-
Essay / A Study of Deviance Among Governments and International Powers
Table of ContentsDefinitionPunishmentCase Study: Crime Against Business and the StateCase Study: International DevianceCase Study: HarassmentConclusionThe Study of Deviance as a Sub- Overall sociology tends to focus on the most common forms of deviance, such as petty crime and theft. These examples are numerous and are not difficult to find. Theories and definitions of these deviant domains differ only slightly and, although theorized differently, ultimately reach similar conclusions regarding the definition of deviance. Researchers define deviance as “a challenge to commonly accepted societal norms” (Nuncic, 2005, p. 2). A divergent subset of the study, deviance in politics and government, is both unique and intrinsically important to the well-being of citizens around the world. United States citizens, in particular, "continue to be victims of suspicious incidents that benefit high-ranking public officials, and yet Americans have no way of knowing whether these incidents are unavoidable events or, On the contrary, crimes initiated or facilitated by the officials themselves. (DeHaven, 2006, p. 332). It can be argued that deviant behavior on such a scale, to the point of involving politics and government institutions, is more dangerous than any minor crime. For this reason, this research is imperative to uncover the true mechanisms behind the theory of political deviance. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why violent video games should not be banned”?Get the original essayThis research aims to investigate the deviant actions of governments and international powers in the field of sociology. As there are many forms of political deviance, this article will cover the scope of political deviance, the punishment of these crimes, and the divergent branches through case studies that cover examples of deviance in the United States and the global community . DefinitionThe definition of political deviance deviance has fluctuated with the revolutions of sovereignties throughout the world. A combined definition of political deviance is an act of deviance that has social motivations, crimes of passion, including murder, and an altruistic belief (Schafer 1971; Schroeder 1919; and Stark 1995). In Schafer's 1971 article, he argues that social motivations are imperative in defining a crime as political. He quotes Enrico Ferri, a prominent social scientist, who asserted that "political offenders are not criminals, but 'honest and normal men, led astray by their political ideas'" (Schafer 384). This distinction from Schafer's argument supports the idea that political criminals are elevated to a higher status than common criminals based on their perceived motivations, which range from personal wealth to social defiance. This is further reinforced by the distinction established between the convicted offender and the conventional offender (Schafer). In his analysis of political criminals, he notes that “the real political criminal is a pseudo-criminal and must not be considered in the same way as the ordinary criminal” (Schafer, 1920, p. 311). Schafer notes that the conventional offender acts in a way that furthers his or her self-interest and tends to lack motivation or meaningful justification. This criminal may steal food out of hunger or money and jewelry out of greed, but he has no higher, overriding social or institutional purpose for doing so. These actions can bedefined as short, simple and limited. On the other hand, the convicted criminal strives to achieve a greater social goal. Schafer argues that the convicted criminal has an “altruistic-communal motivation rather than a selfish impulse” (Schafer 384). Schafer argues that another difference between conventional crime and convicted crime is the feeling regarding the action taken. A conventional criminal will feel anxiety about carrying out his plan, and will often be agitated and guilty once the crime has been committed. On the other hand, the convicted criminal will be eager to commit the crime and will then seek media attention and fame in order to further promote the social motive (Schafer). This can be attributed to the noble nature of a political crime rather than the shame and fear of committing a common crime. The noble nature of political crime refers to the greater political and social consequences that arise from demonstrations and protests. Schafer argues that the political criminal seeks fame and attention after committing the crime in order to maximize the reach and impact of his crime on the population. While the above definitions focus on a single strategic actor, another segment of the literature highlights state corruption as a political crime. . Green and Ward define corruption as “the abuse of public office for private gain” (11). They also refer to a form of organizational deviance, which involves the use of corruption to achieve a set objective. This form of deviance can be motivated by profit-minded individuals with the means to interfere in government-civilian relations or by power-hungry political actors with sufficient corporate and lobbyist support to get elected. . The difference between definitions of communal deviance and larger-scale deviance, such as organizational and political deviance, is the range of people who are affected. Large-scale deviant activities such as government corruption are defined in part by the number and degree of afflictions suffered by the population. Green and Ward note that rights can be transformed into goods for entire nations, such as water and education (18). When this happens, products tend to be scarce and people have difficulty accessing them without money or political influence. This is an example of the negative effect of political deviance. On the other hand, deviance on this scale can have positive effects. Sometimes the literature emphasizes that deviance is necessary to overthrow an oppressive regime or systematic forms of oppression. Japan “is an exception in that corruption favors residents of poorer rural districts over urban voters” (Green and Ward, 2004, p. 18). This is an interesting dichotomy, because although common crime is rarely found to have positive effects, some forms of political deviance are necessary to prevent or delay human rights violations perpetrated by a state actor. . A government can interfere with the work of another government when human rights violations take place to protect the citizens of the other nation. A different segment of the literature relating to the definition of a political criminal or political crime is presented in the work of Stark (1995). Stark posits the idea that, given the public opinion of political actors, politicians and government officials can be indicted using the appearance standard with respect to official irregularities. Stark uses theWILD VS trial. United States of 1982 to illustrate his point. In this case, a United States appeals court decided to uphold the firing of a Chicago Housing and Urban Development employee named Lawrence A. Wild. The offense warranting dismissal was that Wild failed to track rental housing under his name, in his private interests, to the point that a newspaper commented on the decaying property (Stark, 326). Stark points to the standard for U.S. officials that officials can be prosecuted for crimes they committed as well as misdemeanors they were perceived to have committed. This is an extreme difference in the definition of political criminal activity compared to common law crimes. To be tried for a common crime, the prosecutor must clearly indicate to a judge and a jury composed of the accused's peers that the accused committed the crime in question. For public officials, on the other hand, the mere idea that a person may have committed an offense worthy of dismissal can give rise to a dismissal charge. There are several reasons for this, as pointed out by Stark. The first is that, because the public must place a high level of trust in politicians and public officials, perceptions of official impropriety must be kept to a minimum so as not to destabilize the governmental situation. and parole, and fines. There is a court established in each district of the United States that adjudicates criminal and civil cases brought by individual or class actors. However, when looking at political crimes, there are far fewer bodies capable of bringing charges against the state and political actors. Ferrari notes that in theory, "people whose desire is to change the social or industrial order and who commit what would be considered a purely political crime if the act were strictly political [based on the laws of era] must be punished.” treated as political prisoners” (1920, p. 314). While this relies on solid logic and thinking, the most difficult aspect of this argument is the execution. For example, at a hearing in New York regarding the falsification of an Irish passport, a political prisoner was given a small fine as well as a guilty plea because the prisoner's motivations were political, even though all another perpetrator would have been sentenced to a long sentence. imprisonment (Ferrari 1920). This marked difference between sanctions for common law offenses and political offenses can be attributed to the motivations of the actor. Although Ferrari clearly emphasizes this difference in his work, he also states that "if today we penetrate the mind of the political criminal, we emerge determined to exterminate him all the more firmly because we found him infected dangerous ideas. to the established order” (315). This quote from Ferrari's work shows that people would like to see political criminals held to judicial standards, but the judge's decision may not always be in line with public opinion. plane crash, they further examine the role that corporate and state crime plays in the field of deviant sociology. They note that while the exact definition of deviance differs from person to person, those who specialize in the nuts and bolts of federal or state crimes agree that it is "unlawful or socially harmful acts committed for the benefit of a State or its agencies, and not for the benefit of a State or its agencies.” the personal gain of an individual state agent” (Matthews and Kauzlarich, 2000, p. 281). They even go so far as to assert that criminalitygovernmental, state and political lends itself to organizational crime trends. Examples of state and corporate crimes cited by the authors include the Challenger explosion, US nuclear weapons, and factory fires. This particular case study focuses on the crash and explosion of ValuJet Flight 592. There are two branching theories regarding state-corporate crime: state-initiated and state-facilitated. While both meet the criteria for being classified as deviant behaviors, the mechanisms that accompany them differ. State-initiated deviance when companies under contract with the government engage in deviance with government approval. Matthews and Kauzlarich note that in these cases, a government and a private company share and work toward the same goal. State-facilitated deviance exists when regulatory extensions of government fail to recognize and expel deviant business activities. These acts are usually an omission rather than a commission, but they are nonetheless considered deviant (Matthews & Kauzlarich, 2000, p. 284). ValuJet was a fast-growing company, earning nearly $6.8 million in four years (Matthews and Kauzlarich, 2000, p. 284). Part of their success was purchasing and repairing planes deemed problematic. The company responsible for repairing these planes and preparing them for flight was SabreTech, based in Miami. Several maintenance tasks were requested, including inspection of the oxygen generators. In March 1996, SabreTech crews began removing and replacing the old oxygen generators with newer models, but the safety caps were never replaced on the old oxygen tanks (Matthews and Kauzlarich, 2000, p. 287). The Federal Aviation Association explicitly states that although companies like ValuJet are allowed to subcontract to mechanical companies, the final evaluation of the aircraft and the materials transported with it rests with ValuJet. Following a series of communications problems, a box containing unsecured oxygen tanks was loaded onto the flight following previous mechanical work. Just moments after leaving the tarmac at Miami Airport, the plane caught fire and all 105 passengers and five crew members were killed (Matthews and Kauzlarich, 2000, p. 285). The tragedy has left family members, lawmakers and the American public perplexed. Who was really responsible for the disaster? Although the Federal Aviation Association's guidelines imply that ValuJet had responsibility for overseeing and regulating SabreTech's maintenance operations, it is also clear that the Federal Aviation Association itself bears some responsibility, since it is charged with the responsibility of regulating the entire industry. This is an example of state and state-facilitated corporate crime. In this case, both the private and non-private sectors were working toward a similar goal of saving money and becoming more efficient. Upon further investigation of the incident, it appeared that the FAA “attempted to get ValuJet to comply with federal standards rather than impose heavy penalties” (Matthews and Kauzlarich, 2000, p. 290). By withholding penalties and fines, the industry itself maintains a sense of financial security. In this quest for efficiency and cost-saving measures, the Federal Aviation Association has failed to regulate itself and the industries within it. A closer look at the company also revealed that ValuJet and SabreTech were both guilty of cutting corners. ValuJet, asthat a start-up likely to fail in the first few years, resorted to procedures such as "using older aircraft in various stages of disrepair, outsourcing all its maintenance and granting salaries and very low employee benefits” (Matthews and Kauzlarich, 2000, p.293). SabreTech blamed the monitoring of the oxygen tanks on the fact that for each day of maintenance beyond the originally scheduled date, they would incur a loss of approximately $2,500. This forced them to speed up the process or risk losing the business altogether. Matthews and Kauzlarich blame the profit motive for the three companies' inability to maintain the integrity of the plane. They also call this "normative corporate behavior," insinuating that these state and corporate criminal acts are frequently committed in the United States, but few people realize it. The impact of these examples of political and governmental deviance is far-reaching, as these governing bodies are charged with ensuring the safety of American citizens. When they fail to meet their demands, who is left to regulate them? These acts of deviance endanger ordinary Americans, and there is undoubtedly a need for careful attention to detail. An article by Miroslav Nincic discusses cases of deviant behavior in the study of international relations and political institutions. It does not focus on two military powers fighting vigorously against each other, but rather intends to capture the deviant behavior of the oppressed, the "outlaws, reactionary states, thugs and renegades" (Nincic , 2005, p. This new approach to classic power politics offers an interesting insight into the world of deviant behavior on the international level. Notes that, "as deviance refers to a challenge to commonly accepted societal norms, international deviance refers to a disregard for fundamental standards of conduct adopted by the global community” (2005, p. 2). Just as each society has its own set of standards, so does the global community. An example of violation of international norms given by Nincic is the French Revolution. At the time of this revolution, the global norm was the monarch, established by the Treaty of Utrecht in 1713. Violation of this norm caused panic and fear in European countries. This caused other governments to declare their obligation to the monarchs and the stabilization of the monarch in the region. However, this intense desire to stabilize the monarch ended up destabilizing the European continent, leading to several revolutions around 1815, including the Bolshevik revolution. The Bolshevik Revolution was seen as a direct threat to Western values and thus sent a catalyst abroad (Nincic, 2005, p. 10). One of the most interesting aspects of international deviance is the impact we can see on other regions of the world. world. In the case of the French and Bolshevik revolutions, the greatest repercussions were felt in Western democracies like the United States. This fear led President Wilson to send troops to Russia, where the Bolshevik regime was confronting the Japanese in Siberia (Nincic, 2005, p. 10). When we think about these acts of revolutionary deviance, it becomes interesting to see their impact. Although these acts are not intended to harm or harm a society or individual members of a society, their consequences differ depending on the point of view. In this example, the government is at a disadvantage, but the citizens get all the power. Case study: harassment A third case study brings the subject back to the United States, in the state of Alabama. Richard Arrington was.