Crime - Revision history

75.210.94.84: Reorganized overview of criminology -C:

2025-10-25T19:47:08Z

Reorganized overview of criminology -C:

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:47, 25 October 2025
Line 3:		Line 3:
	'''Crime''' is any action that a society's [[ruling class]] considers unacceptable.<ref name=":0">{{Citation\|author=Mary Stevenson Callcott\|year=1935\|title=Russian Justice\|chapter=The Soviet Theory of Crime\|chapter-url=https://en.prolewiki.org/wiki/Library:Russian_Justice#CHAPTER_II:_THE_SOVIET_THEORY_OF_CRIME\|quote=Or again, speaking more plainly, the [[Marxian]] formula states "that the [[state]] is an organ of oppression of one [[class]] by another; that it sets up an order which legalizes and consolidates this oppression modifying the [[class struggle\|conflict of classes]]." Thus since the state is an organ of class domination, and crime necessarily, by the same definition, is the commission of an act against the interests of the ruling class, a criminal code would be a formulation of penalties imposed for such acts.}}</ref> An act is a crime if it breaks the [[law]]. The study of crime is called criminology.		'''Crime''' is any action that a society's [[ruling class]] considers unacceptable.<ref name=":0">{{Citation\|author=Mary Stevenson Callcott\|year=1935\|title=Russian Justice\|chapter=The Soviet Theory of Crime\|chapter-url=https://en.prolewiki.org/wiki/Library:Russian_Justice#CHAPTER_II:_THE_SOVIET_THEORY_OF_CRIME\|quote=Or again, speaking more plainly, the [[Marxian]] formula states "that the [[state]] is an organ of oppression of one [[class]] by another; that it sets up an order which legalizes and consolidates this oppression modifying the [[class struggle\|conflict of classes]]." Thus since the state is an organ of class domination, and crime necessarily, by the same definition, is the commission of an act against the interests of the ruling class, a criminal code would be a formulation of penalties imposed for such acts.}}</ref> An act is a crime if it breaks the [[law]]. The study of crime is called criminology.

	Several etiologies of crime have been proposed by criminologists. In the ''classical school'' of criminology, crime was always an exercise of the [[Freedom\|free will]] of the criminal. Since crime was considered a choice, two people who committed the same crime were to be given the same sentence. This theory was adopted during the 18th century and was exemplified in the French Penal Code of 1791~~. It was historically [[progressive]] compared to judges in earlier times, who dealt punishments that were disproportionate to the crime and were allowed personal discretion over a crime's sentence~~. The ''neo-classical school'' left the classical school's theory of complete free will mostly intact but carved out exceptions by defining some criminals as ontologically non-rational. Courts, with the help of scientists, could now decide that a crime was due to "insanity" or "imbecility." The [[Eugenics\|eugenicist]] ''anthropological'' or ''Italian school'' of criminology mostly disregarded crime as the choice of the criminal and instead saw it as the result of either insanity or behavioral regression to earlier stages in human evolution, which supposedly occurred side-by-side with primitive physical features and meant criminals could be identified by those features.<ref>{{Citation\|author=Stephen Jay Gould\|year=1981\|title=The Mismeasure of Man\|chapter=Measuring Bodies: Two Case Studies on the Apishness of Undesirables\|section=The ape in some of us: criminal anthropology\|publisher=W. W. Norton & Company\|isbn=0-393-01489-4}}</ref> The original form of this theory, from Cesare Lombroso, was modified by his successors to allow room for criminals who did not fit either category. The [[Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (1922–1991)\|Soviet Union]] regarded crime as the product of economic circumstances. The solution to crime implied in their theory was to remove the conditions that create crime.<ref name=":0" />		Several etiologies of crime have been proposed by [[Bourgeoisie\|bourgeois]] criminologists. In the ''classical school'' of criminology, crime was always an exercise of the [[Freedom\|free will]] of the criminal, regardless of circumstances. Since crime was considered a choice, two people who committed the same crime were to be given the same sentence. This theory was adopted during the 18th century and was exemplified in the French Penal Code of 1791. The ''neo-classical school'' left the classical school's theory of complete free will mostly intact but carved out exceptions by defining some criminals as ontologically non-rational. Courts, with the help of scientists, could now decide that a crime was due to "insanity" or "imbecility." The [[Eugenics\|eugenicist]] ''anthropological'' or ''Italian school'' of criminology mostly disregarded crime as the choice of the criminal and instead saw it as the result of either insanity or behavioral regression to earlier stages in human evolution, which supposedly occurred side-by-side with primitive physical features and meant criminals could be identified by those features.<ref>{{Citation\|author=Stephen Jay Gould\|year=1981\|title=The Mismeasure of Man\|chapter=Measuring Bodies: Two Case Studies on the Apishness of Undesirables\|section=The ape in some of us: criminal anthropology\|publisher=W. W. Norton & Company\|isbn=0-393-01489-4}}</ref> The original form of this theory, from Cesare Lombroso, was modified by his successors to allow room for criminals who did not fit either category.<ref name=":0" />

			Bourgeois criminology was historically [[progressive]] compared to earlier times, where judges dealt punishments that were disproportionate to the crime and were allowed personal discretion over a crime's sentence. However, neither [[Idealism\|idealistic]] pure free will nor its opposite, biological [[determinism]], can truly account for and end crime because neither recognizes the class content of crime. The [[Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (1922–1991)\|Soviet Union]] regarded crime as the product of economic circumstances. The solution to crime implied in their theory was to remove the conditions that create crime.<ref name=":0" />

	Discussing prisoners in [[Capitalism\|capitalist]] societies, [[Huey P. Newton]] divides them into "illegitimate capitalists," who accept capitalism but attempt to achieve capitalist ends through illegitimate means and are criminalized, and "political prisoners," who are criminalized for "reject[ing] the legitimacy of the assumptions upon which the society is based."<ref>{{Citation\|author=Huey P. Newton\|year=1970\|title=Prison, Where is Thy Victory?\|title-url=https://abolitionnotes.org/huey-p-newton/prison-where-is-thy-victory-1970}}</ref>		Discussing prisoners in [[Capitalism\|capitalist]] societies, [[Huey P. Newton]] divides them into "illegitimate capitalists," who accept capitalism but attempt to achieve capitalist ends through illegitimate means and are criminalized, and "political prisoners," who are criminalized for "reject[ing] the legitimacy of the assumptions upon which the society is based."<ref>{{Citation\|author=Huey P. Newton\|year=1970\|title=Prison, Where is Thy Victory?\|title-url=https://abolitionnotes.org/huey-p-newton/prison-where-is-thy-victory-1970}}</ref>

75.210.94.84: Described the history of criminology -C:

2025-10-24T19:13:35Z

Described the history of criminology -C:

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:13, 24 October 2025
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{Message box/Stub}}		{{Message box/Stub}}

	'''Crime''' is any action that ~~the~~ [[ruling class]] considers unacceptable.<ref>{{Citation\|author=Mary Stevenson Callcott\|year=1935\|title=Russian Justice\|chapter=The Soviet Theory of Crime\|chapter-url=https://en.prolewiki.org/wiki/Library:Russian_Justice#CHAPTER_II:_THE_SOVIET_THEORY_OF_CRIME\|quote=Or again, speaking more plainly, the [[Marxian]] formula states "that the [[state]] is an organ of oppression of one [[class]] by another; that it sets up an order which legalizes and consolidates this oppression modifying the [[class struggle\|conflict of classes]]." Thus since the state is an organ of class domination, and crime necessarily, by the same definition, is the commission of an act against the interests of the ruling class, a criminal code would be a formulation of penalties imposed for such acts.}}</ref> An act is a crime if it breaks the [[law]].		'''Crime''' is any action that a society's [[ruling class]] considers unacceptable.<ref name=":0">{{Citation\|author=Mary Stevenson Callcott\|year=1935\|title=Russian Justice\|chapter=The Soviet Theory of Crime\|chapter-url=https://en.prolewiki.org/wiki/Library:Russian_Justice#CHAPTER_II:_THE_SOVIET_THEORY_OF_CRIME\|quote=Or again, speaking more plainly, the [[Marxian]] formula states "that the [[state]] is an organ of oppression of one [[class]] by another; that it sets up an order which legalizes and consolidates this oppression modifying the [[class struggle\|conflict of classes]]." Thus since the state is an organ of class domination, and crime necessarily, by the same definition, is the commission of an act against the interests of the ruling class, a criminal code would be a formulation of penalties imposed for such acts.}}</ref> An act is a crime if it breaks the [[law]]. The study of crime is called criminology.

			Several etiologies of crime have been proposed by criminologists. In the ''classical school'' of criminology, crime was always an exercise of the [[Freedom\|free will]] of the criminal. Since crime was considered a choice, two people who committed the same crime were to be given the same sentence. This theory was adopted during the 18th century and was exemplified in the French Penal Code of 1791. It was historically [[progressive]] compared to judges in earlier times, who dealt punishments that were disproportionate to the crime and were allowed personal discretion over a crime's sentence. The ''neo-classical school'' left the classical school's theory of complete free will mostly intact but carved out exceptions by defining some criminals as ontologically non-rational. Courts, with the help of scientists, could now decide that a crime was due to "insanity" or "imbecility." The [[Eugenics\|eugenicist]] ''anthropological'' or ''Italian school'' of criminology mostly disregarded crime as the choice of the criminal and instead saw it as the result of either insanity or behavioral regression to earlier stages in human evolution, which supposedly occurred side-by-side with primitive physical features and meant criminals could be identified by those features.<ref>{{Citation\|author=Stephen Jay Gould\|year=1981\|title=The Mismeasure of Man\|chapter=Measuring Bodies: Two Case Studies on the Apishness of Undesirables\|section=The ape in some of us: criminal anthropology\|publisher=W. W. Norton & Company\|isbn=0-393-01489-4}}</ref> The original form of this theory, from Cesare Lombroso, was modified by his successors to allow room for criminals who did not fit either category. The [[Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (1922–1991)\|Soviet Union]] regarded crime as the product of economic circumstances. The solution to crime implied in their theory was to remove the conditions that create crime.<ref name=":0" />

	Discussing prisoners in [[Capitalism\|capitalist]] societies, [[Huey P. Newton]] divides them into "illegitimate capitalists," who accept capitalism but attempt to achieve capitalist ends through illegitimate means and are criminalized, and "political prisoners," who are criminalized for "reject[ing] the legitimacy of the assumptions upon which the society is based."<ref>{{Citation\|author=Huey P. Newton\|year=1970\|title=Prison, Where is Thy Victory?\|title-url=https://abolitionnotes.org/huey-p-newton/prison-where-is-thy-victory-1970}}</ref>		Discussing prisoners in [[Capitalism\|capitalist]] societies, [[Huey P. Newton]] divides them into "illegitimate capitalists," who accept capitalism but attempt to achieve capitalist ends through illegitimate means and are criminalized, and "political prisoners," who are criminalized for "reject[ing] the legitimacy of the assumptions upon which the society is based."<ref>{{Citation\|author=Huey P. Newton\|year=1970\|title=Prison, Where is Thy Victory?\|title-url=https://abolitionnotes.org/huey-p-newton/prison-where-is-thy-victory-1970}}</ref>

97.242.116.48: Expanded the page -C:

2025-09-14T06:41:05Z

Expanded the page -C:

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:41, 14 September 2025
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{Message box/Stub}}		{{Message box/Stub}}

	'''Crime''' is any action that the [[ruling class]] considers unacceptable.<ref>{{Citation\|author=Mary Stevenson Callcott\|year=1935\|title=Russian Justice\|chapter=The Soviet Theory of Crime\|chapter-url=https://en.prolewiki.org/wiki/Library:Russian_Justice#CHAPTER_II:_THE_SOVIET_THEORY_OF_CRIME\|quote=Or again, speaking more plainly, the [[Marxian]] formula states "that the [[state]] is an organ of oppression of one [[class]] by another; that it sets up an order which legalizes and consolidates this oppression modifying the [[class struggle\|conflict of classes]]." Thus since the state is an organ of class domination, and crime necessarily, by the same definition, is the commission of an act against the interests of the ruling class, a criminal code would be a formulation of penalties imposed for such acts.}}</ref>		'''Crime''' is any action that the [[ruling class]] considers unacceptable.<ref>{{Citation\|author=Mary Stevenson Callcott\|year=1935\|title=Russian Justice\|chapter=The Soviet Theory of Crime\|chapter-url=https://en.prolewiki.org/wiki/Library:Russian_Justice#CHAPTER_II:_THE_SOVIET_THEORY_OF_CRIME\|quote=Or again, speaking more plainly, the [[Marxian]] formula states "that the [[state]] is an organ of oppression of one [[class]] by another; that it sets up an order which legalizes and consolidates this oppression modifying the [[class struggle\|conflict of classes]]." Thus since the state is an organ of class domination, and crime necessarily, by the same definition, is the commission of an act against the interests of the ruling class, a criminal code would be a formulation of penalties imposed for such acts.}}</ref> An act is a crime if it breaks the [[law]].

			Discussing prisoners in [[Capitalism\|capitalist]] societies, [[Huey P. Newton]] divides them into "illegitimate capitalists," who accept capitalism but attempt to achieve capitalist ends through illegitimate means and are criminalized, and "political prisoners," who are criminalized for "reject[ing] the legitimacy of the assumptions upon which the society is based."<ref>{{Citation\|author=Huey P. Newton\|year=1970\|title=Prison, Where is Thy Victory?\|title-url=https://abolitionnotes.org/huey-p-newton/prison-where-is-thy-victory-1970}}</ref>

			[[Al Capone]]'s sincere [[anti-communism]] provides an example of an "illegitimate capitalist" upholding capitalism:<blockquote>[[Bolshevism]] is knocking at our gates. We can’t afford to let it in. We have got to organize ourselves against it, and put our shoulders together and hold fast. We must keep America whole and safe and unspoiled. We must keep the worker away from red literature and red ruses; we must see that his mind remains healthy.<ref>{{Web citation\|author=Cornelius Vanderbilt Jr.\|newspaper=Liberty Magazine\|title=How Al Capone Would Run This Country\|date=1931-08-27\|url=https://myalcaponemuseum.com/id234.htm\|quote=Bolshevism is knocking at our gates. We can't afford to let it in. We've got to organize ourselves against it, and put our shoulders together and hold fast. We need funds to fight famine. [...] We must keep America whole, and safe, and unspoiled. If machines are going to take jobs away from the worker, then he will need to find something else to do. Perhaps he'll get back to the soil. But we must care for him during the period of change. We must keep him away from red literature, red ruses; we must see that his mind remains healthy.}}</ref></blockquote>Explaining why a criminal like Capone would feel this way, [[R. Palme Dutt]] writes:<blockquote>The earnestness of this appeal of a thief and gangster to maintain existing society "unspoiled" in face of the Communist menace might appear at first blush comic; but in fact it is purely reasonable. None have more sincere concern and zeal than thieves to maintain the institution of [[private property]], without which their profession would come to an end, and they would find themselves faced with the unpleasant alternative of having to [[Wage slavery\|work for their living]].<ref>{{Citation\|author=R. Palme Dutt\|year=1935\|title=Fascism and Social Revolution\|title-url=https://marxistleninists.org/Reference/Palme%20Dutt/fascism_and_social_revolution.htm\|chapter=Chapter IX: The Theory and Practice of Fascism\|chapter-url=https://marxistleninists.org/Reference/Palme%20Dutt/chapter%209.htm\|section=2. Demagogy as a Science\|page=120-121\|pdf=https://www.marxists.org/archive/dutt/1935/fascism-social-revolution-2.pdf}}</ref></blockquote>

	== References ==		== References ==

Ledlecreeper27 at 14:49, 28 December 2024

2024-12-28T14:49:27Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:49, 28 December 2024
Line 4:		Line 4:

	== References ==		== References ==
			<references />
			[[Category:Class society]]
			[[Category:Law]]

Ledlecreeper27: Created

2024-06-12T13:17:22Z

Created

New page

{{Message box/Stub}}

'''Crime''' is any action that the [[ruling class]] considers unacceptable.<ref>{{Citation|author=Mary Stevenson Callcott|year=1935|title=Russian Justice|chapter=The Soviet Theory of Crime|chapter-url=https://en.prolewiki.org/wiki/Library:Russian_Justice#CHAPTER_II:_THE_SOVIET_THEORY_OF_CRIME|quote=Or again, speaking more plainly, the [[Marxian]] formula states "that the [[state]] is an organ of oppression of one [[class]] by another; that it sets up an order which legalizes and consolidates this oppression modifying the [[class struggle|conflict of classes]]." Thus since the state is an organ of class domination, and crime necessarily, by the same definition, is the commission of an act against the interests of the ruling class, a criminal code would be a formulation of penalties imposed for such acts.}}</ref>

== References ==

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:47, 25 October 2025
Line 3:		Line 3:
	'''Crime''' is any action that a society's [[ruling class]] considers unacceptable.<ref name=":0">{{Citation\|author=Mary Stevenson Callcott\|year=1935\|title=Russian Justice\|chapter=The Soviet Theory of Crime\|chapter-url=https://en.prolewiki.org/wiki/Library:Russian_Justice#CHAPTER_II:_THE_SOVIET_THEORY_OF_CRIME\|quote=Or again, speaking more plainly, the [[Marxian]] formula states "that the [[state]] is an organ of oppression of one [[class]] by another; that it sets up an order which legalizes and consolidates this oppression modifying the [[class struggle\|conflict of classes]]." Thus since the state is an organ of class domination, and crime necessarily, by the same definition, is the commission of an act against the interests of the ruling class, a criminal code would be a formulation of penalties imposed for such acts.}}</ref> An act is a crime if it breaks the [[law]]. The study of crime is called criminology.		'''Crime''' is any action that a society's [[ruling class]] considers unacceptable.<ref name=":0">{{Citation\|author=Mary Stevenson Callcott\|year=1935\|title=Russian Justice\|chapter=The Soviet Theory of Crime\|chapter-url=https://en.prolewiki.org/wiki/Library:Russian_Justice#CHAPTER_II:_THE_SOVIET_THEORY_OF_CRIME\|quote=Or again, speaking more plainly, the [[Marxian]] formula states "that the [[state]] is an organ of oppression of one [[class]] by another; that it sets up an order which legalizes and consolidates this oppression modifying the [[class struggle\|conflict of classes]]." Thus since the state is an organ of class domination, and crime necessarily, by the same definition, is the commission of an act against the interests of the ruling class, a criminal code would be a formulation of penalties imposed for such acts.}}</ref> An act is a crime if it breaks the [[law]]. The study of crime is called criminology.

	Several etiologies of crime have been proposed by criminologists. In the ''classical school'' of criminology, crime was always an exercise of the [[Freedom\|free will]] of the criminal. Since crime was considered a choice, two people who committed the same crime were to be given the same sentence. This theory was adopted during the 18th century and was exemplified in the French Penal Code of 1791~~. It was historically [[progressive]] compared to judges in earlier times, who dealt punishments that were disproportionate to the crime and were allowed personal discretion over a crime's sentence~~. The ''neo-classical school'' left the classical school's theory of complete free will mostly intact but carved out exceptions by defining some criminals as ontologically non-rational. Courts, with the help of scientists, could now decide that a crime was due to "insanity" or "imbecility." The [[Eugenics\|eugenicist]] ''anthropological'' or ''Italian school'' of criminology mostly disregarded crime as the choice of the criminal and instead saw it as the result of either insanity or behavioral regression to earlier stages in human evolution, which supposedly occurred side-by-side with primitive physical features and meant criminals could be identified by those features.<ref>{{Citation\|author=Stephen Jay Gould\|year=1981\|title=The Mismeasure of Man\|chapter=Measuring Bodies: Two Case Studies on the Apishness of Undesirables\|section=The ape in some of us: criminal anthropology\|publisher=W. W. Norton & Company\|isbn=0-393-01489-4}}</ref> The original form of this theory, from Cesare Lombroso, was modified by his successors to allow room for criminals who did not fit either category. The [[Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (1922–1991)\|Soviet Union]] regarded crime as the product of economic circumstances. The solution to crime implied in their theory was to remove the conditions that create crime.<ref name=":0" />		Several etiologies of crime have been proposed by [[Bourgeoisie\|bourgeois]] criminologists. In the ''classical school'' of criminology, crime was always an exercise of the [[Freedom\|free will]] of the criminal, regardless of circumstances. Since crime was considered a choice, two people who committed the same crime were to be given the same sentence. This theory was adopted during the 18th century and was exemplified in the French Penal Code of 1791. The ''neo-classical school'' left the classical school's theory of complete free will mostly intact but carved out exceptions by defining some criminals as ontologically non-rational. Courts, with the help of scientists, could now decide that a crime was due to "insanity" or "imbecility." The [[Eugenics\|eugenicist]] ''anthropological'' or ''Italian school'' of criminology mostly disregarded crime as the choice of the criminal and instead saw it as the result of either insanity or behavioral regression to earlier stages in human evolution, which supposedly occurred side-by-side with primitive physical features and meant criminals could be identified by those features.<ref>{{Citation\|author=Stephen Jay Gould\|year=1981\|title=The Mismeasure of Man\|chapter=Measuring Bodies: Two Case Studies on the Apishness of Undesirables\|section=The ape in some of us: criminal anthropology\|publisher=W. W. Norton & Company\|isbn=0-393-01489-4}}</ref> The original form of this theory, from Cesare Lombroso, was modified by his successors to allow room for criminals who did not fit either category.<ref name=":0" />

			Bourgeois criminology was historically [[progressive]] compared to earlier times, where judges dealt punishments that were disproportionate to the crime and were allowed personal discretion over a crime's sentence. However, neither [[Idealism\|idealistic]] pure free will nor its opposite, biological [[determinism]], can truly account for and end crime because neither recognizes the class content of crime. The [[Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (1922–1991)\|Soviet Union]] regarded crime as the product of economic circumstances. The solution to crime implied in their theory was to remove the conditions that create crime.<ref name=":0" />

	Discussing prisoners in [[Capitalism\|capitalist]] societies, [[Huey P. Newton]] divides them into "illegitimate capitalists," who accept capitalism but attempt to achieve capitalist ends through illegitimate means and are criminalized, and "political prisoners," who are criminalized for "reject[ing] the legitimacy of the assumptions upon which the society is based."<ref>{{Citation\|author=Huey P. Newton\|year=1970\|title=Prison, Where is Thy Victory?\|title-url=https://abolitionnotes.org/huey-p-newton/prison-where-is-thy-victory-1970}}</ref>		Discussing prisoners in [[Capitalism\|capitalist]] societies, [[Huey P. Newton]] divides them into "illegitimate capitalists," who accept capitalism but attempt to achieve capitalist ends through illegitimate means and are criminalized, and "political prisoners," who are criminalized for "reject[ing] the legitimacy of the assumptions upon which the society is based."<ref>{{Citation\|author=Huey P. Newton\|year=1970\|title=Prison, Where is Thy Victory?\|title-url=https://abolitionnotes.org/huey-p-newton/prison-where-is-thy-victory-1970}}</ref>