criminal justice system to support conflict theory and its role in the stratification of society.

Crime and Punishment: an institution for the Rich and Famous

The criminal justice system is a formalized system of social control. The purpose of the criminal justice system is to maintain order in society. However, when one considers conflict theory and its relationship to the wants and needs of the upper class, it can be argued that the criminal justice system is an institution at the disposal of the upper class to secure their position in society. One of the key concepts upon which America was founded was the institution that no group or person would be under the control of another. As the founders drafted the ideals that would later become the Bill of Rights and the Constitution, declaring "liberty and justice for all," many of them were slave owners (Neiman, 2000).

As the fledgling democracy attempted to take flight, it appears that the concept of equality was only for the elite portion of society. Although the documents upon which the United States was founded did not explicitly state that "all men were created Equal" only applied to a select few, the ideal was present as an accepted societal construct. The founding forefathers accepted the fact that "equality" was a consequence of wealth. Wealth equated power and power equated the ability to control others in such as way as to secure one's own position in the future.

Equality the criminal justice system is one of most basic concepts that the United States proposes to hold dear. However, it is difficult to look at the class of criminals in prisons and argue that justice is handed out on an equal basis, regardless of class. When one examines the statistics behind the American prison system, they will find a disproportionate number of person incarcerated are from impoverished social backgrounds (Wacquant, 1998). Only 10-15% of those incarcerated are considered to pose a threat to society, if they were to be released (Wacquant, 1998). Yet, prison populations continue to rise by an average of 8% annually (Wacquant, 1998).

The trends themselves are astounding, yet the facts behind the numbers provide greater support for the thesis that the criminal justice system is a tool designed for the protection of the upper class. Nearly one-third of all American males are now under some type of police surveillance (Wacquant, 1998). Let us examine some of the effects of this statistic and its affect on society. Society holds morality in high esteem. One must be of high moral standing to gain employment. Those that are considered to be less than moral cannot find employment, or if they do find employment, it is in jobs that are low-wage, menial labor jobs.

The attainment of a high-paying job constitutes high moral standards as well. Those that have "rap sheets" or that have spent time in prison are labeled and will be unable to find high paying, high level jobs when they get out. Companies doe not hire those with a criminal record, or if they do, they are relegated to lower positions, where they can e watched. Higher prison populations also make the unemployment picture look better, as it cuts the number of laborers available for work. Thus, the number of persons able to seek work is lower, resulting in lower unemployment figures (Wacquant, 1998).

This effect means that the poor will tend to stay poor, with little chance of climbing the social ladder. A criminal record precludes someone from holding certain public offices or from other types of employment that rely on public trust. Once a person is a part of the criminal justice system, they are doomed to a life in the lower ranks of society (Mehlum, Moene, & Torvik, 2005). If this constitutes one-third of all males in America, this means that there is a plentiful supply of lower level workers to accomplish the jobs that need to be done on a daily basis. From this perspective, the criminal justice system assures that there is an ample supply of laborers at the disposal of the wealthy. This allows them to produce more goods and secure higher profits for themselves (Dyer, 2000).

The upper class is in control of determining the moral status of various acts. The laws can be seen as a means to separate the haves from the have nots. Conflict theory states that the controlling class makes laws that benefit themselves and that secure their own personal interests. The elite represent the power structure, and as such have the right to set the moral tone of society. Conflict theory stresses the motives of the individual, as opposed to the good of the group. Therefore, it is unlikely that the elite will pass laws that do not benefit themselves in some way, even if it is to suppress the poor so that they cannot gain the strength to form a resistance. The criminal justice system can be viewed as the supreme tool for social class stratification.

The most basic laws are to protect one from physical harm and from being dispossessed of the symbols of power, such as money and property. Those that do not have money and material goods are not allowed, under the law, to simply take them for themselves by force. If the wealthy were suddenly to be dispossessed of their material goods in such a manner, they would no longer be the wealthy class. Theoretically, the class roles would be reversed and the poor would become wealthy. This would leave the wealthy in the position of the former poor, with no material goods or means of support. The wealthy must maintain their positions, so they create laws that make it immoral for the poor to take their goods. This creates a social order where the wealthy will remain wealthy and the poor must find another means to transverse social class.

The poor may see theft as a means of survival and may not hold it in the same moral light as the wealthy in society. if, for instance, a person were to steal food to feed their starving children, they would see it as a less severe matter than the wealthy class. In a class where a middle class exists, the middle class are more likely to agree with the wealthy, in hopes that they too can rise up to the top class. The wealthy represent the goal that everyone else wishes to strive to become. Few wish to become like the poor and the powerless. The wealthy class represents a goal to strive for, as it represents material security. With wealth, not only comes physical security, but a sense of authority and self-determination. Those that are wealthy can dictate the direction of their lives and they can also dictate the lives of others as well.

White Collar vs. Blue Collar Crime

The criminal justice system has different classifications for criminal acts. The distinction between white collar and blue collar crime is based solely on social class distinctions. This could be viewed as two separate criminal justice systems. Punishment for "white collar" crime is generally less severe than that for "blue collar" crimes. White collar crimes seldom encourage public outrage, more often they are downplayed, to a "mistake" rather than a serious crime (Percy, 2002). Blue collar crimes often result in heavier penalties, labeling, and a lifelong relegation into the lower levels of social class. The blue collar criminal faces much harsher consequences, even after the formal phase of their punishment is complete.

Social inequality can be seen in the punishments for various crimes. When the lower class commits a crime, such as theft, that threatens to dispossess the upper class, the punishments are much more severe than for "white collar" crimes. It is more likely that the white collar criminal is of higher socioeconomic status than the common thief. Therefore, these types of crimes are punished much less severely, once again to protect the status of the upper class. They must be able to take action, even if it is immoral to protect their social status. Any act that attempts to dispossess the wealthy of their material goods and status is viewed as much more "criminal" than when the wealthy attempt to further deprive the poor of material goods.

A prime example of social inequality in the criminal justice system is the scant punishment received by Ken Ley, as a result of the Enron scandal (O'Meara, 2003). When one strips away the facade of the actions of fellows such as Ken Lay and Arthur Anderson, what is left behind is the attempt to deprive those less fortunate of their wealth. This is a prime example of the wealthy attempting to steal from those of lower social class, such as the 401K plans of Enron employees. The only difference between this act and the poor person who robs a convenient store at gunpoint is the size of the "booty" and the use of physical force. The intention of the act is the same: to deprive someone else of material goods. However, no one can argue that punishments are equitable (O'Meara, 2003).

Relationship between Crime and poverty

If one examines the early beginnings of today's class structure, it is easy to see its beginnings in the early part of the industrial era. Factories were owned and controlled by the wealthy. The poor worked in the factories and provided the labor. The poor were subject to intolerable working conditions and did not receive even a fraction of the pay that was afforded the wealthy. The workers were relegated to certain sections of town, where they could be kept out of sight of the bourgeoisie class. The lifestyles of the wealthy and the poor contrasted such that they hardly resembled each other at all. Worker revolts were quickly squashed, as they threatened the power and position of the wealthy factory owner. Workers were not allowed to revolt, as it disrupted the established social order and threatened the position of the wealthy. These ideals were ingrained into the minds of children from an early age, which ensured that they would easily fall into their "proper place" in society (Doepke & Zilibotti, 2005).