IndexDefinitionPunishmentCase Study: State-Corporate CrimeCase Study: International DevianceCase Study: HarassmentConclusionThe study of deviance as a subset of sociology has tended to focus on the most common forms of deviance, such as petty crime and theft. These examples are numerous and not difficult to find. The theories and definitions of these deviant areas differ only slightly, and although theorized differently, they ultimately reach similar conclusions regarding the definition of deviance. Scholars define deviance as “a challenge to commonly accepted social norms” (Nuncic, 2005, p. 2). A divergent subset of the study, deviance in politics and government, is unique and intrinsically important to the well-being of citizens around the world. United States citizens, in particular, “continue to be victims of suspicious incidents benefiting senior public officials, yet Americans have no way of knowing whether the incidents are unavoidable events or, instead, crimes initiated or facilitated by the officials themselves.” (DeHaven, 2006, p. 332). It can be argued that deviant behavior on a scale so large as to include politics and government institutions is more dangerous than any petty crime. For this reason, this research is crucial to uncover the true mechanisms behind the theory of political deviance. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay This research seeks to investigate the deviant actions of governments and international powers in the realm of sociology. Since there are many forms of political deviance, this article will cover the scope of political deviance, the punishment for such crimes, and the divergent branches through case studies covering examples of deviance in the United States and the global community. Definition The definition of political deviance deviance has fluctuated with sovereign revolutions around the world. A combined definition of political deviance is an act of deviance that has social motivations, crimes of passion, including murder, and altruistic beliefs (Schafer 1971; Schroeder 1919; and Stark 1995). In Schafer's 1971 article, he argues that social motivations are indispensable for defining a crime as political. He quotes Enrico Ferri, a distinguished social scientist, who argued that “political delinquents are not criminals, but are 'honest and normal men misled by their political ideas'” (Schafer 384). This distinction from Schafer's argument supports the idea that political criminals are elevated to a higher status than the common criminal based on their perceived motivations, which range from personal wealth to social defiance. This is further supported by the distinction between convicted and conventional offenders (Schafer). In his analysis of political criminals, he observes that “the true political criminal is a pseudo-criminal and should not be considered in the same way as the ordinary criminal” (Schafer, 1920, p. 311). Schafer notes that the conventional offender acts in a way that promotes self-interest and tends to lack meaningful motivation or justification. This criminal may steal food out of hunger or money and jewelry out of greed, but he has no higher social or institutional purpose for doing so. These actions can be defined as short, simple and petty. On the other hand, the convicted criminal strives for a greater social purpose. Schafer argues that the convicted criminal has an “altruistic-communal motivation rather than a selfish drive” (Schafer 384). Schafer argues that another difference between the crimeconventional and the one with condemnation is the feeling regarding the action taken. A conventional criminal will experience anxiety over the execution of the plan and will often be restless and guilty after the crime has been committed. On the other hand, the convicted criminal will be eager to commit the crime, and will subsequently seek media attention and fame to further promote the social motive (Schafer). This can be attributed to the noble nature of a political crime, rather than the shame and fear of committing a common crime. The noble nature of political crime refers to the greater political and social outcomes that arise from demonstrations and protests. Schafer argues that the political criminal seeks fame and attention after committing the crime to maximize the reach and impact of his crime on the population. While the above definitions focus on a single strategic actor, another segment of the literature highlights state corruption as a political crime. . Green and Ward define corruption as “the abuse of public office for private profit” (11). They also refer to a form of organizational deviance, which involves the use of corruption to achieve a set goal. This form of deviance can be driven by profit-driven individuals with the means to interfere with government-civilian relations or by power-hungry political actors with sufficient corporate and lobbyist support to get elected. The difference between definitions of common deviance and larger-scale deviance, such as organizational and political deviance, is the range of people who are affected by it. Large-scale deviant activities such as government corruption are partially defined by the number and degree of suffering of the population. Green and Ward note that rights can be transformed into goods for entire nations, such as water and education (18). When this happens, raw materials tend to become scarce and people have difficulty accessing them without money or political influence. This is an example of a negative effect of political deviance. On the other hand, deviance on this scale can have positive effects. At times, the literature notes that deviance is necessary to overthrow an oppressive regime or systematic forms of oppression. Japan “is an exception where corruption favors residents in poorer rural constituencies at the expense of urban voters” (Green and Ward, 2004, p. 18). This is an interesting dichotomy because, while common crime is rare to have positive effects, some forms of political deviance are necessary to prevent or delay human rights violations by a state actor. A government may interfere with the work of another government when human rights violations occur to protect the other nation's citizens. A different segment in the literature related to the definition of political criminal or political crime is shown in the work of Stark (1995). Stark hypothesizes that, given public opinion of political actors, politicians and government officials could be accused of official wrongdoing using the appearance standard. Stark uses the court case WILD VS. US since 1982 to outline his point. In the case, a U.S. Court of Appeals decided to uphold the firing of a Chicago Housing and Urban Development employee named Lawrence A. Wild. The offense justifying the dismissal was that Wild did not keep up with rental units in his name, in his private interest, to the point that a newspaper commented on the decaying property (Stark, 326). Stark highlights the standard for US officials, according to which officials can be prosecuted for crimes they havecommitted and for the crimes they are believed to have committed. This is an extreme difference in the definition of political criminal activity compared to ordinary crimes. To be tried for a common crime, the prosecutor must clearly outline to the judge and jury made up of the defendant's peers that the defendant committed the crime in question. For public officials, however, the simple idea of ​​having committed a crime worthy of dismissal can give rise to the charge of dismissal. There are a few reasons for this as highlighted by Stark. The first is that because the public must place such a high level of trust in politicians and officials, the perception of impropriety on the part of authorities must be minimized so as not to destabilize government situations. Punishment Typical punishments for common crimes include prison sentences and house arrest. and probation and fines. There is a court established in each district of the United States that makes decisions on both criminal and civil cases of individual and group plaintiffs. When examining political crimes, however, there are far fewer bodies capable of issuing indictments against state and political actors. Ferrari notes that, in theory, "those who wish to change the social or industrial order, and who commit what would be considered a purely political crime if the act were strictly political [under the laws of the time] must be treated as political prisoners” (1920, p. 314). While this has sound logic and thinking, the most difficult aspect of this topic is the execution. For example, at a hearing in New York on the forgery of a passport for Ireland, a political prisoner was given a small fine along with a guilty plea because the prisoner's motives were political, whereas any other offender would a long sentence was given. term of imprisonment (Ferrari 1920). This stark difference between punishments for common crimes and political crimes can be attributed to the actor's motivations. Although Ferrari clearly states this difference in his work, he also postulates that, “if today we enter the mind of the political criminal, we will emerge determined to exterminate him all the more firmly because we have found him infected with dangerous ideas.” to the established order" (315). This quote from Ferrari's work shows that people would like to see political criminals held to judicial standards, but the judge's sentence may not always be in line with public opinion. Case Study: Corporate-State Crime In Matthews and Kauzlarich's case study of a ValuJet plane crash, they further examine the role that corporate-state crime plays in the field of deviant sociology. They note that while the exact definition of deviance differs from person to person, those who specialize in the workings of federal or state crimes agree that they are “illegal or socially harmful acts committed for the benefit of a state or its agencies, not for the personal gain of some individual agent of the state” (Matthews and Kauzlarich, 2000, p. 281). They even go so far as to argue that governmental, state, and political crime lends itself to organizational crime tendencies. Examples of state and corporate crimes provided by the authors include the Challenger explosion, US nuclear weapons, and factory fires. This particular case study focuses on the crash and explosion of ValuJet Flight 592. There are two branching theories involving state-corporate crime: state-initiated and state-facilitated. Although both meet the criteria to be classified as deviant behaviors, the mechanisms that accompany them differ.State-initiated deviance when companies that have contracted with the government engage in deviance with government approval. Matthews and Kauzlarich note that in these cases a government and a private company share and work toward the same goal. State-facilitated deviance exists when government regulatory extensions fail to recognize and expel deviant business activities. These acts are usually of omission rather than commission, but are nevertheless considered deviant (Matthews & Kauzlarich, 2000, p. 284). ValuJet was a rapidly growing company, earning nearly $6.8 million in four years (Matthews and Kauzlarich, 2000, p. 284). Part of their success involved purchasing and repairing airplanes that were deemed problematic. The company responsible for repairing these planes and preparing them for flight was SabreTech, based in Miami. Several maintenance tasks were required, including inspection of oxygen generators. In March 1996, SabreTech crews began removing and replacing the old oxygen generators with newer models, but the safety caps were never replaced on the old oxygen tanks (Matthews and Kauzlarich, 2000, p. 287). The Federal Aviation Association explicitly states that while companies like ValuJet can outsource to mechanical companies, the final evaluation of the aircraft and the materials transported with it rests with ValuJet. Due to a series of communication problems, a box containing loose oxygen cylinders was loaded onto the flight from the previous mechanical work. Moments after leaving the runway at Miami airport, the plane caught fire and all 105 passengers and five crew members died (Matthews and Kauzlarich, 2000, p. 285). This tragedy left family members, lawmakers, and the American public shocked. Who was really responsible for the catastrophe? While Federal Aviation Association guidelines imply that ValuJet had the responsibility to oversee and regulate SabreTech's maintenance operations, it is also evident that the Federal Aviation Association itself bears some of the blame, as it is charged with the responsibility of regulating the the entire sector. This is an example of state-facilitated corporate crime. Both the private and non-private sectors in this case were working towards a similar goal of saving money and becoming more efficient. After further investigation into the accident, it appears that the FAA “attempted to get ValuJet to comply at the federal level rather than impose harsh sanctions” (Matthews and Kauzlarich, 2000, p. 290). By withholding penalties and fines, the industry itself maintains a sense of financial security. In this search for efficiency and cost-saving measures, the Federal Aviation Association has failed to regulate itself and its component industries. A closer look at the company also revealed that ValuJet and SabreTech were both guilty of cuts within their businesses. ValuJet, being a startup doomed to fail in its early years, employed procedures including “using older aircraft in various stages of disrepair, outsourcing all maintenance, and providing very low wages and benefits to employees” (Matthews and Kauzlarich, 2000, p. .293). SabreTech attributed the oversight of the oxygen tanks to the fact that each day that maintenance exceeded its originally scheduled date, they would suffer a loss of approximately $2,500 dollars. This forced them to speed up the process or risk losing the company entirely. Matthews and Kauzlarich blame the pursuit of profit for the failure of all three companies to maintain the integrity of the plane. They also refer to this as“normative corporate behavior,” implying that these acts of state-corporate criminality are often carried out in the United States, but few realize it. The impact of these examples of political and governmental deviance is far-reaching, as these government bodies are responsible for ensuring the safety of American citizens. When they fail to meet their requirements, who is left to regulate them? These acts of deviance jeopardize the everyday American, and attention to detail is indisputably necessary. Case Study: International Deviance Many cases in international history center on power struggles between nations with powerful armies and powerful ruling regimes. An article by Miroslav Nincic discusses cases of deviant behavior in the study of international relations and political institutions. It does not focus on two military powers fighting fiercely against each other, but rather aims to capture the deviant behavior of the losers, the “outlaws, reactionary states, thieves and renegades” (Nincic, 2005, p. 2). This new vision of classical power politics provides an interesting insight into the world of deviant behavior at the international level. Nincic observes that, “because deviance refers to a challenge to commonly accepted social norms, international deviance refers to a violation of norms key to conduct embraced by the global community” (2005, p. 2). Just as each society has its own set of norms, so too does the global community have its own set of norms. An example of violation of international norms given by Nincic is the French Revolution. At the time of this revolution, the global norm was the monarch, established by the Treaty of Utrecht in 1713. Violation of this norm caused panic and fear to spread across European countries. This sent other governments to declare obligations for monarchs and monarch stabilization within the region. However, this intense drive to stabilize the monarch ended up destabilizing the European continent, resulting in several revolutions around 1815, including the Bolshevik Revolution. The Bolshevik revolution was perceived as a direct threat to Western values, and therefore sent a catalyst overseas (Nincic, 2005, p. 10). One of the most interesting aspects of international deviance is the impact that can be seen rippling into other regions of the world. world. In the case of the French and Bolshevik revolutions, the largest wave occurred in Western democracies such as the United States. This fear pushed President Wilson to send troops to Russia where the Bolshevik regime was clashing with the Japanese in Siberia (Nincic, 2005, p. 10). When reflecting on these acts of revolutionary deviance, their impact becomes interesting. While these acts are not intended to harm or harm a society or individual members of a society, their consequences differ depending on one's perspective. In this example the government is at a disadvantage, but the citizens get all the power. Case study: harassment A third case study brings the topic back to the United States, to the state of Alabama. Richard Arrington was a student during the civil rights struggle in Alabama. He earned a doctorate from the University of Oklahoma in the 1960s, but returned in the late 1960s as a higher education administrator. As the literature on the civil rights movement in the South will argue, the South was full of tension and hatred throughout the region. Blacks were rapidly gaining political power and needed someone in Birmingham, Alabama to spur their progress. This man would be Richard Arrington (Wilson and Lynxwiler, 1998, p. 547). Arrington was elected mayor of Birmingham in 1979 and was re-elected..