1. Disorganization, like deviant behavior, is inevitably inherent in any social system, as well as its basis - social organization and social norms. There has not been and is impossible the existence of a society without social deviations and crime, sociologists say. Can you give examples of societies that did not know the manifestation of deviant behavior or at least such an extreme form as crime? Does the above thesis lead to the conclusion that it is pointless to fight deviant behavior? Give reasons for your answer.
1 answer:
The process of socialization reaches a certain degree of completion when a person reaches social maturity, which is characterized by the person acquiring an integral social status (a status that determines a person’s position in society). However, in the process of socialization, failures and failures are possible. A manifestation of socialization deficiencies is deviant behavior - this is various shapes negative behavior of individuals, the sphere of moral vices, deviations from principles, norms of morality and law. Deviant behavior, understood as a violation of social norms, has become recent years mass character. It seems to me that this is due to the fact that the more complex society becomes, the more processes take place in it, the more people have the opportunity to display their deviant behavior. Therefore, this problem is at the center of attention of sociologists, social psychologists, doctors, law enforcement officials, and us ordinary people, members of society. Numerous forms of deviant behavior indicate a state of conflict between personal and social interests. Deviant behavior is most often an attempt to leave society, to escape from everyday life. life problems and adversity, overcome the state of uncertainty and tension through certain compensatory forms. However, deviant behavior is not always negative. It may be associated with the individual’s desire for something new, an attempt to overcome the conservative that prevents him from moving forward. Various types of scientific, technical and artistic creativity can be classified as deviant behavior. The work will consist of three interconnected parts. In the first, I will try to explain what deviant behavior is, find its roots, and consider various approaches to the study of deviant behavior. In the second I will briefly consider the main forms of manifestation, and in the third I will address perhaps the most serious problem: deviant behavior among adolescents. And in conclusion, we will consider the main methods of preventing deviant behavior.
See also:
- HELP SOLVING TEST 13. A characteristic feature of an industrial society is: A) the widespread use of non-economic principles
- Adults can tell a lot about their entrepreneurial activities, but during school years the main activity is study.
- In country Z, the government provides assistance to small businesses. the immediate consequence of this may be: 1) reduction in consumption
- try to depict individual parts of a human face. Are they easy to recognize if we relate them to the whole face? Which m
A person, like any other living creature, is characterized by a certain activity - the ability to respond to influences environment. The activity of people in external (motor) and internal (mental, mental) forms in the process of interaction with the environment is usually called activity. Externally observable manifestations of an individual’s activity, actions and deeds, as well as their specific sequence, are defined as behavior. The behavior of an individual in one way or another affects the interests of other people, groups, and the entire society. Human behavior acquires social meaning and becomes personal when it is directly or indirectly involved in communication with other people, is in connection with their actions, and is aimed at certain social facilities(groups, communities, institutions).
To explain the specifics of this or that behavior, sociologists widely use the concept "identity" This term was first used in psychoanalysis to refer to the unconscious process of imitating the behavior or certain qualities of the person with whom the individual identifies. In sociology, this socio-psychological category means an individual’s identification of himself with a certain person, social group, model or ideal. Identity as awareness of one's group membership can be considered as the most important mechanism formation of a deviant personality. The process of gradually acquiring or changing identity is defined as personal identification. When studying deviant behavior, the term " deviant identity" may mean an individual’s awareness of himself as a member, participant in a criminal group, gang, community of drug addicts or alcoholics.
In the sociology of deviant behavior, there are a number of concepts that analyze both deviant and conformist behavior. These are the theories of anomie by R. Merton, differentiated association by E. Sutherland, and the theory of social control.
Personal behavior is considered conformal if it corresponds to social norms and expectations of the social environment (groups, society as a whole).
The degree of conformity, as well as deviance in behavior, depends on the extent to which a person identifies himself with the social environment. The terms “conventional,” “normative,” or “normal behavior” are sometimes used to refer to conforming behavior. For a long time, only deviant behavior was opposed to conformal behavior. However, recently nonconforming behavior has also been considered as independent, changeable, reactive behavior.
It is well known that not all people exhibit behavior that is consistent with generally accepted social norms. In society, along with law-abiding citizens, there are offenders: bribe-takers, thieves, drug addicts, rapists and murderers. Along with ordinary people, there is always a place for geniuses and altruists. Moreover, these variations are no less statistically significant than socially approved, conformal (normal) behavior.
Term "deviation"(from Latin deviatio - deviation), as well as in general deviant (deviant) behavior usually and quite strictly defined using the concept of social norm. Indeed, if there is no social norm, then it makes no sense to talk about deviation from it. Therefore, d aviation - it is an act of deviance that goes beyond one or more social norms.
For sociologists, it is important to evaluate not only a single action in relation to the norm, but also behavior - externally observable manifestations of an individual’s activity, the sequence of his actions and actions.
Thus, Deviant behavior is a retreat, a refusal to constantly follow, when performing actions, generally accepted social norms.
A deviant or deviant individual is one who, in his behavior, does not comply with the norms established in a group or social system. Consequently, deviant behavior is a capacious sociological term that covers a wide range of behavioral deviations. In criminology, this concept has a narrower interpretation and is understood as “behavior that contradicts legal or moral norms accepted in society, criminal or immoral behavior; the result of asocial personality development..."
Many American sociologists associate deviant behavior not only with a violation of social norms, but also with social expectations, values, and social roles. Thus, the socio-functionalist Albert Cohen defines deviant behavior “as that which goes against institutionalized expectations, that is, with expectations shared and recognized as legitimate within social system».
According to Cohen, the sociology of deviant behavior must deal “with the structure of systems of interaction, with the distribution and interconnection of events within these systems, and not with human personalities.” From the object of study, functionalists derive some psychological aspects social interaction- everything that relates to the psyche in the personality structure. Neurotic, psychotic and other pathologies in personal behavior are excluded by supporters of this scientific direction from the subject of sociology of deviant behavior. In this regard, Cohen argues that in order to “create a sociology of deviant behavior, we must keep in mind deviant behavior rather than types of people.” The theory of deviant behavior, according to functionalists, should explain not only deviant behavior, but also its absence, that is, conformism.
Another functionalist sociologist N. Smelser considers “deviant behavior to be that which is considered as a deviation from group norms and leads to isolation, treatment, correction or punishment of the offender.” Moreover, he associates the concept of norm not only with expectations, like Cohen, but, above all, with rules of behavior, standards that regulate interaction between people. There are interpretations of deviant behavior that consider as a starting point not norms and expectations, but social roles, that is, typical patterns of behavior. The approach to deviance as behavior that violates social norms and roles has become widespread in modern criminology and sociology. It is developed by functionalists: R. Merton, R. Akers, A. Liska, A. Tio, M. Clinard, R. Meer.
From the standpoint of symbolic interactionism and understanding sociology, social groups themselves create rules and violators, naming them in this way. This means that deviation acts as a consequence of excessive social control, when society reacts to an individual’s behavior with negative sanctions. Proponents of an interactionist or constructivist orientation in the sociology of deviant behavior include famous American researchers G. Becker, D. Black, K. Ericson, E. Schur, E. Lemmert, E. Good. In their opinion, deviation is not an inherent quality of this or that action, but a consequence of correlating the action with the rules for applying sanctions to the violator. And, therefore, deviance acts as a “reactive construct.” From the standpoint of symbolic interactionism and constructivism, the phenomena of deviant behavior do not so much exist objectively, per se, sui generis, but are artificially “constructed.” Consequently, within the framework of this approach, concepts such as “crime”, “corruption”, “terrorism”, “prostitution” are social constructs.” The key role in such “construction” activities belongs to the political regime and legal institutions that are controlled by those in power.
In the works of the famous American social psychologist R. Harré, deviant behavior is seen in the psychological state of the individual, caused by a change in his position in the system of socio-political coordinates. This researcher comes to the conclusion that “deviant and normative behavior are two equivalent components of social-role behavior.”
In Russian sociology, a capacious formulation of deviant behavior has received some recognition, actually combining it with the concept of deviation given by Ya. Gilinsky:
deviant behavior- This:
“1) an act or action of a person that does not correspond to officially established or actually established norms and expectations in a given society (social group);
2) a social phenomenon expressed in relatively massive and sustainable forms human activity that do not correspond to officially established or actually established norms and expectations in a given society».
Social deviations are understood as social processes based on the deviant behavior of individuals and groups. These are crises, wars, revolutions, etc.
As you can see, deviant behavior has many definitions, which, according to American sociologist Alex Tio, can be summarized into two main groups: scientific and humanitarian.
Supporters scientific approach consider deviation from “normal” behavior as objective, inherent in human nature. This position is most clearly represented in the works of functionalist sociologists (R. Merton, R. Akers, M. Clinard, R. Meer, A. Cohen, N. Smelser), who developed the views of E. Durkheim regarding the natural origin of deviations. However, deviant behavior itself, according to functionalists, is defined as non-normative, dysfunctional, destroying the balance of the social system, leading after exceeding a certain threshold to its disintegration. In this case, deviant behavior is subject to the system of social control.
However, one cannot help but see that deviant behavior, using the conclusions of R. Merton, is not only dysfunctional, but also adaptive; its various types continue to exist and develop even in economically prosperous countries. It is no coincidence that one of the highest crime rates is observed in the United States, many times higher than all known world indicators.
From the perspective humanitarian approach, deviation is considered as a product of society, as a consequence of excessive social control, which does not have internal, objective properties, as a social construction.
The modern “Encyclopedia of Criminology and Deviant Behavior” contains another approach to understanding deviance. It is interpreted as a violation of human rights (G. Schwedinger, J. Schwedinger).
A broad sociological interpretation of a social norm presupposes the dual nature of social deviations from it. It is obvious that some of them contribute to constructive social change. For example, social creativity in science, art, and technology acts as a violation of generally accepted norms and standards. It always challenges time, serves progress, overcomes reactionary stereotypes of consciousness and cliches of behavior. These deviations are usually called positive, according to the terminology of Higgins and Butler - "creative".
Negative deviations are dysfunctional because they disorganize the social system, threatening its existence. These include social pathologies such as crime, alcoholism, drug addiction, corruption, and prostitution. Most often, negative deviations attract the interest and attention of researchers, since they are the ones that create problems for society. Moreover greatest number research devoted delinquent (criminal) behavior understood as deviation from legal norms.
The relationship between positive and negative deviations in the behavior of an individual or group is relative. For example, murder in war is not only permitted, but also encouraged, and in peacetime it is prosecuted by law. In addition, sanctions for violating certain social norms are relative and vary significantly. Thus, it is well known that in different states of the United States the same crime (for example, rape) leads to different forms and terms of punishment.
Thus, deviations are variable in time and socio-cultural dimensions.
In social systems, like biological ones, processes of organization, self-organization and disorganization occur simultaneously. Therefore, when studying deviant behavior, sociologists widely use the concept of “disorganization,” usually associating it with the weakening of the influence of norms and rules of behavior in society.
Disorganization is a social process during which the established social order and habitual actions become unstable. This is a state of confusion in society, a case when the inability of social institutions to perform constructive activities increases. Disorganization at the personal level is understood as a condition in which an individual cannot behave in a socially approved manner. Social disorganization occurs, as a rule, in conditions of rapid social change, a lack of social identity, and a number of social reasons.
Availability in transition Russian society a steady trend of increasing the level and scale of socially dangerous deviations (for example, corruption, terrorism and drug addiction) leads to an increase in processes of disorganization, which provokes the state and its legal institutions to take repressive measures. However, not only to “eradicate”, but also to limit social problems Only traditional prohibitive and repressive actions do not succeed. This is happening especially clearly in the area of drug control and terrorism.
In general, organization and disorganization of social life coexist in an inextricable connection; norm and deviation complement each other. They appear in unity, and only examining them together can lift the veil of secrecy. Control over deviant behavior makes sense only with a comprehensive and systematic study of the problem, which requires knowledge of the mechanisms of rule-making and law enforcement, explicit and latent functions of deviations, processes of stigmatization and deviant identity, the formation of deviant careers and subcultures.
Besides being memorable, .com domains are unique: This is the one and only .com name of its kind. Other extensions usually just drive traffic to their .com counterparts. To learn more about premium .com domain valuations, watch the video below:
Turbocharge your Web site. Watch our video to learn how.
Improve Your Web Presence
Get noticed online with a great domain name
73% of all domains registered on the Web are .coms. The reason is simple: .com is the where most of Web traffic happens. Owning a premium .com gives you great benefits including better SEO, name recognition, and providing your site with a sense of authority.
Here's What Others Are Saying
Since 2005, we"ve helped thousands of people get the perfect domain name
- Spoke to Ryan over the phone, and he helped me with all my questions! Great customer service and readily available. The process was easy and relatively quick, taking place over the course of only three business days. Would highly recommend for those that are considering buying a domain from hugedomains.com. A third-party gets involved called namebright.com but there is no additional charge and they facilitate the transfer of domains from severs. Cheers - Sammy Lam, 10/14/2019
- Frankly speaking before purchasing domain from HugeDomains.com, i was roo much scared as i read some negative review on some website.. but decided to take a chance. After purchase i was surprised, it was unbelievable my domain name purchase was successful and best part was i transferred it with other registrar and again hugggggggeeee surprise because my domain name get transferred within 30 minutes.. total time taken from purchase to transfer was less than 2 hours.... Too much thanks to HugeDomain.com and NameBright.com - Sandip Rajput, 10/14/2019
- Fast and smooth deal and transfer. Can recommend it! - Tom, 12/10/2019
- More
If the condition for the existence of any social education, emerging as a result of the interaction of its members, is its orderliness, that is, at least the relative stability of such interaction, its organization, then an inevitable characteristic of any social system is also the manifestation of elements of social disorganization. Disorganization of the social system manifests itself in the emergence of types of behavior, the content of which deviates from the social norms that characterize the system as a whole. Disorganization, as well as deviant behavior, are inevitably inherent in any social system, along with its basis - social organization and social norms.
Deviant behavior is always (albeit to varying degrees) present wherever social norms apply. These can be norms of behavior of a moral, ethical, aesthetic nature. Alcoholism, drug addiction, prostitution are examples of types of behavior related to types of social deviations within the framework of accepted systems of social assessments. Certain types of deviant behavior are regarded by the state as offenses and crimes.
There has not been and is impossible the existence of a society without social deviations and crime. Moreover, in any social system, in any type of society, social deviations (including crime) fulfill a certain social function. This is the function - to ensure the possibility of deviations from the average, normal type, to maintain the necessary level of openness of the social system to inevitable changes.
In this sense, it is necessary to clarify the concept of “social disorganization”. Its most obvious manifestation is social deviations. If they grow disproportionately, the very existence of a social organization of this type is threatened. However, a disproportionately small number (or complete absence) of social deviations also leads to social disorganization, since it marks the loss of such an organization the most important condition their survival - the ability to make adequate social changes and timely adaptation. “In order for the individuality of an idealist, whose dreams are ahead of his time, to be given the opportunity to express, it is necessary that there is also the opportunity to express the individuality of a criminal who is below the level of his contemporary society. One is unthinkable without the other."
This circumstance also determines the functions of social control. An inevitable condition for the existence of any social organization is the presence of explicit, obvious definitions of a polar nature (good and evil, moral and immoral, permitted and criminal, etc.). Sanctions applied for negative (from the point of view of the dominant system of values) deviations serve as a clear, obvious manifestation of such values, their obvious confirmation. Visual confirmation of the boundaries of an accepted social norm is an important function of social control, ensuring the stability of a given social organization. The problem is that by designating such boundaries, it is important not to bring the system into a state of stagnation, to deprive it of another important condition for survival - the ability to change and update.
It is necessary to consider the question of how those limits of an objective social norm are determined, beyond which
entails the recognition of an act as a deviation, an anomaly, subject to appropriate action. To resolve this issue, it should be taken into account that the concept of a social norm includes two components: a) an objective (material) characteristic of a certain type of behavior that takes place in objective reality; b) its subjective (social) assessment from the point of view of desirability or undesirability, usefulness or harmfulness for society and the state.
It is this kind of assessment that serves as an external expression of the boundaries of the social norm, beyond which lies the area of social deviations. The material being of a certain type of human activity and their social assessment are inseparable elements of the social norm, but they are not strictly connected. This connection is fluid, since these social assessments of specific objective characteristics can, on the one hand, lag behind the development and changes in the essence of social phenomena; on the other hand, such a social assessment may change depending on social (subjective) factors during the evolution of sociocultural values. It is through the evaluative component that the role is manifested political component in defining a social norm. The evaluative element of a social norm embodies the basic social, religious, ethical and other values and categories of social consciousness.
It is important to emphasize that this fusion of objective (material) and evaluative, subjective (social) manifests itself in specific acts of real individuals, represents a set of socially significant actions that are not indifferent to society, and therefore receive appropriate assessment. This assessment is usually embodied in a rule of law, which combines the description of a behavioral act (disposition of the norm), deviation from the norm (hypothesis of the norm) and the type of legal response (sanction of the norm). The assessment of the norm, expressed in imperative form, becomes a measure of behavior (for the individual) and a measure of assessment of behavior (for the state). The measure of behavior is guided by the individual, the assessment belongs to society (the state).
The problem, however, is that the measure of behavior embodied in the rule of law is in optimal correlation with the real behavioral acts that form the social norm. In this case, one should keep in mind the difference that exists between a social norm and social ideals, i.e., ideas about the desired state of social phenomena (processes, objects, objects, etc.), which has not yet been achieved, but the achievement of which (with point of view of dominant social values) constitutes the goal social development.
Delinquency and crime. Increasing social disorganization leads to the loss by social institutions of a given society of the opportunity to realize their main function - satisfying a specific social need. An unsatisfied social need leads to spontaneous manifestations of normatively unregulated activities, seeking to fulfill the function of legitimate institutions, but at the expense of existing norms and rules. In extreme manifestations, such activity can manifest itself in illegal, criminal actions.
Crime that arises in connection with the dysfunction of social institutions is predominantly instrumental, i.e., aimed at achieving a specific goal, and structured, i.e., internally interconnected in nature. Its features are planning of criminal activity, systematicity, elements of organization, i.e. distribution of criminal roles. Such features of structured crime are associated with its function - illegally satisfying a need that is not recognized or not adequately provided by social institutions. Such narrow functionality, that is, the satisfaction of a separate social need, at the same time leads to disorganization of more general social systems.
Dysfunctions of political institutions arising from the disorganization of society, often associated with a change in forms of government, in conditions of weakening legitimacy state power may cause growth political, i.e. anti-state crimes (violent seizure or retention of power, violent change of the constitutional system, public calls for such a change, terrorism, etc.). Crime is functionally connected with the course of social processes that determine the nature and direction of social development and the content of social changes.
Modernization, stability and political violence. The process of modernization is considered as the dominant type of social change, which covers to varying degrees the countries of the world, divided according to this criterion into developed (modernized), developing and traditional countries. The following indicators of the level of modernization are considered: the percentage of urban residents; percentage of gross national income derived from agriculture; percentage of people employed in agriculture; per capita income; prevalence of media and communication; level of participation in politics (voting, stability of the executive branch); social benefits (education, literacy, life expectancy). These are the main conditions influencing the level of political violence in society.
By general rule, modernized countries exhibit lower levels of political unrest and violence than those that exist in less developed countries. Economic modernization, the presence of modernized means of mass communication, the level of health, education, and participation in political life are associated with lower levels of political violence.
Political violence is directly related to the level of stability of a given society. On the scale, ranked by the degree of increase in the level of political instability, the following indicators of growth of instability are noted: from 0 (maximum stability) to 6 (maximum instability). The zero level - a sign of a normal level of political stability - is considered to be regularly held elections; the first level of growth of instability is frequent changes (dismissals or resignations) of the government; the next sign of growing instability is demonstrations and accompanying arrests; an even more serious indicator of the level of instability is the murder (or assassination attempts) of political figures (except the head of state); a further indicator of the growth of this level is the murder (or attempt on the life) of the head of state or terrorism; the next level is a coup d'etat or guerrilla warfare; highest (seventh) level - civil war or mass executions.
Political development and level of violence. The level of political violence also depends on the nature of the existing regime. The nature of the regime can be assessed by the degree of predominance in the process of regulating social relations of either coercive methods or methods of a permissive nature (coercive regime and permissive regime). The categories that allow one to judge such characteristics of the political regime in a particular country are data on the presence of legal competition, competition in the political system (multi-party system, etc.), and the level of police restriction of citizens’ freedoms. As a general rule, countries with the most permissive regimes are characterized by the least violence. Political violence increases with increasing coerciveness of the regime, but decreases somewhat in conditions of extreme, maximum coercion of such a regime.
Level political development is also related to the level of violence. Indicators of political development include the participation of the population in political issues, government decisions and political groupings, as well as the existence of an influential legislature and the level of press freedom. In conditions where military or political party play only their specialized role in politics - the conditions for democracy and pluralism are present. In conditions when these structures monopolize the sphere of politics, conditions are created for the dominance of the authoritarian elite.
Political development associated with the growth of democratic structures turns out to be closely related to economic and social development. The higher the level of political development of a society, the higher the level of income and literacy of the population. Trends in political violence look different. With the growth of the economic and social sectors of society, the political system. Such changes, economic and social development lead to growth social conflicts and political violence, reducing the level of political stability. However, when a country reaches complete modernization (an important indicator is universal literacy of the population), and the economy reaches the level of mass consumption (per capita income significantly exceeds the level sufficient to support subsistence), political stability increases and the level of violence decreases.
Thus, the legitimacy of power, the characteristics and pace of social change, the degree of modernization of society, the nature of the regime, the level of political development - these are the sociological characteristics that determine the conditions for the emergence, state and trends of political crime, revealing its derivative nature, its dependence on the state of the political institutions of a given society and the social processes taking place in it. At the same time, modernized countries are characterized by lower levels of political unrest and violence, while less developed countries are characterized by higher levels.
The nature of the political regime and violence. The level of political violence depends on the position of a given country on the “permissive regime - prohibitive regime” scale. Countries with permitting regimes have the lowest level of political violence. The latter increases with increasing coerciveness of the regime, but decreases to some extent under conditions of extreme coercion. The same trend is shown by the indicator of political instability. In contrast, the level of modernization falls as we move from a highly permissive regime ( highest level modernization) to the conditions of an extremely coercive regime (the lowest level of modernization).
Democratic countries are characterized by low levels of political unrest, although governments in countries with repressive, totalitarian regimes are able to effectively suppress open expressions of popular discontent. It is governments in countries with an average level of political development and average permissiveness of the regime that face the greatest political disturbances.
Economic crime is a phenomenon that arises during and in connection with the interaction of the state and the economy. As a result of this interaction, state structures that have political and legal resources of power intersect with economic institutions, subjects of economic relations with material (property, monetary) resources. Fundamental in this regard is the scope of the state’s powers in the field of economic relations, where the economy, property relations serve as the object, and the state is the subject of economic regulation.
Elimination of the institution of private property in Soviet Russia, its delegation created a situation where the state was both the owner and the sole regulator of property relations. The function of possession (possession, disposal) merged with the function of control and regulation; the violent methods of the command economy ensured an absolute monopoly of state property, complete, uncontrolled freedom of disposal by agents of political power. Where there is no separation of the object and subject of regulation, where they are fused together, regulation ends and arbitrariness begins, since real regulation presupposes a purposefully oriented restriction of the activity of the object of regulation on the part of the regulating subject on the basis of principles, rules and norms that are binding on both of them.
In reality, private property in Soviet Russia was not completely eliminated; along with market relations, it continued to exist virtually, illegally, being a real and inseparable feature of the economy, forming the backbone of economic crime within the framework of the legislation of that period. The illegal position of the private entrepreneur in the economy has led to the emergence of a special kind of symbiosis of the bearers of political power (resource - power, violence) and the illegal private owner (resource - money), in which the economic entity buys by criminal means the very possibility of existence. For their part, in such a situation, the holders of power become dependent on illegal “tributes”; a vital interest arises in maintaining their illegal status - the key to receiving abundant “tribute”. The legalization of private property deprives power holders of this method of enrichment.
Legalization of private property, development of market relations in Russian society in the 1990s. introduce new elements into the interaction between the economy and the state. Normal, legal market relations are threatened by two dangers. The first is in the form of criminal attacks officials states abusing power, trading their right to make decisions in the economic sphere. The merging of illegal, criminal business figures (drugs, arms trafficking, smuggling, etc.) with patrons from among corrupt officials, mutually feeding and protecting each other, continues. The second danger comes from the participants in market relations themselves, those of them who seek to make a profit not as a result of fair competition, but by obtaining unjustified privileges and benefits through bribery of officials.
Under these conditions, the illegal gain of some means a corresponding loss for others, since the purchased privilege moves benefits, the volume of which is always limited, in favor of the bribe-giver at the expense of those who do not give bribes, or puts the briber in a more advantageous position than others, but not deserved. them a position. The market economy is undermined by deception of the consumer, making a profit by hiding from paying taxes, as a result of a conspiracy to fix prices on the market, etc. Finally, there may be a complete refusal to compete in cases of criminal encroachment on the property of a competitor or on his life (contract killings).
Without achieving real dominance in the market of legal, influential private capital, serious growth of the productive economy is impossible. Achieving such dominance leads to two consequences that have sociocriminological significance. The marginal (secondary, outlying, subordinate) position of private capital leads to the fact that those established in the course of economic interactions relations between economic entities are unsystematic, often random, and largely chaotic. In such a situation, there is a tendency to immediately use the current situation, not restrained by the need to take into account the further consequences of the actual interaction, there is a desire to get the maximum gain by any, including illegal, criminal means (get a loan and hide, establish a fictitious company and disappear, embezzle profits by stealing partners, ruining shareholders, etc.).
Only under conditions of dominance of private capital in the economy does a pattern come into play, according to which maximum profit is achieved not by economic robbery, but by stable, forward-oriented production and trading activities. Only under these conditions does it become obvious that real economic success depends on an orientation towards stable, predictable actions of partners, that honesty is economically beneficial, and a reliable business reputation is a condition for obtaining real profits, far superior to criminal “loot”. Under these conditions, the algorithm of market entrepreneurship is implemented: credit (loan) + + investment (investment) = profit.
Translated, the word “credit” means “trust”. This moral category turns out to be built into the structure of stable market relations. The initial, elementary cell of market relations (exchange of money for goods or goods for money) has an important feature. This exchange can never be synchronous, instantaneous (one counterparty sends money and then receives goods or sends, transfers goods and then receives money), a time gap is inevitable here, someone must trust someone, be confident in the guaranteed continuation of this interaction , in the inviolability of the relevant contractual relations. The prospects for a successful fight against economic crime, therefore, are directly related to the formation and development of legal private capital and a stable market in the economy.
- See: Grounds for criminal law prohibition / Ed. V. N. Kudryavtseva, L. M. Yakovleva. M., 1982.
- 2 Durkheim E. Norm and pathology // Sociology of crime. M., 1966.
- See: Yakovlev L. M. Sociology of economic crime. M., 1988.
