Critical criminology has suffered from poor theoretical development. This has resulted not only in confusion with other radical criminologies, but also in distorting the objectives of Marxist inquiry. This thesis examines this confusion via discussions of of class, the state, criminality and the scientific and ideological nature of Marxism. The objective is to demonstrate that a Marxist "critical criminology is both possible and desirable. In order to avoid confusion with other perspectives, and to avoid an overly deterministic analysis, it is argued that critical criminology must recognize the importance of the distinctions between classes-in-themselves, classes-for-themselves and class fractions. Without a full understanding of these concepts it is possible to see the state as either a simple tool of a dominant elite, or an autonomous entity having a life of its own, rather than something created and controlled by human action. Further as a result of an overly simplistic analysis of the state it is possible to view crime as inevitably "revolutionary" rather than as something which may equally be counter to the interests of the working classes. Thus throughout the discussions of class, state and crime it is emphasized that much of critical criminology has left out the dialectics of Marxian analysis. It is the failure to include the dialectic which has led some critics to argue that critical criminology is simply "ideology" or "unscientific." Thus care is taken in the final chapter to specify that Marxism is both ideological and scientific. It is ideological to the extent that it is to act as a political statement of the interests of the working class in the effort at crime control, and it is scientific to the extent that it offers an analysis of the way in which social formations organise their social, political and economic life. / Thesis / Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

No description available.

This paper examines the current state of border hardening against refugees in the European Union and Australia through the lens of state crime. Border hardening strategies are described for both of these areas and a theoretical basis of state crime victimology is used to examine the refugees who encounter this border hardening. The present study analyzes two data sets on border deaths, one for the European Union and one for Australia, to examine the demographics of the refugees who perish while attempting to transgress the border. Results indicated that there remains a significant amount of missing data, suggesting that official methods of record-keeping are necessary to determine the most basic demographics, such as gender and age, so analyses can be run to determine significance in this area. One clear finding was that migrants most frequently die from drowning (EU: 83.6%; AU: 93%) compared to any other cause. Also, there is indication that those from disadvantaged areas of origin (such as the Middle East and Africa) are more likely to die in the borderlands than others in the dataset. Practical implications of the findings are discussed along with suggestions for future research.

This dissertation seeks to explain the uncanny continuity of hegemonic US foreign policy across presidential administrations and the breakdown of the rule of law as evidenced by unadjudicated state and elite criminality. It finds that a nebulous deep state predominates over politics and society. This deep state is comprised of institutions that advance the interests of the politico-economic elite through nexuses connecting the overworld of the corporate rich, the underworld of organized crime, and mediating national security organizations. To investigate the evolution of the state, the tripartite state construct is elucidated. It is a synthesis and expansion of three extant approaches—dual state theory, theories of the power elite, and the deep politics framework which explores the impactful forces and institutions whose influence is typically repressed rather than acknowledged in mainstream discourse. The tripartite state is comprised of the democratic or public state, the security state, and the deep state. A key contention herein is that the deep state developed alongside postwar US exceptionism—the institutionalized abrogation of the rule of law, ostensibly on the basis of “national security.” Theories of hegemony and empire are analyzed and critiqued and refined. To wit: the post-World War II US empire has been sustained by hegemonic institutions which rely on various degrees of consent and coercion—both in a dyadic sense but increasingly through structural dominance following the collapse of Bretton Woods. Rival hypotheses related to the state and US foreign policy are analyzed and critiqued. To explore the concept of a deep state within a nominal democracy, open democratic modes of power are contrasted with top-down or dark power. Through process tracing, the historical evolution of the US state is delineated, charting the means by which US imperial hegemony was reproduced. Presidential administrations and the Watergate scandal serve as case studies of sorts, illustrating the deep state’s role in the general thrust of postwar US politics—imperial hegemony over the international system. Finally, various deep state institutions are examined along with a discussion of generalizability, applications, and implications of the foregoing scholarship. / Political Science