* * * * *
1. Epistemological Concerns. In moving from Mead to Marx, from intersubjective interaction to dialectical struggle, we stay within the realm of the relational: for Marxist thinkers, reality is a relationship and struggle between dialectical opposites. Epistemologically, Marxist dialectics combines with its materialist underpinnings to view individuals as born into a set of social relationships according to class structures; not merely "subjects" but also constitutive of material structures. As such, the consciousness and perspectives of an individual at any given time are at best inherently partial, historically specific views reflecting their "reality"; at worst, individuals possess "false consciousness," the victims of ideology. Nevertheless, Marx remains committed to his work as science ("there is no royal road to science" he warns his readers of Capital); science alone is able to find the laws ordering the apparent randomness of social relations and to penetrate the ideological fog that blinds us from reality. And nevertheless—dialectical to the end—science alone cannot bring about change, but rests in a dialectical relationship with political praxis; both are needed.
2. Theoretical Concerns. The first theoretical commitment of Marxist criminologists remains the articulation of the class structure of capitalist society and an exposition of the ways in which mechanisms of social control are maintained. Social control can be understood formally or informally: while some Marxist scholars study the ways in which legal ideology, the definition of crimes, and practices of punishment maintain class relations; others study how pervasive disciplinary practices and institutions maintain class control, such as the disciplinary techniques of schools, factories, and hospitals. In addition, Marxist criminologists work to redefine what is understood as "crime" in society, seeking to expose the criminality of the privileged and powerful. Marxist criminologists additionally focus on relationship between punishment and economics. Whatever its variant, "power" carries much theoretical weight for Marxist scholars: whether it be defined more in traditionally, as the ability to define the law and control its enforcement, or in a more epistemic manner, such as the power to shape perceptions, understandings, and identities, as in the ideas of "ideology" and "hegemony." Finally, Marxist criminologists retain, of course, a commitment to praxis, and call for criminologists to use their expertise for the causes of justice and social change, or to work to alter the priorities of criminologists themselves.
3. Substantive Concerns. In addition to the concerns suggested by the theoretical points above, when considering the substantive areas of Marxist inquiry, one is immediately struck by the role by the importance of history to Marxist analysis, including a substantial body of "revisionist" history concerning the origins of the prison and other institutions. Perhaps this has less to do with the fact that Marxism has historically been grounded in an understanding of the "laws" of history, though this is not unrelated. Rather, one might argue that historical accounts of the legal practice and the "origins" of institutions are an ideal site for Marxist scholars to gravitate to, for a variety of reasons: (a) historical accounts of the past allow us to regain a perspective of the historical contingency of our current social order, particularly accounts that show us how institutions that appear seemingly necessary or inevitable, such as the prison, are the products of political struggles and class interests; (b) they show us how institutions which we accept as beneficent, beneficial, and as public goods, such as the juvenile courts in Platt's The Child Savers, or, closer to the present, community and restorative justice programs in Cohen's Visions of Social Control, have historically been tied to class or state interests, and invite us to look for interest in the present; (c) they put current practices into relief with the past, allowing us to understand strategies of social that are distinctive to our age; and (d) histories, such as E. P. Thompson's Whigs and Hunters, are able to examine past practices over a duration of time; since Marxism is a forward looking doctrine, such historical analyses speak to our present condition, giving us strength to change. Finally, other substantive concerns include the way in which law functions sporadically to give the veneer of justice while replicating class structures; an emphasis on everyday social control mechanisms; and, in works like The New Criminology, ostensibly revealing the theoretical and ideological inadequacies of the criminological tradition, in an effort to clear some ground for new, more dialectical growth.