N0143950 Verity James
4
shed some philosophical light as to why the police have come to be perceived as
agents of social control.
Though the conclusions that have been established by researching and writing this
thesis are somewhat tenuous and fragmented, it is evident that there are prevalent
issues that have important implications in everyday society. The notion of supposed
legal objectivity in contradistinction with the subjectivity of the human condition is
particularly necessary to re-evaluate in terms of improving police-public relations.
The progression of technology which has aided surveillance and dataveillance is not
only unstoppable but irreversible too. However, it appears that current ontological
debates have yet to catch up with the increasing technocracy of society, and
perhaps a re-assessment of ontological questions is essential to further understand
the role of the police and police technology within our lives.
N0143950 Verity James
5
Introduction
The question as to why the police have become to be perceived as agents of social
control is a contentious one. ‘Agents of social control’ can be defined as those who
regulate the behaviour of individuals or groups through social means, attempting to
invoke and/or instil conformity, as well as dealing with deviance at the same time.
There can be a tangible control over the behaviour of a deviant, which for example,
can be manifested in the form of repressive policing techniques such as those
methods utilised by riot officers. On the other hand, there is a more covert control
exercised by the state over its subjects, which is augmented by the created image of
the police as an omnipresent force, which imposes itself as an objectification of the
power of the state. Throughout the history of ‘policing’, this issue has gained
increasing support and publicity. The notion of the police as agents of social control
has been propagated by civil libertarians and various philosophers, most notably,
controversial poststructuralist Michel Foucault. On the other hand, through texts such
as Hobbes’ Leviathan:1 a theory of freedom propagated through the idea of a strict
sovereign state, we see a foundation of the being ‘policed’ as essential for the
structure and order of society. Though the questions raised in this thesis may be
seen to be inherently criminological, the strands that run throughout are of deep
interest to philosophy. The notions of ‘Freedom’ and ‘Justice’ along with both
existential and ontological issues are topics centred at the heart of this thesis and will
be examined in depth.
I will be conducting an analysis of mass media and police-public relation
representations, particularly in light of the postmodern linguistic turn and neo-Marxist
1
Hobbes, T. (1994). Leviathan. London: Dent.
N0143950 Verity James
6
ideas on the concept of the commodity and alienation. I also aim to tackle the
popular discourses surrounding control and surveillance society and try to offer some
alternative theories which do not naively comply with the mainstream view. In terms
of control and surveillance I will look at the topic of technology, in particular I will give
an overview of Heidegger’s ideas about technology and how they can be applied to
surveillance, along with the panoptic principle and dataveillance. I will also examine
the notions of power and resistance, looking more closely at Foucault’s shepherd-
flock critique of power and power in neo-Liberal political philosophy. Ultimately this
thesis attempts to tackle and shed some light as to why both philosophical and public
opinion of the police has become so negative and looking for areas which can be
improved.
N0143950 Verity James
7
Chapter 1: The History of Justice, Freedom, Ethics and Morals
In terms of analysing the reasons why the police have come to be perceived as
agents of social control in the twenty-first century, it is imperative to compile the
various philosophical strands that have influenced public opinion throughout the
history of philosophy. In this chapter the topics of Justice, Freedom, Ethics and
Morals will be discussed. As such, it is intended that this will create a fuller, albeit
somewhat fragmented image of why, in the philosophical sense, the perception of
the police has altered in light of these fields. Though the ‘police’ in terms of an official
force was not established in the UK until 1829, crime and justice have always been
an integral part of the human condition and civilisation, and they are issues widely
discussed through the history of philosophy. I aim to shed light on various
philosophers and their ideas, along with my own observations and critiques, in order
to begin to construct an analysis as to why the police may now be perceived as
instruments of control.
“Poverty is the parent of revolution and crime”2
Though much of Aristotle’s writings about ethics draw inspiration and topic matter
from Plato’s Republic3 and other works, his Nicomachean Ethics4 and Eudemian
Ethics5 are the first to unify and categorise these ideas specifically. For Aristotle,
moral virtue of character is a prerequisite for happiness. He recognises poverty,
isolation and dishonour as characteristics that can impinge on the pursuit of a
2
Aristotle. (2004). Politics. Montana: Kessinger. p.32.
3 Plato. (1974). The Republic. 2nd ed. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
4
Aristotle. (2009). The Nicomachean Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
5
Aristotle. (1992). The Eudemian Ethics: Books I, II and VIII. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
N0143950 Verity James
8
virtuous and happy life, and ‘as a rule, to live well is to have sufficient resources for
the pursuit of virtue over the course of a lifetime.’6 The focus of Ethics substantially
concerns the concept of moral virtue. Aristotle ascertains that because the individual
is a synthesis of body and mind, crime is motivated by desire and is ultimately an act
of free will because ‘it is in our power to be virtuous or vicious’7. Consequently, those
who are unaware of their actions, or the consequences of those actions (such as the
mentally ill and children) should not be held responsible for their misdemeanours.
For Aristotle, the two responses towards crime consist of preventative and
repressive methods. In terms of the preventative societal response to crime, this
could consist of a eugenic approach, for example some children should be nurtured,
whilst those with certain deformities should be left to die. Though this lies in
opposition to the ethical norms that we hold today, on the other hand Aristotle’s
repressive response seems to correlate more with the ideals of the modern justice
system. Aristotle suggests that ‘punishments and penalties should be imposed on
those who disobey and are of inferior nature, while the incurably bad should be
completely banished.’8
Aristotle claims that justice can mean lawfulness or fairness, and that universal
justice is the state of an individual who has both of these traits and acts according to
them. His notion of ‘particular’ justice is separated into two; the first of which being
distributive justice. This is concerned with the distribution of wealth amongst a
community however, ‘justice consists in treating equals equally and ‘unequals’
6
Kraut, R. (2001). Aristotle's Ethics. Available: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle-ethics/. Last accessed 06 December
2009.
7
Aristotle. (2009). Aristotle: The Nicomachean Ethics. London: Forgotten Books. p.59.
8
Aristotle. Aristotle: The Nicomachean Ethics. p.253.
N0143950 Verity James
9
unequally in proportion to their inequality.’9 The second form of particular justice is
that of rectificatory justice, which aims to remedy unequal loses and gains between
people. However, the only type of justice (or injustice) that should have the
intervention of an agent is when an act of injustice is carried out voluntarily.
Though Aristotle’s ethics seem far detached from the basis of the police in
contemporary society, it is essential to give an overview of his thoughts to have a
wider understanding of the substructure of the current justice system. It is Aristotle’s
ideas about voluntary/involuntary actions, and the notion of a ‘mean’ justice which
aims to maintain or restore the balance of individuals having their fair share, which
has become the basis for our legal system today. Therefore, in light of Aristotle’s
works, we can envisage that as the police are supposed to be agents of justice, this
justice may have been compromised because of the general consensus of the
balance being disturbed within the criminal justice system. However, perhaps in our
society we have returned to Aristotle’s idea of treating equals equally and unequals
unequally, and this is where the contention may lie. Though Aristotle lived millennia
before the next philosopher that is going to be discussed, advancing in this vein is
logical as Kant is the next significant figure to examine this topic. Kant’s works on
ethics lay the foundation for the current Western, Protestant view of crime and
justice.
“It is our membership in the intelligible world that Kant locates our freedom”10
Kant’s assumes that our part in the intelligible world is that which expresses our
freedom. This is connected with the idea that in our contemporary society our
9
Wacks. Philosophy of Law: A Very Short Introduction. p.59.
10
Denis, L. (2008). Kant and Hume on Morality . Available: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-hume-morality/. Last accessed
08 Dec 2009.
Ricevi informazioni sui nostri servizi, sulle offerte e non perdere news e consigli su università e lavoro.
