Critical, Marxist and Conflict theories in criminology offer a fundamental critique of traditional crime theories that focus on individual pathology or socialisation failures. Instead of asking why individuals offend in isolation, these perspectives explore how definitions of crime, mechanisms of control, and punishment practices are shaped by social inequalities, power structures, and historical conflicts. They argue that criminal justice is not neutral but is used to maintain existing hierarchies and suppress dissent.
These theories see crime as socially constructed in ways that protect the interests of dominant groups while criminalising the behaviour of marginalised communities. In doing so, they expose the ideological role of law, the unequal application of justice, and the hidden violence of social and economic systems.
Critical and Conflict CriminologyThe scientific study of crime, criminal behavior, prevention, and societal reactions to deviance within and beyond the criminal justice system. asks: Who defines crime? In whose interests? And with what consequences for inequality and social control?
Context
The development of critical and conflict theories in criminology must be understood as a reaction against the dominant paradigms of the mid-20th century, which focused on individual-level explanations of crime such as biological, psychological, or socialisation-based theories. In the post-war decades, especially during the social upheavals of the 1960s and 1970s, scholars began to challenge these approaches for ignoring the structural roots of crime and the role of the state in defining and enforcing criminal law.
Drawing inspiration from Marxist analysis, critical sociologists argued that crime could not be separated from the dynamics of class struggle and capitalist exploitation. At the same time, the civil rights, feminist, and anti-colonial movements demanded that criminology confront its blind spots around race, gender, and imperialism. „Conflict Criminology“ became an umbrella term to capture these perspectives that viewed crime and punishment as the outcome of social conflicts between groups with unequal power and resources.
Unlike traditional criminological theories that focused on individual deviants and their motivations, critical and conflict approaches interrogated the power relations that shape criminal law, policing, courts, and punishment. They asked why certain harms are criminalised while others remain invisible, and how definitions of crime serve to maintain social hierarchies. Over time, this tradition expanded to include feminist criminology, theories of state and corporate crime, postcolonial criminology, green criminology, and many other critical perspectives.
Key Approaches in This Category
Marxist Theory of CrimeActs or omissions that violate criminal laws and are punishable by the state. is rooted in Karl Marx’s analysis of capitalism as a system marked by class conflict and exploitation. Marxist criminology argues that criminal law is not a neutral instrument for maintaining social order but a tool that serves the interests of the ruling class by protecting property, disciplining labour, and managing social unrest. It examines how crime is produced by structural inequalities—such as poverty, unemployment, and alienation—and how the state uses law and punishment to sustain capitalist relations.
Feminist CriminologyA criminological perspective that examines how gender and patriarchy shape crime, justice, and social control. emerged as both a critique of mainstream criminology and a challenge to traditional Marxist analyses for ignoring gendered power relations. Feminist criminologists focus on how crime, victimisation, and justice processes are shaped by patriarchy, sexism, and gendered violence. They examine how criminal law has historically regulated women’s bodies and behaviours while neglecting violence against women. Feminist criminology also analyses the intersections of gender with race, class, and sexuality, offering a more inclusive understanding of crime and justice.
Power-Control TheoryControl theory explains criminal behavior by focusing on the absence or weakness of social bonds that normally prevent individuals from deviating., developed by John Hagan, represents a synthesis of conflict and control perspectives. It examines how gendered power dynamics within families shape differences in delinquency between boys and girls. According to this theory, patriarchal family structures exercise stricter social control over daughters, leading to lower rates of female delinquency compared to male delinquency. PowerThe capacity to influence others and shape outcomes, even against resistance.-Control Theory thus links class structures, family dynamics, and gendered socialisation practices to explain variations in youth offending.
Critical CriminologyA perspective that examines power, inequality, and social justice in understanding crime and the criminal justice system. (included here as its own section) is not a single, unified theory but an umbrella for diverse approaches united by their critique of inequality, power, and the role of the state. It encompasses Marxist, feminist, postcolonial, green, abolitionist, and other radical perspectives. Critical criminology interrogates the social construction of crime, the selective application of criminal law, and the ways criminal justice systems reproduce social divisions. It also examines contemporary issues such as mass incarceration, systemic racism, state and corporate crime, and environmental harm, offering tools for critique and social transformation.
Significance and Contemporary Relevance
Critical, Marxist and Conflict theories remain essential for understanding crime as a phenomenon deeply embedded in social inequalities and power relations. They compel us to ask who benefits from existing definitions of crime, whose harms are ignored, and how punishment is used to manage marginalised populations. By shifting focus from individual deviance to structural and institutional processes, these theories continue to challenge criminology to confront its own complicity in systems of social control and to imagine more just and equitable alternatives.
