Essay on Control Theory Corporate Crime

It's difficult not to be cynical about how “big business” treats the subject of ethics in today's world. In many corporations, where the

It's difficult not to be cynical about how “big business” treats the subject of ethics in today's world. In many corporations, where the

In their theories, Marxists say that certain types of crime are more likely to be punished compared to others. Street crimes (brawls, binge drinking, theft, muggings, social unrest and disorder) are more likely to be pursued than white collar crime (fraud, tax evasion, ‘insider training’ and even gambling and prostitution). This is because the capitalist governments who have run the country are sympathetic to those who are of the same belief and class, but have just got carried away with their search for wealth. In this society of greed, the working class have to turn to crime just to stay alive and to obtain the materialistic goods or lifestyle, which is typical to a capitalistic state, and that general standard of living and attitude to life, is enforced on them, when living in this type of society. Money and personal gain, and the ‘every man for himself’ attitude is what life is like in an unfair, and socially unequal way of life under a capitalist government.

White Collar crime is not a crime unto it self, but instead a criteria that has to be met in order for a crime to be considered as White- Collar Crime; (Blount, 2002) hence the reason why Corporate Crime is also considered as White- Collar Crime. At the same time, White Collar Crime and Corporate Crime can be seen as distinct criminological categories, however, in order to reveal this, this essay will firstly be exploring Sutherland's definition of white collar crime and the perplexity with this definition of white-collar crime. It will then be looking at the modification which had to take place with Sutherland's definition of white-collar crime in order to established a distinction between white-collar and corporate crime.

In comparison Merton’s theory put forward a entirely different rationalisation of the causes of crime, and juxtaposing major ideals about who commits these crimes, Marxists points out that absence of egalitarianism of opportunity is at the centre of the capitalist system and Merton contends that not all individuals who lack genuine opportunities look to crime to do so. (Eglin and Hester, 2013).

Marxists argue that capitalist society actually generate crime because it encourages greed and crime is a response to the inequalities in wealth.

Most everyone goes home after a long day of work and watches the news. Think, what is usually reported? The weather, local activities, headline news, or daily criminal activity. Shootings, stabbings, homicides, etc. are all discussed by media anchors these days. This causes most everyone in our society to become familiar with crimes that are considered street crimes. What most people don’t hear about on the news is what is considered white-collar crime, sometimes known as corporate crime. White-collar crime not only is less reported in the media but also receives weaker punishments than street crime. This paper will first discuss the similarities between the two types of crime and then explain why their punishments are strongly

The well-to-do generally come from upper-class families - meaning that they face none of the disadvantages of an absent-parent upbringing - and have no need to rob convenience stores to feed their children, so they bypass petty crime and move on to what is known as white-collar crime; financially motivated nonviolent crime committed by business and government professionals. “The temptation to commit white collar crimes is far greater for the wealthy” says Sal Bommarito of the Mic Network. Petty crime offers no worthwhile reward to the 1%, as the money earned from a late-night robbery would likely end up being spent on their breakfast the next morning, but the hundreds of thousands of dollars that could be made from corporate embezzlement could be the down payment on the new Ferrari they’d been eyeing. The lack of street crime but over-saturation of white-collar crime committed by the upper-class is ultimately just as, if not more, harmful on a global scale. Canada alone lost $74,387,465.23 in 2014 due to mass marketing fraud, a crime generally committed by white-collar criminals. In contrast, there were 14, 258 reported thefts of $5000 or more perpetrated in Canada in the same year, resulting in an approximate loss of $71, 290,000, undercutting mass marketing fraud by $3,097,465.23. The difference lays in the types of crimes being committed; the poor are more likely to commit street crime whilst the rich are ultimately more likely to commit fraudulent corporate

The question before our society is not whether corporate crime is a victimless crime, rather the question is what should be done about it? Corporate crime doesn’t just do harm to the investors that can be unknowingly damaged by these crimes, it has a much more insidious nature to it as it has done harm on global scales. Corporate crime is almost a misnomer because many of these criminal wrongdoings are for the most part legal, when not taken to their ultimate conclusion. Society within the United States has been taught that the man in the brief case, yelling at other men in dark coats on the flow of the stock exchange are the smartest guys in the room. This paper will attack that idea on many levels, the first salvo will be

Traditional Marxists believe that crime is inevitable in all societies because capitalism is criminogenic suggesting that it is societies very nature that causes crime. According to traditional Marxists society causes capitalism in different ways. One of which is due to poverty. The lack

In, “Who is Winning the Losing War against Crime?” Jeffrey Reiman, a philosopher out of Washington, D.C., expands on a different viewpoint in which to look at Marx’s political theory. Rather than the typical way to viewing it by addressing how it would affect our economic system, he turns it around to focus on it could be used to evaluate current social problems, particularly crime. Reiman’s belief was that we as people are not seeing the real story of crime due to these false ideologies floating around, same as Marx’s belief that the pursuit of happiness contained an ideology that favored the result of capitalism, which he saw as very deteriorating. In this reading, Reiman’s main argument is to adjust our view on crime. Instead of believing there is a direct correlation between crime and human nature, which is fed to the public by researchers, Reiman puts forth an effort to make us see the criminal system as unjust and corrupt in a way. “For example, a number of researchers approach criminal behavior by exploring the role that human nature plays in criminal activity. Reiman attempts to reframe and recast the problem. The unjust and inept criminal system is not, he argues, the result of failure to recognize the contribution human nature makes to criminal behavior. The real truth, he contends, is that powerful groups in society have a vested interest in perpetuating an inept, unjust criminal system. This is what Reiman calls the Pyrrhic defeat theory, the hypothesis that the

Needless to say, with these conclusions the book had a controversial reception. Many in the social sciences hailed it as a landmark, whereas many in law and business stated it as misleading and distorted. The principal basis for disagreement concerned the underlying concept of crime. The "crimes" of the corporations Sutherland examined were rarely prosecuted in criminal court: they were violations of administrative rules or simply contract cases to be processed, if at all, in civil court. Many in the legal community insisted these were not crimes at all.

The corporate world has an unfavorable view of itself by being selfish, evil, and against the average American. Companies market themselves and their products in certain ways that makes them and their products appealing to everyone and if not everyone then a certain group of people. Every company has a mission to follow and values to go by, but some companies lack ethics and morals. In this paper I am going to talk about one company that engages in ethical behavior and another that doesn’t.

A corporation has its king and its barons, its courtiers and ambassadors, its loyalists and its dissident elements, its allies and its enemies. What is important to our application of his principles of statecraft to the business world is not the superficial differences but the underlying unity. Modern corporations that are successful and well-managed do not necessarily operate in harmony with the personal morality of their employees and for the general good of their communities. Similarly, firms which pollute the environment or ask their employees to lie are not always forced into bankruptcy.

The case study that was analyzed is, “Unauthorized Disclosure: Hewlett-Packard’s secret Surveillance of Directors and Journalists,” by Anne T. Lawrence, Randal D. Harris, and Sally Baack. The ethical issues presented through the case deal with Hewlett-Packard Company (HP). HP is a major international company in the computer and technology market. The company describes itself as a “technology solutions provider to consumers, business and institutions globally.” Their credo is called “HP way”, which focuses on points such as trust and respect for individuals, high level of achievement and contribution, business conduct with uncompromising integrity, objectives through teamwork, and encouragement of flexibility and innovation (Newman). The problems faced by HP’s board of directors were a lack of accountability with HP’s credo. If the “HP way” was followed by them, these ethical issues would be avoided. It also promotes a bad example by the high-level of management of this globally powerful organization.