Untitled

The Holocaust and Disciplinary Myopia in Criminology and Sociology: Social injury as a response to the challenges of legal formalism

“…Cunneen ( 2016 ) similarly noted that legal formalism creates a type of disciplinary hypocrisy, in that “the issue of human rights abuses goes to the heart of many questions which criminology has had so much to say about in the case of individual behaviour, but so little to say about when it comes to large scale organised and legitimised criminal behaviour by state agencies” (p. 137). The epistemic implications of distraction and exclusion are significant, as Michalowski ( 2009 ) cautioned: “limiting criminological analyses to only those harmful actions that have been prohibited through the workings of the hegemonic power structures inherent in law formation renders criminological inquiry constitutive of the dominant social order rather than analyses of that order”, and he considered this the “most significant factor placing the power crimes of empire outside the consciousness of criminological inquiry” (p. 307 and 314 respectively; see also: Baer & Chambliss, 1997 ).…”

The Colombian National Police and the Politics of Crime Control Evaluations

“…There is no body of data that is more consistently and brilliantly critiqued than officially gathered and processed crime data, and yet it is repeatedly used without apology in every major journal that publishes work on crime and crime control. (see also Baer and Chambliss 1997) The problematic nature of relying on official crime data is well known to criminologists, yet researchers continue 'skating on thin ice' as though biased criminal justice data are issues to be corrected 'as statistical techniques become more sophisticated and survey methods improve' (Xu 2014: 162 are seldom accounted for in mainstream criminological literature (Chambliss 2004(Chambliss , 2001(Chambliss , 1994see Copson 2014;Manning 2009).…”