deviance and conformity in the reproduction of order

19
Chter 2 Deviance and Conformity in the Reproduction of Order Clford D. Shearing Recently, a number of theorists have directed attention to the problem of identiing the mechanisms through which the state acts to preserve "the hegemony of the dominant classes" (Burawoy, 1978: 59; see also Quinney, 1977: 80; Hall et al., 1978; Giddens, 1976; Beirne, 1979: 378). I have elsewhere (Shearing, 1981) sought to contribute to this discussion by elaborating upon Foucault's (1977) notion that social control has become increasingly diffuse, invisible and automatic through the identification of the subterranean mechanisms that direct and co-ordinate the activities of police officers in ·the maintenance of order. 1 The argument advanced was that the police subculture co-ordinates police action so as to reproduce structures of dominance in two ways. First, it encourages them to support the productive classes-referred to as "the public"-in their struggle with the unproductive "lumpen proletariat" -referred to by a variety of derogatory epithets such as "the dregs" or "the scum" (see Quinney, 1977: 136 and Silver, 1967). Secondly, it defines the formal values supposedly governing the police organization (both the legal system and departmental policy) as no more than a normative framework to be used in the legiti- mation of police action (see Bittner, 1967a; Katz, 1972; Manning, 1977). 2 In this paper my purpose is t o extend this analysis of the "mutual accommodation of power and norms in social interaction" (Giddens, 1976: 113) one step further by considering how individual police officers respond to the expectations of the police subculture as well as the formal values and rules governing the police organization. This analysis is directly relevant to Parson's attempt to develop a voluntaristic account of the manner in which normative expectations are translated into social action (see Giddens, 1976: chap. 3). I will accordingly examine its implication for the development of s uch a theory. The Research Both the analysis referred to above (Shearing, 1981) and the analysis to follow are based on research which took place within the Communications Published as: Shearing, C. 1981. Deviance and Conformity in the Reproduction of Order. In: Shearing, C. Eds. Organizational Police Deviance: Its Structure and Control. Toronto: Butterworths, 29-47.

Upload: uct

Post on 03-Dec-2023

0 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Chapter 2

Deviance and Conformity in the

Reproduction of Order

Clifford D. Shearing

Recently, a number of theorists have directed attention to the problem of

identifying the mechanisms through which the state acts to preserve "the

hegemony of the dominant classes" (Burawoy, 1978: 59; see also Quinney, 1977: 80; Hall et al., 1978; Giddens, 1976; Beirne, 1979: 378). I have

elsewhere (Shearing, 1981) sought to contribute to this discussion by

elaborating upon Foucault's (1977) notion that social control has become

increasingly diffuse, invisible and automatic through the identification of

the subterranean mechanisms that direct and co-ordinate the activities of

police officers in ·the maintenance of order. 1 The argument advanced was that the police subculture co-ordinates police action so as to reproduce

structures of dominance in two ways. First, it encourages them to support

the productive classes-referred to as "the public"-in their struggle with

the unproductive "lumpen proletariat" -referred to by a variety of

derogatory epithets such as "the dregs" or "the scum" (see Quinney, 1977:

136 and Silver, 1967). Secondly, it defines the formal values supposedly governing the police organization (both the legal system and departmental policy) as no more than a normative framework to be used in the legiti­mation of police action (see Bittner, 1967a; Katz, 1972; Manning, 1977). 2

In this paper my purpose is to extend this analysis of the "mutual accommodation of power and norms in social interaction" (Giddens, 1976:

113) one step further by considering how individual police officers respondto the expectations of the police subculture as well as the formal values andrules governing the police organization. This analysis is directly relevant toParson's attempt to develop a voluntaristic account of the manner in whichnormative expectations are translated into social action (see Giddens, 1976:chap. 3). I will accordingly examine its implication for the development ofsuch a theory.

The Research

Both the analysis referred to above (Shearing, 1981) and the analysis to follow are based on research which took place within the Communications

Published as:

Shearing, C. 1981. Deviance and Conformity in the Reproduction of Order. In: Shearing, C. Eds. Organizational Police Deviance: Its Structure and Control. Toronto: Butterworths, 29-47.