Criminology is a subject that is a very complex debate within the United States in that there are a plethora of theories attempting to explain why there is such a high crime rate. Many of these theories link the heightened crime to the disparity between the class systems that has an affect on the educational level of the citizens, (Gesualdi, Louis, 2014). Other theories relate to the lack of connection between morality and the current generation, (Gesualdi, Louis, 2014). The final theory is that crime is directly tied to the lack of jobs, (Gesualdi, Louis, 2014). These three theories have been categorized as the radical left view, liberal view, and conservative view in Gesualdi’s book titled A Peacemaking Approach to Criminology. In my viewpoint the conservative view is the principal cause of the heighted crime rate that we witness today within the United States.
In order to understand the conservative view, it is imperative to ascertain what the conservatives are essentially trying to protect in modern society. According to the conservative view, the moral order of society is essentially crumbing due to the weakening religious values and the immense decline of the two parent family, (Gesualdi, Louis, 2014). The conservatives believe that this causes children to get less attention and to be more inclined to commit crimes, (Gesualdi, Louis, 2014). In the conservative view, this is the essential problem that leads to crime. That being said, the conservative view proposes that the solution to this issue in society is that there has to be a significant step towards strengthening the modern family and the culture’s emphasis on good an effective parenting, (Gesualdi, Louis, 2014). Furthermore, conservatives believe that law enforcement must be stricter when a crime has taken place, (Gesualdi, Louis, 2014). Through these proposed objectives, conservatives feel that they will be able to substantially reduce the crime rate.
In order to give another dimension to the conservative view, it is important to assess what the book discusses with relation to both the liberal view and radical left view. Through analyzing these two strategies in depth, one understands the subject of the book in how it paints a multi-layered portrayal of what criminology is with regards to sociology principles because it highlights the underlying fabrics of society that lead to crime. Commencing with the radical left view, the book illustrates that the problem of crime is related to the substantial economic inequality of a capitalist society because it promotes criminal activity by the lower class who are unable to succeed by legitimate means, (Gesualdi, Louis, 2014). This is a fascinating comparison to the conservative argument of lack of morality; however, in my view a classist system is not sufficient to demonstrate the sociological principles needed to teach a youth to grow up into an individual that commits crime. Crime is derived from the lack of morals shown by the parents in the home due to the compromised family unit that exists in the modern society. With both parents working, it become difficult to provide adequate parenting to the children, which causes them to have too much free time and commit crimes as a result. The radical left view’s proposal as a solution to eliminate the class system is unrealistic as outlined in the book because there always has to be inequality because otherwise you see a model such as Venezuela’s current state of affairs where the country cannot afford the socialist programs that were an attempt to equalize the classes and distribute the wealth.
The liberal view, in the book, argues that lack of jobs is what leads to crime because families are forced to do what they have to in order to survive, (Gesualdi, Louis, 2014). This, in theory, makes logical sense; however, it does not address what is required in sociological principals to cause someone to cross that moral line. Sure, poverty is an issue that is tied to petty theft; however, when thinking of higher tier crime, poverty is not the direct cause of such lack of morality as the liberal’s state. According to the liberal view, government should be using resources to not construct more prisons, but to provide more jobs where individuals are desperate and in need of work, (Gesualdi, Louis, 2014). While this may be true, it does not address where this extra funding could possible come from and it also does not address the science behind the crime that the conservative theory does. In contrast to this solution, conservatives believe that the crime starts with the upbringing rather than the poverty, (Gesualdi, Louis, 2014).
The reason that the conservative view is the ideal approach is because the extreme liberal and the liberal view deal with the problem after the fact. In the book, it is discussed with these three different theories regarding how to combat this situation. Upon looking at these three approaches clearly, the state is going to have to expend far less resources in the long run by starting at the root of the problem, which is the family unit. This assessment is crucial in understanding how Gesualdi is arguing his viewpoints.
Weighting Gesualdi’s viewpoints into account, combating crime has been focused for far too long on a more racial standpoint when the sociological factors that contribute to one’s propensity to commit crime have nothing to do with race, but rather lack of proper upbringing. By addressing the lack of upbringing the state is going to do a more preventative approach through implying conservative ideals. Furthermore, conservative ideals are not necessarily tied to religion, which is a common misconception. Conservative ideals are actually tied to the approach of family and morals. Families can be a wide variety of faiths and still not commit crimes necessarily because the children’s education comes from the lessons taught by the parents and the experiences that they allow their children to be exposed to, (Gesualdi, Louis, 2014). By keeping the traditional family unit together, it will be quite simple to witness a substantial reduction in the rate of crime that is committed.
One potential pitfall with the conservative approach that needs to be addressed is what morals the families are instructed to teach their children, (Gesualdi, Louis, 2014). There is going to have to be a demonstration regarding which potential morals are going to be conducive to what society needs in order to put a positive foot forward with regards to the act of committing crime. Some potential examples of how to properly combat this with the conservative method would be to provide incentives for marriage counseling with parents, for example. This is a way that is non-denominational to keep the parents together in one family with their child. Additionally, there could be a program that incentivizes families to not have a two-parent working household. This would allow one parent to be with the children during their formative years, which could enhance the conservative model of thinking. Lastly, there could be an incentive for parents to have children later on in their marriage with taxes in order to get through the most difficult time of marriage without children. All of these factors could play a positive role in keeping the family unit together while promoting effective parenting.
The science behind what makes an individual commit a crime is a fascinating one. Gesualdi does a sensational job discussing the various theories and how each one leads to the individual snapping and going against their morals. Gesualdi’s conservative model is the most important because it essentially targets the source of the sociological issue pertaining to why an individual commits crime and how to combat it by attempting to keep the traditional family unit together. Through applying the conservative approach, it is highly likely that one will be able to see a substantial drop in crime overall.
References
Gesualdi, Louis. “A Peacemaking Approach to Criminology.” University Press of America Inc., Lanham, Maryland. 2014.
