CSA Executive Team 2023/24

• President – Nicole Buhagiar
• Vice-President – Rachel Busuttil
• Secretary General – Joelle Anastasi
• Public Relations Officer – Jerome Falzon
• Media Officer – Royvin Debono
• Events Officer – Raisa Ciantar

Presidential Comment

This year new faces were elected, and hopefully this will bring different perspectives to CSA. I am very thankful to have been given this position, and I am sure all of us will work well together to achieve as much as we can. We want our team to grow so Criminology students can benefit the most out of their 3 years here at University of Malta.

Nicole Buhagiar

The Third Eye wishes the new executive the best of luck!

The post Nicole Buhagiar Elected As CSA’s New President appeared first on The Third Eye.

Introduction on Psychopathy

“Psychopathy is an enduring biopsychosocial disorder in which violence and antisocial behaviours require long-term management in order for changes to occur and for relapse to be prevented”. (Wang and Hare, 2014)

With the study of Psychopathy we tend to analyse and research the biological and innate behaviors of an individual rather than the social interactions they have and the societal environment they grew up in. The term ‘psychopath’ suggests a biological link with personality whereas, ‘sociopath’ puts emphasis upon the environment.

It is a form of personality disorder affected by emotional, interpersonal, and behavioral factors. Characterised with traits such as ‘manipulation; impulsivity, irresponsibility, superficial emotions, pathological lying, lack of empathy, and repeated violations of social norms and expectations’ (Cleckley, 1976, Hare, 1970). Some researchers link psychopathy with above-average intelligence.

The Mask of Sanity was a research study conducted by Cleckley’s, in 1957. Cleckley goes on to theorise that psychopathy is linked to above-average intelligence, absence of psychotic symptoms, absence of anxiety, lack of guilt, failure to learn from experience, egocentricity, and lack of emotional depth. These are are all essential criteria subjects to magnify.

The Triarchic Model

The Triarchic Model was created in response to a long-running discussion about psychopathy. The extent and limitations of the “construct” of psychopathy, as well as questions about whether psychopathy is dimensional or typological, and the features of psychopathy, such as variation among persons scoring highly on psychopathy measures, were all discussed.

According to the Triarchic Model (Patrick, Fowles and Krueger, 2009), it encompasses three distinct yet interrelated phenotypic dispositions. These involve; Disinhibition: a tendency to act impulsively in general, Boldness: defined as a combination of social dominance, emotional resilience, and a willingness to take risks, and Meanness, also
known as “disaffiliated agency,” is aggressive resource-seeking with little regard for others. Mixed with a biological basis (eg. impulsivity, executive control (precortex)- conduct disorder in children).

The link between Psychopathy and Crime

Psychopathy is a disorder of high public concern because it predicts violence and offence recidivism. Despite the fact that psychopaths form a small percentage of the population, there is a clear link between psychopathy and criminal activity.

‘Treatment’

Traditional means of treatment, intervention, and management, which focus on factors such as growing self-esteem, empathy, and conscience, are not as effective with psychopaths. This is due to the fact that psychopaths do not show signs of emotional discomfort and do not distinguish between right and wrong. Moreover, they will “engage” in treatment when it is convenient for them.

Treatment that focuses on the affective/emotional part of moral reasoning is unlikely to be beneficial. This is due to offending behavior is more likely to be influenced by contextual factors than by the moral reasoning principles that normally regulate behavior. As a result, moral reasoning-based psychopath therapy may not be helpful.

Read more about CSA here.

The post Psychopathy | CSA appeared first on The Third Eye.

Written by Leo Ghorishi

In order to explore and discuss ruling class crime we have to investigate the sociological theory of conflict and marxism. Marx was a famous philosopher in the criminogenic and legal field, the son of a successful jewish lawyer. Following in his fathers footsteps, Karl Marx studied law at Bonn and Berlin where he was introduced to the ideas of Hegel and Feurbach– two leading German philosophers.

Marx, Crime and Ideology

According to Marx, the rule of law exists to safeguard the bourgeoisie’s interests (the rich). He believed the bourgeoisie had to govern conflict. Because conflict causes social change, the powerful had to figure out how to control and limit it. Ideologically, inequity must be justified. Crime, according to Marx, is a reaction to systemic constraints like poverty. The ruling class’s ideology is the prevailing ideology in society, ensuring that other ideas are not heard, marginalised, or ignored. (For example, the capitalist system is rarely questioned). Marxism is known as conflict consensus structuralism, while functionalism is known as consensus structuralism. People follow the law because they have been socialised to believe this is right and this is wrong, according to Marxist values.

It’s all about the Bourgeoisie!

The bourgeoisie wields power, according to Marxist criminologists, and laws are a manifestation of bourgeois ideology. The bourgeoisie’s interests are served by the legal system and the police. These institutions are used to keep people in a condition of false awareness, control the masses, and prevent revolt.

Because advertisement is a sort of intellectual power, the bourgeoisie uses power derived from economic ownership to regulate how and what people believe about the social world. This can be seen in the neo-marxist beliefs on the impact of advertisement on society. In the form of advertising and other platforms, economic power has the ability to define -ideologically- what should and shouldn’t be idealised.

You can summarise Marx criminology and ruling class crime into four points;

1. Capitalism is criminogenic, meaning that the capitalist system encourages criminal behaviour.
2. The law is made by the capitalist elite and tends to work in their interests.
3. All classes in society, not just the working classes, commit crime, and the crimes of the capitalist class are more costly than street crime.
4. The state practices selective law enforcement.

To elaborate the criminal justice system mainly concerns itself with policing and punishing the marginalized, not the wealthy, and this forms ideological functions for the elite classes. The ideological functions of selective law enforcement ignores the fact that it is criminogenic capitalism which causes crime in the first place. The imprisonment of lower social classes neutralises opposition to the system. It also masks the worst cases of poverty out of sight to the public, illustrating to them, once again, a false consciousness.

Money, Money, Money

There is enormous competitive pressure in a capitalist society to make money, to be more successful, and to generate more profit. Why?

In a competitive economy, this is the only way to secure existence. In this environment, breaching the law may appear minor in comparison to the pressures to succeed and the pressures to break the law that affect everyone from the investment banker to the unemployed gang member (stereotypical roles of classes imposed upon us by society).

Marxists associate white-collar crime with individual white-collar crimes like fraud. It also focuses on corporate crime, which includes institutional crime, such as embezzlement. Negligence in terms of health and safety. The elite’s atrocities are frequently unpunished (Tombs and Whyte).

Marxists Criminologists and the Capitalist System

There are several Marxist theories on crime which explore the capitalist system in depth. Snider ( 1993) points out that the government is hesitant to establish rules restricting enterprises, and Chambliss (1973) highlights that private property is at the center of the capitalist system. These are instances of how the elite shape the law in their own interests. State-sponsored harm is rarely often labeled as criminal, for example; colonialism, and a slew of wars. Furthermore, the economic consequences of corporate criminality outweigh the costs of street crime.

Here’s a mind map that elaborates on Marxist Theories of Crime:

Marxist criminologists believe that the capitalist system’s volume pervades the rest of our civilization. When you think about it, burglary, robbery, and thievery all stem from personal gain, originating from the goals of economic criminals. Some may argue that corporate crime will exist even in non-capitalist societies. This can be linked to the functionalist theory, which states that all factors in society, such as industrial industries, media, religion, politics, and crime, are fundamental pillars that help to stabilise and balance a society. You may even claim that corporate criminality causes greater emotional harm than street crime.

Is Crime the result of a faulty system?

While Marx wrote little about crime, his general analysis yielded a number of influential propositions, including how crime is caused by fundamental conflicts in the social order, not by moral or biological defects. Crime is an unavoidable feature of existing capitalist societies arising from inequalities; and working-class crime is the result of demoralisation caused by labor exploitation. Crimes like theft, arson, and sabotage can also be seen as a form of protest and
revolt against the bourgeois system of property ownership and control in some ways.

The post Marx Criminology and Criminogenic Capitalism | CSA appeared first on The Third Eye.