Аннотация: The fundamental paradoxes of criminology of the 21st century. A scientific treatise.
The fundamental paradoxes of criminology of the 21st century. A scientific treatise.
The criminology, the science about crime (science about the reasons, regularities, crime prevention, etc.), has an old story.
It was dominated at different time periods by different theories and concepts.
Yet the dominant view was about a society as a large group of good, law-abiding people, among whom offenders appear for some reason. Perhaps this view originated in the democratic poleis-states of Ancient Greece.
Time passed, and a concepts of criminality of large groups of people gradually appeared. For example, about a criminality character of a some public classes.
The authors of such concepts could not break the civilizational link with the history of mankind. They portrayed the case in such a way that although large groups of people are criminal, these groups are not large compared to society (as a whole). Most members of society can to live, to act and to sleep quietly. They 're free of a surveillance, out of a persecution. They are independent and free.
And members of a large criminal groups can, for example, re-educate themselves and become a good-order members of society.
At last, in the 21st century, the concept (idea) of the criminality of society (as a whole) began to take shape indirectly.
The indirect nature of this idea is expressed in the following.
At first, the thesis is put forward about the usefulness of observing (tracking) groups of people of uncertain size. An usefulness is a theme of a glorifying. A bad results of a surveillance (an observation) are left in the shade. Other methods of achieving a useful results are simply not mentioned (they are not discussed). A technology, an algorithms of surveillance (observation) are being tested.
Then the boundaries of surveillance are moved to cover the society (as a whole).
Further, in response to the protests connected with destruction of the basic foundation of society of the western type - an autonomous, an independence (creative) PERSONALITY, - the counterargument is using. An observation (surveillance) in relation to a society is necessary for fight against crime.
According a logic, it turns out, that society as a whole has the property, the sign of criminality. This is a powerful logical step forward in comparison with the recognition of the criminality of individuals or of a significant groups of people.
The paradox of this logical step is that it is not based on any coherent system of arguments.
This logical step has its source in a media trick, when many sources are generating a certain statement, a certain postulate in a media environment, reach a dominant position, - and therefore the put forward statement seems self-evident, axiomatic.
According to the level of a foresight and of an intellectual depth, the postulate about the usefulness of a total observation (control) of society (as a whole) resembles the idea about the usefulness of a chemicalization of agriculture. Chemicalization of agriculture increases productivity, brings large profits. But there is a point of view that 75 percent of insects have already died out on the Earth planet by today. In a few years, all insects will die out completely. And agriculture will come to an end. A smart people started designing a bee robot ... The scheme is well-known. Firstly, to talk a lot about success and get bonuses, and then to stop with a feeling of a surprise, with a confusion...
In fact, for the fight against crime, there are enough a modern, very diverse and powerful methods of solving crimes, developing (traditional, western, world) culture, respecting the traditions of the Western way of life and neutralizing the tendencies for a building a Unified (Uniformed) World.
The Uniformed World itself is anti-human (in the Western sense of the word), which is manifested both in its criminality and in general discomfort (at this stage the coronavirus pandemic testifies to this property). The filling the Uniformed World with means of tracking (observation) and control over society will not make it more comfortable and suitable for a normal human life. On the contrary.
Democratic Western society involves not only a control of elite over other members of society, but also a society control over the elite.
Paradoxically, the conceptual extension of a sign, of a property of criminality over (on) a society (as a whole) does not cover (does not capture) of those who conduct surveillance (surveillance). Such a group of people appears.
Society, of course, is criminal (according to the version stated above). But those who monitor him - they a priori are not criminal.
So, the starting point is upside down, cardinally changes. If earlier the position, that society as a whole was law-abiding, dominated, - then according to the new logical approach it turns out that society as a whole is criminal ... A society cannot continue a normal human life without total surveillance (control).
But for a normal human life also there remains no space with a total surveillance (control).
Somehow, in the prospects of building of a Uniformed World, neither democracy, nor humanism, nor equality, in general, no anything pleasant (that what is inherent a Western-style society) is visible.
We note the existence of a fundamental paradoxes in the criminology and in the worldview of the 21 century.
March 23, 2020 09:16
Translation from Russian into English: March 23, 2020 23:09.
Владимир Владимирович Залесский 'Принципиальные парадоксы криминологии 21 века. Научный трактат'.