Abstract
Critical criminology and radical constructivism are frequently regarded as an impossible pair—or, at least, as a rather schizophrenic one. This is so, notably, because radical constructivism rests on the (paradoxical) abandonment of what Jean-François Lyotard named méta-récits. It rests on the refusal to distinguish between the phenomenal and the symbolic, and thus implies the complete vanishing of the classical difference between ontology and epistemology. This would consequently deprive criminology (or, more generally, the social sciences) of any anchoring point enabling a critical utterance. The present contribution’s thesis is that, on the contrary, radical constructivism can catalyze critical criminology. Among the possible contributions of a radically constructivist sociology of criminalization, this paper focuses on: its call for a reworking of the concept of social control, which avoids problems related to its contemporary usage; its focus on power and force, in a way which avoids Foucaultian perspectives’ aporetic elements, and problematizes every instance of legitimized authoritarian practices.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Numerous exemplifications of cultural criminologists pretending to have a ‘superior’, ‘truer’ or simply ‘more human’ access to crime’s “reality”—despite their usual suspicion towards the ontologization of crime—can be found in Cultural Criminology Unleashed (2004).
Of course, some uses of Luhmann’s sociology can be found in criminological work, notably in those of Alvaro Pires and Richard Dubé (e.g. Pires 2001; Pires and Cauchie 2007; Dubé 2007; Dubé and Cauchie 2007). Introductions to Luhmann’s grueling theory can be found, notably, in Moeller (2006), King and Thornhill (2005, 2006), Clam (1997, 2000, 2001a, b), Stichweh (2000) and Ertler (1999). See also King (2001) for a presentation of, and answers to, common, but ill-founded, critiques of the theory.
Clear linkages between social control and the dynamic processes through which Modernity is (re)produced can be found, notably, in Ross (1901), Mead (1925), Park and Burgess (1924), Elias (1939), Horkheimer (1944), Mills (1939, 1940), and Parsons (1951). Mead and Park were particularly targeted by criminologists advocating a restricted conception of social control, because their work was taken as being blind to “conflicts over norms” and to State apparatuses, and failing to problematize “the objectives of control” (Lowman et al. 1987:3). On the defence of a restricted concept of social control, see Quirion (2001), Pitts (1991), Horwitz (1990), Cohen (1985), Black (1984), Robert (1984), Cohen and Scull (1983), Gibbs (1982), Meier (1982).
Arbitrariness here only refers to the self-referentiality of meaning production (see the analytical, not phenomenological, decomposition of meaning in factual, temporal and social dimensions in Luhmann’s theory, e.g. 1995:75). For example, statements like ‘we should punish crime’, ‘incapacitation is (or should be) the single most important penological principle’, ‘imprisoning individuals for non violent criminal(ized) acts/conditions is inhumane’ all consist in an arbitrary reduction of the world’s complexity, since they are deprived of any ultimate, external, foundation. I will come back on this in addressing the issue of legitimacy.
Foucault himself distinguished three major phases in his work, the study of: the relationship between various “truth games” (“jeux de vérité”), the famous power/knowledge (through the study of disciplinary practices), and “truth games” as they are involved and mobilized in the “hermeneutic of the subject” (Foucault 1982b, 1984b:13). The ‘first’ Foucault, particularly in Naissance de la clinique, relied on a very negative (or juridical-like) conception of power that the ‘second’ heavily criticized (see also Foucault 1977).
This, of course, is just a way to rearticulate the traditional question of the social impact of legal versus non-legal norms. As Weber noted (Weber 1971:13), it is quite problematic to assume that conformity to what he called the “juridical order” derives from its ‘legitimate’ threats and violence, as the advocates of classic utilitarianism and contemporary rational choice posit.
The processes through which law (as a social system) de-paradoxifies (or de-tautologizes) its operations are thus central to a Luhmannian sociology of law. A classic example of de-paradoxification (because taken as a juridical artifact) is the ‘reasonable person’ standard.
References
Arrigo, B. A., & Bernard, T. J. (1997). Postmodern criminology in relation to radical and conflict criminology. Critical Criminology, 8(2), 38–60.
Baudrillard, J. (1981). Simulacres et simulations. Paris: Galilée.
Baudrillard, J. (1987). Cool Memories. Paris: Galilée.
Bauman, Z. (1992). Intimations of Postmodernity. New York: Routledge.
Becker, H. S. (1963). Outsiders, traduction française (1985). Paris: Éditions A.-M. Métailié.
Beckett, K., & Herbert, S. (2008). Dealing with disorder. Social control in the post-industrial city. Theoretical Criminology, 12(1), 5–30.
Bergalli, R. (1997). The new order in Spain and an hispanic perspective on the history and meaning of social control. In R. Bergalli & C. Sumner (Eds.), Social control and political order. European Perspectives at the End of the Century (pp. 34–51). London: Sage.
Best, S., & Kellner, D. (1997). The postmodern turn. New York: The Guilford Press.
Black, D. (1984). Social control as dependent variable. In D. Black (Ed.), Toward a general theory of social control (pp. 1–36). Orlando: Academic Press.
Bloomberg, T. G., & Hay, C. (2007). Visions of social control revisited. In D. Downes, P. Rock, C. Chinkin, & C. Gearty (Eds.), Crime, social control and human rights. From moral panics to states of Denial–Essays in honour of Stanley Cohen (pp. 174–194). Cullompton: Willan.
Bogard, W. (1996). The simulation of surveillance. Hypercontrol in telematic societies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bourgois, P. (1995). In search of respect. Selling Crack in El Barrio. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Capps, P., & Olsen H. P. (2002). Legal autonomy and reflexive rationality in complex societies. Social & Legal Studies, 11(4), 547–567.
Carrier, N. (2004). Les vedettes de la prohibition du cannabis. Drogues, santé et société, numéro double, 2 (2) et 3 (1), 233–286.
Carrier, N. (2006a). La dépression problématique du concept de contrôle social. Déviance & Société, 30(1), 3–20.
Carrier, N. (2006b). Academics’ Criminals. The Discursive Formations of Criminalized Deviance. Champ pénal/Penal Field, 3, http://champpenal.revues.org/document3143.html
Carrier, N. (2007). The autonomy and permeability of law—The case of the Canadian prohibition of Cannabis. Canadian Journal of Law & Society, 22(1), 123–138.
Carrier, N. (2008a). La Politique de la stupéfaction. Pérennité de la prohibition des drogues. Rennes: Presses Universitaires de Rennes.
Carrier, N. (2008b). Speech for the Defense of a Radically Constructivist Sociology of (Criminal) Law. International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice, 36(3), 168–183.
Carrier, N., & Quirion, B. (2003). Les logiques de contrôle de l’usage des drogues illicites: la réduction des méfaits et l’efficience du langage de la périllisation. Drogues, santé et société, 2(1), 9–73.
Castel, R. (1988). De l’intégration sociale à l’éclatement du social: l’émergence, l’apogée et le départ à la retraite du contrôle social. RIAC, 20(60), 67–78.
Cauchie, J. -F & D. Kaminski (2007). Theoretical problematization of penal innovation: The case of community service in Belgium. Champ pénal/Penal Field, 4, http://champpenal.revues.org/document4493.html
Chevigny, P. (2003). The populism of fear. Punishment & Society, 5, 77–96.
Christie, N. (2000). Crime control as industry. Towards Gulags, Western style (3rd ed.). London: Routledge.
Clam, J. (1997). Droit et société chez Niklas Luhmann. La contingence des normes. Paris: PUF.
Clam, J. (2000). System’s sole constituant, the operation: Clarifying a central concept of Luhmannian theory. Acta Sociologica, 43(1), 63–79.
Clam, J. (2001a). The specific autopoiesis of law: Between derivative autonomy and generalised paradox. In J. Priban & D. Nelken (Eds.), Law’s new boundaries. The consequences of legal autopoiesis (pp. 45–79). Aldershot: Ashgate.
Clam, J. (2001b). Monétarisation, généralisation de l’envie et paradoxe du droit. Droit et société. Revue internationale de théorie du droit et de sociologie juridique, 47, 155–182.
Cohen, S. (1973). Folk Devils and moral panics. The creation of the Mods and Rockers. St Albans: Paladin.
Cohen, S. (1985). Visions of social control, crime, punishment and classification. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Cohen, S., & Scull, A. (1983). Social control in history and sociology. In S. Cohen & A. Scull (Eds.), Social control and the state. Historical and comparative essays (pp. 1–14). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Comack, E. (2006). Theoretical approaches in the sociology of law. In E. Comack (Ed.), Locating law—Race, class, gender, sexuality connections (2nd ed., pp. 18–67). Fernwood: Halifax.
Cusson, M. (1998). Criminologie actuelle. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
Dahl, R. A. (1975). The concept of power. Behavioral Science, 2, 201–205.
Dean, M. (1999). Governmentality. Power and rule in modern society. London: Sage.
Deflem, M. (2008). Sociology of law. Visions of a scholarly tradition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Denzin, N. K. (1992). Symbolic interactionism and cultural studies. The politics of interpretation. Cambridge: Blackwell.
Denzin, N. K. (1997). Interpretive ethnography. Ethnographic practices for the 21st century. Sage: Thousand Oaks.
Derrida, J. (1967). L’écriture et la différence. Paris: Seuil.
Digneffe, F., Nachi, M., & Périlleux, T. (2002). En guise de conclusion. Des contrôles sans fin(s) ou le passage de la vérification à l’autocontrôle permanent, Recherches sociologiques, 1, 109–126.
Dubé, R. (2007). Éléments de théorie sur les commissions de réforme du droit et l’innovation cognitive en matière de justice pénale: Contributions conceptuelles de Michel Foucault et Niklas Luhmann, Champ pénal/Penal Field, Séminaire innovations pénales, http://champpenal.revues.org/document694.html.
Dubé, R., & Cauchie, J.-F. (2007). Enjeux autour de l’évolution du droit criminel moderne. Quand les variations de la périphérie défient l’autorité redondante du centre. Déviance & Société, 31(3), 465–485.
Elias, N. (1939[1994]). State formation and civilization. In The civilizing process. Oxford: Blackwell.
Ertler, K.-D. (1999). De la théorie des systèmes à la théorie de la société: Niklas Luhmann et les sciences sociales, Sociétés. Revue des sciences humaines et sociales, 64(2), 107–112.
Ferrell, J. (1994). Confronting the agenda of authority: Critical criminology, Anarchism, and Urban Graffiti. In G. Barak (Ed.), Varieties of criminology: Readings from a dynamic discipline (pp. 161–178). Westport: Praeger.
Ferrell, J. (2007). For a ruthless critique of everything existing. Crime, media, culture, 3(1), 91–100.
Ferrell, J., Hayward, K., Morrison, W., & Presdee, M. (Eds.). (2004). Cultural criminology unleashed. London: The Glass House Press.
Ferrell, J., & Websdale, N. (1999). Materials for making trouble. In J. Ferrell & N. Websdale (Eds.), Making trouble: Cultural constructions of crime, deviance, and control (pp. 3–21). New York: Walter de Gruyter.
Feyerabend, P. (1975). Against method: Outline of an anarchistic theory of knowledge. Londres: Nlb.
Foucault, M. (1963). Naissance de la clinique. Paris: PUF.
Foucault, M. (1969). L’archéologie du savoir. Paris: Gallimard.
Foucault, M. (1974a). Prisons et asiles dans le mécanisme du pouvoir, reproduit dans Dits et écrits—I—1954–1975, pp. 1389–1393. Paris: Quarto.
Foucault, M. (1974b). La vérité et les formes juridiques, reproduit dans Dits et écrits—I—1954–1975, pp. 1406–1513. Paris: Quarto.
Foucault, M. (1975a). Surveiller et punir. Naissance de la prison. Paris: Gallimard.
Foucault, M. (1975b). Pouvoir et corps, reproduit dans Dits et écrits—I—1954–1975, pp. 1622–1628. Paris: Quarto.
Foucault, M. (1976a). Histoire de la sexualité—I—La volonté de savoir. Paris: Gallimard.
Foucault, M. (1976b). L’extension sociale de la norme, reproduit dans Dits et écrits—II—1976–1988, pp. 74–79. Paris: Quarto.
Foucault, M. (1976c). Michel Foucault, l’illégalisme et l’art de punir, reproduit dans Dits et écrits—II—1976–1988, pp. 86–89. Paris: Quarto.
Foucault, M. (1977). Les rapports de pouvoir passent à travers les corps, reproduit dans Dits et écrits—II—1976–1988, pp. 228–236. Paris: Quarto.
Foucault, M. (1978). Précisions sur le pouvoir. Réponses à certaines critiques, reproduit dans Dits et écrits—II—1976–1988, pp. 625–635. Paris: Quarto.
Foucault, M. (1981a). Les mailles du pouvoir, reproduit dans Dits et écrits—II—1976–1988, pp. 1001–1020. Paris: Quarto.
Foucault, M. (1981b). Subjectivité et vérité, reproduit dans Dits et écrits—II—1976–1988, pp. 1032–1037. Paris: Quarto.
Foucault, M. (1982a). The subject and power. In H. Dreyfus & P. Rabinow (Eds.), Michel Foucault: Beyond poststructuralism and hermeneutics. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Foucault, M. (1982b). L’herméneutique du sujet, reproduit dans Dits et écrits—II—1976–1988, pp. 1172–1184. Paris: Quarto.
Foucault, M. (1984a). L’éthique du souci de soi comme pratique de la liberté, reproduit dans Dits et écrits—II—1976-1988, pp. 1527–1548. Paris: Quarto.
Foucault, M. (1984b). Histoire de la sexualité—III—Le souci de soi. Paris: Gallimard.
Franko Aas, K. (2007). Analysing a world in motion. Global flows meet ‘criminology of the other’. Theoretical Criminology, 11(2), 283–303.
Freitag, M. (1986a). Dialectique et Société I: Introduction à une théorie générale du Symbolique. Montréal: Saint-Martin.
Freitag, M. (1986b). Dialectique et Société II: Culture, pouvoir, contrôle. Les modes de reproduction formels de la société. Montréal: Saint-Martin.
Freitag, M. (1995). Le naufrage de l’Université et autres essais d’épistémologie politique. Québec: Nuit blanche.
Freitag, M. (2002). L’oubli de la société. Pour une théorie critique de la postmodernité. Laval: Presses de l’Université Laval.
Freitag, M. (2003a). De la terreur au meilleur des mondes. Genèse et structure des totalitarismes archaïques. In D. Dagenais (dir.), Hannah Arendt, le totalitarisme et le monde contemporain, pp. 248–350. Québec: Presses de l’Université Laval.
Freitag, M. (2003b). De la terreur au meilleur des mondes. Globalisation et américanisation du monde: vers un totalitarisme systémique?. In D. Dagenais (dir.), Hannah Arendt, le totalitarisme et le monde contemporain, pp. 353–404. Québec: Presses de l’Université Laval.
Gagné, G. (1993). Les transformations du droit dans la problématique de la transition à la postmodernité. In J.-G. Belley & P. Issalys (dir.), Aux frontières du juridique. Études interdisciplinaires sur les transformations du droit, pp. 221–253. Laval: GEPTUD.
Garland, D. (1997). ‘Governmentality’ and the problem of crime: Foucault, criminology, sociology. Theoretical Criminology, 1(2), 173–214.
Garland, D. (2001). The culture of control. Crime and social order in contemporary society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Gibbs, J. P. (1982). Law as a means of social control. In J. P. Gibbs (Ed.), Social control. Views from the social sciences (pp. 83–113). Beverly Hills: Sage.
Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Guibentif, P. (2001). Le chameau dans le laboratoire. La théorie des systèmes et l’étude de la communication juridique quotidienne, Droit et Société. Revue internationale de théorie du droit et de sociologie juridique, 47, 123–153.
Guibentif, P. (2010). Foucault, Luhmann, Habermas, Bourdieu. Une génération repense le droit. Paris: Librairie générale de droit et de jurisprudence.
Guzzini, S. (2000). Constructivist Social Theories Dealing with Reflexivity and Power: A Critical Reading of Luhmann. ECPR Joint Session of Workshops, http://www.essex.ac.uk/ECPR/events/jointsessions/paperarchive/copenhagen/ws9/guzzini.PDF.
Hacking, I. (1999). Entre science et réalité : La construction sociale de quoi? Paris: La découverte.
Henry, S., & Milovanovic, D. (1996). Constitutive criminology—beyond postmodernism. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Hillyard, P., Pantazis, C., Tombs, S., & Gordon, D. (Eds.). (2004). Beyond criminology: Taking harm seriously. London: Pluto.
Hirschi, T. (1969). Causes of delinquency. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Hogeveen, B., & Woolfrod, A. (2006). Critical criminology and possibility in the neo-liberal ethos. Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice, 48(5), 681–701.
Horkheimer, M. & T. W. Adorno (1944[1974]). La production industrielle de biens culturels. In La dialectique de la raison. Paris: Gallimard, pp. 129–176.
Horwitz, A. V. (1990). The logic of social control. New York: Plenum Press.
King, M. (2001). The construction and demolition of the Luhmann Heresy. In J. Priban & D. Nelken (Eds.), Law’s new boundaries. The consequences of legal autopoiesis (pp. 123–156). Aldershot: Ashgate.
King, M., & Thornhill, C. (2005). Niklas Luhmann’s theory of politics and law. New York: Palgrave.
King, M., & Tornhill, C. (Eds.). (2006). Luhmann on law and politics. Critical appraisals and applications. Portland: Hart.
Kramer, R. C., Michalowski, R. C., & Kauzlarich, D. (2002). The origins and development of the concept and theory of state-corporate crime. Crime & Delinquency, 48(2), 263–282.
Kuhn, T. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Laudan, L. (1996). Beyond positivism and relativism: Theory, method and evidence. Boulder: Westview Press.
Lea, J. (1998). Criminology and postmodernity. In P. Walton & J. Young (Eds.), The new criminology revisited (pp. 163–189). Houndmills: MacMillan.
Lianos, M. (2001). Le nouveau contrôle social. Toile institutionnelle, normativité et lien social. Paris: L’Harmattan.
Liazos, A. (1972). The poverty of the sociology of deviance: Nuts, sluts & perverts. Social Problems, 20(1), 103–120.
Lippert, R., & Stenson, K. (2010). Advancing governmentality studies: Lessons from social constructionism. Theoretical Criminology, 14(4), 473–494.
Lowman, J., Menzies, R. J., & Palys, T. S. (1987). Transcarceration and the modern state of penality. In J. Lowman, R. J. Menzies, & T. S. Palys (Eds.), Transcarceration, essays in the sociology of social control (pp. 1–15). Aldershot: Gower.
Luhmann, N. (1975). Macht. Stuttgart: Enke.
Luhmann, N. (1985). A sociological theory of law (2nd ed.). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Luhmann, N. (1986). Soziologische Aufklärung IV: Beiträge zur funktionalen Differenzierung der Gesellschaft. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.
Luhmann, N. (1990). Amour comme passion. De la codification de l’intimité. Paris: Aubier.
Luhmann, N. (1993a). Le droit comme système social. In A.-J. Arnaud & P. Guibentif (recueil organisé par), Niklas Luhmann observateur du droit, pp. 55–72. Paris: Librairie générale de droit et de jurisprudence.
Luhmann, N. (1993b). Clôture et couplage. In A.-J. Arnaud & P. Guibentif (recueil organisé par), Niklas Luhmann observateur du droit, pp. 73–95. Paris: Librairie générale de droit et de jurisprudence.
Luhmann, N. (1995). Social systems. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Luhmann, N. (1998a). La société comme différence. Sociétés. Revue des sciences humaines et sociales, 61(3), 19–37.
Luhmann, N. (1998b). Observations on modernity. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Luhmann, N. (1999a). The paradox of form. In D. Baecker (Ed.), Problems of form (pp. 15–26). Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Luhmann, N. (1999b). Sign as form. In D. Baecker (Ed.), Problems of form (pp. 46–63). Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Luhmann, N. (2000). The reality of the mass media. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Luhmann, N. (2001a). La restitution du douzième chameau : du sens d’une analyse sociologique du droit. Droit et Société. Revue internationale de théorie du droit et de sociologie juridique, 47, 15–73.
Luhmann, N. (2001b). La légitimation par la procédure. Québec: Presses universitaires de Laval.
Luhmann, N. (2002). Theories of distinctions, redescribing the descriptions of modernity. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Luhmann, N. (2004). Law as a social system. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lukes, S. (1974). Power—A radical view. New York: MacMillan.
Lyotard, J.-F. (1979). La condition postmoderne. Paris: Minuit.
Lyotard, J.-F. (1983). Le différend. Paris: Minuit.
Macdonald, R. A. (1986). Pour la reconnaissance d’une normativité juridique implicite et «inférentielle». Sociologie et sociétés, 18(1), 47–58.
Macdonald, R. A. (1998). Critical legal pluralism as a construction of normativity and the emergence of law. In A. Lajoie, R. A. Macdonald, R. Janda, & G. Rocher (dir.), Théories et émergence du droit : pluralisme, surdétermination et effectivité, pp. 9–27. Montréal: Thémis.
Macdonald, R. A. (2002). La gestion publique des êtres humains, Rapport d’expert à l’intention du Comité spécial du Sénat du Canada sur les drogues illicites, http://www.parl.gc.ca/37/1/parlbus/commbus/senate/com-f/ille-f/library-f/background-f.htm.
Malmo-Levine, R. v., & Caine, R. v. (2003) 3 SCR 571.
Mead, G. H. (1918). The psychology of punitive justice. American Journal of Sociology, 23, 577–602.
Mead, G. H. (1925). The genesis of the self and social control. International Journal of Ethics, 35, 251–277.
Meier, R. F. (1982). Prospects for control theories and research. In J. P. Gibbs (Ed.), Social control. Views from the social sciences (pp. 265–276). Beverly Hills: Sage.
Melossi, D. (1990). The state of social control. A sociological study of concepts of state and social control in the making of democracy. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Mills, C.W. (1939[1963]). Language, Logic and Culture. In I. L. Horowitz (ed.), Power, politics and people. The collected essays of C. Wright Mills, pp. 423–438. New York: Oxford University Press.
Mills, C.W. (1940[1963]). Situated actions and vocabularies of motive. In I. L. Horowitz (ed.) Power, politics and people. The collected essays of C. Wright Mills, pp. 439–452. New York: Oxford University Press.
Mills, C. W. (1956). The power elite. New York: Oxford University Press.
Mills, C. W. (1959[1963]). The Cultural Apparatus. In I. L. Horowitz (ed.), Power, politics and people. The collected essays of C. Wright Mills, pp. 405–422. New York: Oxford University Press.
Milovanovic, D. (1997a). Visions of emerging orderly (Dis)Order. In D. Milovanovic (Ed.), Chaos, criminology and social justice. The new orderly (dis)order (pp. 195–211). Westport: Praeger.
Milovanovic, D. (1997b). Postmodern criminology. New York: Garland.
Moeller, H.-G. (2006). Luhmann explained, from souls to systems. Chicago: Open Court.
Muzzatti, S. L. (2006). Cultural criminology: A decade and counting of criminological chaos. In W. S. DeKeseredy & B. Perry (Eds.), Advancing critical criminology, theory and application (pp. 63–82). Lanham: Lexington.
Nader, L. (2003). Crime as a category—domestic and globalized. In C. Parnell, & S. C. Kane (Eds.), Crime’s power. Anthropologists and the ethnography of crime, pp. 55–76. New York: Palgrave.
Naffine, G. (1990). The law and the sexes: Explorations in feminist jurisprudence. Sydney: Allen & Unwin.
O’Malley, P., & Valverde, M. (2004). Pleasure, freedom and drugs: The uses of ‘pleasure’ in liberal governance of drug and alcohol consumption. Sociology, 38(1), 25–42.
O’Neill, J. (1995). The poverty of postmodernism. London: Routledge.
Otero, M. (2003). Les règles de l’individualité contemporaine. Santé mentale et société. Québec: Presses de l’Université Laval.
Park, R. E., & Burgess, E. W. (1924). Introduction to the science of sociology (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Parnell, P.C. (2003). Criminalizing colonialism: Democracy meets law in Manilla. In Parnell, C. & S.C. Kane, Crime’s Power. Anthropologists and the ethnography of crime, pp. 197–220. New York: Palgrave.
Parsons, T. (1951). The Social System. New York: Free Press.
Pfohl, S. & A. Gordon (1986). Criminological displacements: A sociological deconstruction. Social Problems, 33(6), S94–S113.
Pfohl, S. (1990). Welcome to the PARASITE CAFÉ: Postmodernity as a social problem. Social Problems, 37(4), 421–442.
Pfohl, S. (1993a). Revenge of the parasites: Feeding off the ruins of sociological (de)construction. In J. A. Holstein & G. Miller (Eds.), Reconsidering social constructionism. Debates in social problems theory (pp. 403–440). New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
Pfohl, S. (1993b). Twilight of the parasites: Ultramodern capital and the new world order. Social Problems, 40(2), 125–151.
Pires, A. P. (2001). La rationalité pénale moderne, la société du risque et la juridicisation de l’opinion publique. Sociologie et Société, 33(1), 179–204.
Pires, A. P. (2002). La politique législative et les crimes à «double face»: Éléments pour une théorie pluridimentionnelle de la loi criminelle. (Drogues, prostitution, etc.). Rapport d’expert à l’intention du Comité spécial du Sénat du Canada sur les drogues illicites, http://www.parl.gc.ca/37/1/parlbus/commbus/senate/com-f/ille-f/presentation-f/pires-f.htm.
Pires, A. P. & J. -F. Cauchie (2007). Un cas d’innovation ‘accidentelle’ en matières de peines : une loi brésilienne sur les drogues. Champ pénal/Penal Field, Séminaire innovations pénales, http://champpenal.revues.org/document1541.html.
Pitts, J. R. (1991). Social control—The concept. In M. Nawaz (Ed.), Exploring social deviance (pp. 325–352). Toronto: Canadian Scholar Press.
Quirion, B. (2001). La prise en charge par l’État de l’usage psychotrope au Canada : une analyse des transformations du contrôle social. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Montréal : Université du Québec à Montréal.
Rigakos, G. S. & J. Frauley (forthcoming). The promise of critical realism: Toward a post-empiricist criminology. In A. Doyle & D. Moore (eds), The criminological promise. Vancouver: UBC Press.
Robert, P. (1984). La question pénale. Genève: Droz.
Robert, P. (1999). Le citoyen, le crime et l’État. Genève: Droz.
Rorty, R. (1980). Philosophy and the mirror of nature. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Rorty, R. (1991). Objectivity, relativism, and truth. Philosophical Papers Volume I. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rose, N. (1999a). Governing the soul. The shaping of the private self (2nd ed.). London: Free Association Books.
Rose, N. (1999b). Powers of freedom, reframing political thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rose, N. (2007). The politics of life itself. Biomedicine, power, and subjectivity in the twenty-first century. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Rosenau, P. V. (1992). Post-modernism and the social sciences: Insights, inroads, and intrusions. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Ross, E. A. (1901). Social control. A survey of the foundation of order. New York: Johnson.
Russell, S. (1997). The failure of postmodern criminology. Critical Criminology, 8(2), 61–90.
Russell, S. (2003). The continuing relevance of marxism to critical criminology. Critical Criminology, 11, 113–135.
Schecter, S. (1995). Luhmann et le politique : au delà de l’incroyable. Société, 14(hiver), 35–65.
Scheerer, S., & Hess, H. (1997). Social control: A defence and reformulation. In R. Bergalli & C. Sumner (Eds.), Social control and political order. European perspectives at the end of the century (pp. 96–130). London: Sage.
Schur, E. M. (1965). Crimes Without Victims. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Schwartz, M. D., & Hatty, S. E. (2003). Introduction. In M. D. Schwartz & S. E. Hatty (Eds.), Controversies in critical criminology, ix–xvii. Anderson: Cincinnati.
Schwendinger, H., & Schwendinger, J. (1970). Defenders of order or guardians of human rights? Issues in Criminology, 5(2), 123–157.
Sellin, T. (1938). Culture conflict and crime. New York: Social Science Research Council.
Spector, M., & Kitsuse, J. I. (1977). Constructing social problems. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
Spencer-Brown, G. (1969). Laws of form. London: George Allen and Unwin.
Stanley, E. (2007). Towards a criminology for human rights. In A. Barton, K. Corteen, D. Scott, & D. Whyte (Eds.), Expanding the criminological imagination, critical readings in criminology (pp. 168–197). Portland: Willan.
Stichweh, R. (2000). Systems theory as an alternative to action theory? The Rise of ‘Communication’ as a Theoretical Option. Acta Sociologica, 43(1), 5–13.
Sumner, C. (1997). Social control: The history and politics of a central concept in Anglo-American sociology. In R. Bergalli & C. Sumner (Eds.), Social control and political order. European perspectives at the end of the century (pp. 1–33). London: Sage.
Teubner, G. (1994). Droit et réflexivité. L’auto-référence en droit et dans l’organisation. Paris: LGDJ/Story-Scientia.
Teubner, G. (2001a). Economics of gift-positivity of justice. The mutual paranoia of Jacques Derrida and Niklas Luhmann. Theory, Culture & Society, 18(1), 29–47.
Teubner, G. (2001b). Alienating justice: On the surplus value of the Twelfth Camel. In J. Priban & D. Nelken (Eds.), Law’s new boundaries. The consequences of legal autopoiesis (pp. 21–44). Aldershot: Ashgate.
Tombs, S., & Whyte, D. (Eds.). (2003). Unmasking the crimes of the powerful: Scrutinizing states and corporations. New York: Peter Lang.
van Krieken, R. (1991). The poverty of social control: explaining power in the historical sociology of the welfare state. Sociological Review, 38(1), 1–25
Wacquant, L. (2001). Deadly symbiosis. When Ghetto and Prison meet and mesh. In D. Garland (Ed.), Mass imprisonment. Social causes and consequences (pp. 82–120). London: Sage.
Wacquant, L. (2005). The great penal leap backward: Incarceration in America from Nixon to Clinton. In J. Pratt, D. Brown, M. Brown, S. Hallsworth, & W. Morrison (Eds.), The new punitiveness: Trends, theories, perspectives (pp. 3–26). Cullompton: Willan Publishing.
Walters, R. (2003). New modes of governance and the commodification of criminological knowledge. Social & Legal Studies, 12(1), 5–26.
Walters, R. (2007). Critical criminology and the intensification of the authoritarian state. In A. Barton, K. Corteen, D. Scott, & D. Whyte (Eds.), Expanding the criminological imagination, critical readings in criminology (pp. 15–37). Portland: Willan.
Ward, T. (2005). State crime in the heart of darkness. British Journal of Criminology, 45, 434–445.
Weber, M. (1971). Économie et société—II—L’organisation et les puissances de la société dans leur rapport avec l’économie. Paris: Plon.
Wedel, J. R. (2003). Mafia without malfeasance, clans without crime: the criminality conundrum in post-communist Europe. In C. Parnell & S. C. Kane (Eds.), Crime’s power. Anthropologists and the ethnography of crime (pp. 221–244). New York: Palgrave.
Welch, M. (2003). Force and fraud: A radically coherent criticism of corrections as industry. Contemporary Justice Review, 6, 227–240.
Wheeldon, J., & Heidt, J. (2007). Bridging the gap: A pragmatic approach to understanding critical criminologies and policy influence. Critical Criminology, 15, 313–325.
Wittgenstein, L. (1961[1945]). Tractatus Logico-philosophicus, suivi de Investigations philosophiques, Paris: Gallimard.
Young, T. R. (1997). Challenges: For a postmodern criminology. In D. Milovanovic (Ed.), Chaos, criminology and social justice. The new orderly (dis)order (pp. 29–51). Westport: Praeger.
Young, J. (1999). Cannibalism and Bulimia: Patterns of social control in late modernity. Theoretical Criminology, 3, 387–407.
Acknowledgments
This article builds on a presentation given at the congress Le pénal aujourd’hui : pérennité ou mutations? I would like to thank Renée Zauberman for inviting me to speak at this congress, which was closed by a celebration of the 30th anniversary of the academic journal Déviance & Société. This journal has been, over the last three decades, the principal vehicle for the development of critical research and scholarly debates in the (relatively) small Francophone criminological realm. One might say that this journal has been one highly influential media in the very production of most critical criminologists in Belgium, France and in French-speaking enclaves of Canada. Sadly enough, a real dialogue between Francophone and Anglophone criminologies has yet to be established. I would also like to thank scholars who commented on various versions of this paper: Jean-François Cauchie, Gilles Chantraine, Richard Dubé, Ummni Khan, Michael Mopas, Augustine S. J. Park, George S. Rigakos, Dale Spencer and Kevin Walby.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Carrier, N. Critical Criminology Meets Radical Constructivism. Crit Crim 19, 331–350 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10612-010-9129-1
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10612-010-9129-1