Marxist criminologists are quite direct in opinions about the contemporary state of capitalistic development of relationships. To date, the situations with white-collar crimes are more significant for society. In the world of huge capital investments, the point on justice is almost trite. In fact, with the emergence of private property people began struggling for having more material amenities. It is supposed with the main idea of the Marxists theory that follows: the well-being of one individual promotes a conflict for the others. As a result, white-collar crimes are seen to be a part of a social process that is shaped by whether the society will thrive or not. Marxists look at such features in justice quite straightforwardly.
Marxist criminologists interpret it in the following way: “…the crimes of the upper class exert a greater economic toll on society than the crimes of the ‘ordinary people’” (Traditional Marxist Perspective on Crime 2). Thus, such top crimes done in the sphere of financial affairs highly damage the economical reality within the society. This idea goes without saying as Marxist theory is, in fact, is anti-capitalist one. It blames the bourgeois way of relationships provision among different strata of the society. Hence, the main reflection of Marxist criminologists against corporate and white-collar crimes is that the richest people are the driving power of society. Their position is too influential, even on the body of justice. They will always be in favor until they have enough money and power at hand.
The issue of more lenient charges as provided for white-collar offenders is rather debatable among Marxist criminologists. It is a result of a capitalistic machine that provides more amenities and more freedom to those of more possession thereof (Schmalleger 45). In other words, capitalistic reality grounds its pivots on those who provide direct movement of the financial system. Logically, it is easier to punish someone for burglary, for such a person is less preserved in society. It is a light crime, moreover. However, tycoons and other possible white-collar offenders do harm to many people working day and night within the country. They provide stagnation or even full delay for economic growth and social prosperity.
Marxists also consider such paradoxical occurrence to be due to the fact that laws are the result of productive work on the part of the state power (Traditional Marxist Perspective on Crime 2). In turn, state power usually represents the interests of the ruling classes of the society. Hence, it is clear that white-collar offenders are charged leniently in most cases. The trials related to corporate crimes become more complicated once the chain line touches in an ascending way upon respectable figures in the society step by step. Higher social status provides an obstacle for a more detailed investigation of a crime. Thus, the stop appears at the point of anticipation to accuse less extent of charge making it more lenient despite particular casualty reflected due to the crime. It is well observed in the example of Enron Corp. bankruptcy.
To facilitate the problem of less attention to corporate crimes, it is vital to take a glance at the theoretical implications according to the issue. In this respect several perspectives should be promoted on the part of the government:
- Corruption decrease;
- Giving commission on corporate crimes more authority;
- Provision of governmental verification once a quarter.
Works cited
Schmalleger, Frank. Criminology Today: An Integrative Introduction. Ed. 5, New York, NY: Pearson/Prentice Hall, 2008.
Traditional Marxist Perspectives on Crime. P. Convington, 1997. Web.