Advertisement

Loyalists, Legalists, Cynics and Outsiders

  • Marc Hertogh
Chapter
Part of the Palgrave Socio-Legal Studies book series (PSLS)

Abstract

The aim of this chapter is to develop an analytical framework based on the concept of ‘legal alienation’. This is done in three steps. First, it examines the general alienation literature and it discusses those few studies in which the concept of alienation has been applied to the field of law. Next, the concept of legal alienation is broken down into several dimensions: ‘legal meaninglessness’, ‘legal powerlessness’, ‘legal cynicism’ and ‘legal value isolation’. Finally, the chapter focuses on two basic questions: ‘Are people aware of the law?’ and: ‘Do people identify with law?’ Based on these questions, the chapter introduces four normative profiles to describe people’s attitudes towards law: ‘legalists’, ‘loyalists’, ‘cynics’ and ‘outsiders’.

Keywords

Analytical framework Alienation Legal alienation Normative profile 

References

  1. Aberbach, J. (1969). Alienation and Political Behavior. American Political Science Review, 63(1), 86–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson, E. (1999). Code of the Street: Democracy, Violence, and the Moral Life of the Inner City. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
  3. Bell, M. (2016). Situational Trust: How Disadvantaged Mothers Reconceive Legal Cynicism. Law & Society Review, 50(2), 314–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Carr, P., et al. (2007). We Never Call the Cops and Here Is Why: A Qualitative Examination of Legal Cynicism in Three Philadelphia Neighborhoods. Criminology, 45(2), 445–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dean, D. (1961). Alienation: Its Meaning and Measurement. American Sociological Review, 26(5), 753–758.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Denters, B., & Geurts, P. (1993). Aspects of Political Alienation: An Exploration of Their Differential Origins and Effects. Acta Politica, 18(4), 445–469.Google Scholar
  7. Ewick, P., & Silbey, S. (1998). The Common Place of Law: Stories from Everyday Life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  8. Feuerlicht, I. (1978). Alienation: From the Past to the Future. Wesport: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
  9. Friedman, L. (1975). The Legal System: A Social Science Perspective. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  10. Gargarella, R. (2009). Tough on Punishment: Criminal Justice, Deliberation, and Legal Alienation. In S. Besson & J. L. Martí (Eds.), Legal Republicanism: National and International Perspectives (pp. 167–184). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gargarella, R. (2011). Penal Coercion in Contexts of Social Injustice. Criminal Law and Philosophy, 5(1), 21–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gau, J. (2015). Procedural Justice, Police Legitimacy, and Legal Cynicism: A Test for Mediation Effects. Police Practice and Research, 16(5), 402–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Genn, H. (1999). Paths to Justice: What People Do and Think About Going to Law. Oxford/Portland Oregon: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
  14. Geyer, F. (1996). Alienation Theories: A General Systems Approach. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
  15. Gibson, J., & Caldeira, G. (1996). The Legal Cultures of Europe. Law & Society Review, 30(1), 55–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Green, L. (2008). Positivism and the Inseparability of Law and Morals. New York University Law Review, 83, 1035–1058.Google Scholar
  17. Hertogh, M. (2011). Loyalists, Cynics and Outsiders. Who Are the Critics of the Justice System in the UK and the Netherlands? International Journal of Law in Context, 7(1), 31–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hertogh, M. (2014). “No Justice, No Peace!” Conceptualizing Legal Alienation in the Aftermath of the Trayvon Martin Case. In R. Nobles & E. Schiff (Eds.), Law, Society and Community: Socio-legal Essays in Honour of Roger Cotterrell (pp. 187–206). Burlington: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  19. Holzer, E. (2013). What Happens to Law in a Refugee Camp? Law & Society Review, 47(4), 837–872.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kaase, M. (1988). Political Alienation and Protest: Comparing Pluralist Democracies. Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  21. Kafka, F. (2005 [1935]). The Trial (R. Stokes, Trans.). London: Hesperus.Google Scholar
  22. Kalekin-Fishman, D., & Langman, L. (2015). Alienation: The Critique That Refuses to Disappear. Current Sociology, 63(6), 916–933.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kanungo, R. (1982). Work Alienation: An Integrated Approach. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
  24. Kölbel, R. (2005). Understellte Rechtsnähe: Zur Literarischen Ficktion im (Straf-) Rechtsdiskurs. Zeitschrift für Rechtssoziologie, 26(2), 249–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Langman, L., & Kalekin-Fishman, D. (Eds.). (2006). The Evolution of Alienation: Trauma, Promise, and the Millennium. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  26. Lee, A. (1972). An Obituary for “Alienation”. Social Problems, 20(1), 121–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Levin, M. (1960). The Alienated Voter: Politics in Boston. New York: Holt, Rhinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
  28. Ludz, P. (1976). Alienation as a Concept in the Social Sciences. In R. Geyer & D. Schweitzer (Eds.), Theories of Alienation: Critical Perspectives in Philosophy and the Social Sciences (pp. 3–37). Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Social Sciences Division.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Marx, K. (1964). Early Writings (T. B. Bottomore, Trans. and Ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  30. Merton, R. (1957). Social Theory and Social Structure. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  31. Mészáros, I. (1970). Marx’s Theory of Alienation. London: Merlin.Google Scholar
  32. Nettler, G. (1957). A Measure of Alienation. American Sociological Review, 22(6), 670–677.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Nielsen, L. (2000). Situating Legal Consciousness: Experiences and Attitudes of Ordinary Citizens About Law and Street Harassment. Law & Society Review, 34(4), 1055–1090.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Ollman, B. (1971). Alienation: Marx’s Conception of Man in Capitalist Society. London: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Podgórecki, A., et al. (Eds.). (1973). Knowledge and Opinion About Law. London: M. Robertson.Google Scholar
  36. Rattner, A., & Yagil, D. (2004). Taking the Law into One’s Own Hands on Ideological Grounds. International Journal of the Sociology of Law, 32(1), 85–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Sampson, R. J., & Jeglum Bartusch, D. (1998). Legal Cynicism and (Subcultural?) Tolerance of Deviance: The Neighborhood Context of Racial Differences. Law & Society Review, 32(4), 777–804.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Schacht, R. (1976). Alienation, the “Is-Ought” Gap and Two Sorts of Discord. In F. Geyer & D. Schweitzer (Eds.), Theories of Alienation: Critical Perspectives in Philosophy and the Social Sciences (pp. 133–150). Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Social Sciences Division.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Seeman, M. (1959). On the Meaning of Alienation. American Sociological Review, 24(6), 783–791.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Seeman, M. (1975). Alienation Studies. Annual Review of Sociology, 1(1), 91–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Seeman, M. (1991). Alienation and Anomie. In J. P. Robinson, P. R. Shaver, & L. S. Wrightsman (Eds.), Measures of Personality and Social Psychological Attitudes (Vol. 1, pp. 291–371). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Shamir, J. (2013). The Influence of Age on the Attitudes Towards the Rule of Law: The Case of Immigrants from the Former Soviet Union to Israel. Journal of Law and Social Deviance, 5(1), 1–100.Google Scholar
  43. Siu-Kai, L., & Hsin-Chi, K. (1988). The Ethos of the Hong Kong Chinese. Hong Kong: The Chinese University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Teubner, G. (2001). Alienating Justice: On the Surplus Value of the Twelfth Camel. In D. Nelken & J. Pribán (Eds.), Law’s New Boundaries: Consequences of Legal Autopoiesis (pp. 21–44). Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  45. Teubner, G., & Hutter, M. (2000). Homo Oeconomicus and Homo Juridicus: Communicative Fictions. In T. Baums, et al. (Eds.), Corporations, Capital Markets and Business in the Law (pp. 569–584). Den Haag: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  46. Thompson, W., & Horton, J. (1960). Political Alienation as a Force in Political Action. Social Forces, 38(3), 190–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Tummers, L. (2013). Policy Alienation and the Power of Professionals: Confronting New Policies. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Tummers, L. (2017). Bureaucracy and Policy Alienation. In A. Farazmand (Ed.), Global Encyclopedia of Public Administration, Public Policy, and Governance (3rd ed.). New York: Springer Nature. Available at: https://www.ris.uu.nl/ws/files/29323270/Tummers_2017_Bureaucracy_and_Policy_Alienation_Global_Encyclopedia.pdf.Google Scholar
  49. Van Reden, C. (1980). Bibliography Alienation (3rd ed.). Amsterdam: SISWO.Google Scholar
  50. Wilkinson, M. (2010). Is Law Morally Risky? Alienation, Acceptance and Hart’s Concept of Law. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 30(3), 441–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Zurcher, L., Jr., et al. (1965). Value Orientation, Role Conflict, and Alienation from Work: A Cross-Cultural Study. American Sociological Review, 30(4), 539–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Socio-Legal Studies, Faculty of LawUniversity of GroningenGroningenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations