Abstract
This paper proposes to examine some of the core philosophical issues to have arisen out of the recent calls to move “beyond criminology”. It will be claimed that the dismissal of crime as a “fictive event” is premature, as crime does indeed have an “ontological reality”. Nevertheless, it will be asserted that the relation between harm and crime is contingent rather than necessary. Accordingly, this paper will argue that there is merit to the claim that we should unify research on social harm through the creation of a new field, a step which would have the added benefit of constructing an alternative venue for crimes of the powerful scholars who wish to explore the destructive practices of states and corporations unconstrained. This paper, therefore, will also offer a dialectical definition of social harm based upon classical Marxist strains of ontological thought.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bukharin, N. (2003). Imperialism and world economy. London: Bookmarks.
Bukharin, N. (2005). Philosophical arabesque. London: Pluto Press.
Callinicos, A. (1987). Making history: agency, structure, and change in social theory. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Callinicos, A. (2007). Does capitalism need the state system? Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 20(4), 533–549.
Donaldson, M., & Good, K. (1988). Articulated agricultural development: traditional and capitalist agricultures in Papua New Guinea. London: Aldershot.
Green, P. J., & Ward, T. (2000). State crime, human rights, and the limits of criminology. Social Justice, 27(1), 101–115.
Green, P. J., & Ward, T. (2004). State crime: Governments, violence and corruption. London: Pluto Press.
Harman, C. (1984). Explaining the crisis. London: Bookmarks.
Harvey, D. (1996). Justice, nature and the geography of difference. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Harvey, D. (2003). The new imperialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hillyard, P., & Tombs, S. (2004). Beyond criminology? In P. Hillyard, C. Pantazis, S. Tombs, & D. Gordon (Eds.), Beyond criminology: Taking harm seriously (pp. 10–29). London: Pluto Press.
Hillyard, P., & Tombs, S. (2007). From ‘crime’ to social harm? Crime, Law and Social Change, 48(1–2), 9–25.
Hirst, P. Q. (1975). Marx and Engels on law, crime and morality. In I. Taylor, P. Walton, & J. Young (Eds.), Critical Criminology (pp. 203–232). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Hirst, P. Q. (1975). Radical deviancy theory and Marxism: a reply to Taylor and Walton. In I. Taylor, P. Walton, & J. Young (Eds.), Critical Criminology (pp. 238–244). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Ilyenkov, E. V. (1982). The dialectics of the abstract and the concrete in Marx’s Capital. Moscow: Progress Publishers.
Lenin, V. I. (1960). Collected works v.38. London: Lawrence & Wishart.
Lukács, G. (1971). History and class consciousness. London: Merlin Press.
Lukács, G. (1974). Conversations with Lukács. London: Merlin Press.
Lukács, G. (1978). The ontology of social being: 2. Marx. London: Merlin Press.
Lukács, G. (1980). The ontology of social being: 3. labour. London: Merlin Press.
Lukács, G. (1989). A conversation with Georg Lukács. In J. Marcus & Z. Tarr (Eds.), Georg Lukács: theory, culture, and politics (pp. 207–218). New Jersey: Transaction Inc.
Marx, K. (1959). Economic and philosophic manuscripts of 1844. Moscow: Progress Publishers.
Marx, K. (1973). Grundrisse. London: Penguin.
Marx, K. (1976). Capital volume 1. London: Penguin.
Marx, K. (1978). The poverty of philosophy. Moscow: Progress Publishers.
Marx, K. (1981). Capital volume 3. London: Penguin.
Marx, K., & Engels, F. (1957). The holy family. London: Lawrence & Wishart.
Marx, K., & Engels, F. (1968). The German ideology. London: Lawrence & Wishart.
Marx, K., & Engels, F. (1982). Selected correspondence. Moscow: Progress Publishers.
Mészáros, I. (1987). Custom, tradition, legality: a key problem in the dialectic of base and superstructure. In W. Outhwaite & M. Mulkay (Eds.), Social Theory and Social Criticism: Essays for Tom Bottomore (pp. 53–82). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Mikhailov, F. (1980). The riddle of the self. Moscow: Progress Publishers.
Ollman, B. (2003). Dance of the dialectic: steps in Marx’s method. Chicago: University of Illinios.
O’Malley, P. (1987). Marxist theory and Marxist criminology. Crime and Social Justice, 29, 70–87.
Pemberton, S. (2007). Social harm future(s): exploring the potential of the social harm approach. Crime, Law and Social Change, 48(1–2), 27–41.
Schwendinger, H., & Schwendinger, J. (1975). Defenders of order or guardians of human rights? In I. Taylor, P. Walton, & J. Young (Eds.), Critical Criminology (pp. 113–146). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Schwendinger, H., & Schwendinger, J. (1977). Social class and the definition of crime. Crime and Social Justice, 7, 4–13.
Tappan, P. (1946). Who is the criminal? American Sociological Review, 12(6), 96–102.
Tombs, S., & Whyte, D. (2007). Safety crimes. Devon: Willan Publishing.
Ward, T. (2004). State harms. In P. Hillyard, C. Pantazis, S. Tombs, & D. Gordon (Eds.), Beyond criminology: Taking harm seriously (pp. 84–100). London: Pluto Press.
Ward, T., & Green, P. J. (2000). Legitimacy, civil society, and state crime. Social Justice, 27(4), 76–93.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lasslett, K. Crime or social harm? A dialectical perspective. Crime Law Soc Change 54, 1–19 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-010-9241-x
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-010-9241-x