Criminology and Criminal Justice Neoliberal Ideology

Question: Discuss about the Criminology and Criminal Justicefor Neoliberal Ideology. Answer: Introduction The neoliberal ideology describes a policy model of social studies along with economics which transmit control of economic factors from the public to the private sector. The ideology builds from neoclassical economics, indicating that governments have to restrain subsidies, make effective reforms to tax law to expand tax base, decrease deficit expenditure, restrain protectionism, along with opening markets up for trade (Giroux 2015). The ideology further seeks for the abolition of fixed exchange rates, support deregulation, allow private property, as well as privatize businesses operated by state. It focuses on the promotion of rational self-interest via policies like privatization, deregulations, tax cuts and globalization. It is a proven ideology since it leads to crony capitalism along with a huge outwards redistribution of wealth whereby poor and ordinary suffer asceticism, repression of wage, labour rights revocation and right for protesting whereas a few cabal of corporate interest along with creation of insiders enrich themselves through ant-competitive behaviors, absolute criminality as well as corruption, besides socialism-for-the-rich plans. The public debate along with political action linked to alcohol-associated violence and one punch killings are perceived to be linked to neoliberal ideology and this can be affirmed by using the concepts of risks as well as responsibilisation. Linking Public Debate and Political Action to Neoliberal Ideology The public debate along with political action related to alcohol-associated violence and one punch killings are linked to neoliberal ideology. In understanding this thesis, the deliberation in this paper uses the concepts of risks as well as responsibilisation. Responsibilisation seeks to have people accept more responsibility for the protection of themselves against the risk of crime victimization. People level of acceptance to be more responsible is influenced by their views on police, especially police attendance expectations, police performance satisfaction, police responsiveness to calls for service perception, along with attitudes to police legitimacy impacts the acceptance of people to increased responsibility for the control of crime. Responsibilisation is further linked to gender, education as well as fear of crime. From this understanding, it can be categorically stated that responsibilisation seeks to implement the neoliberal ideology suggestions that seek to transmit cont rol of economic factors from the public to the private sector through increased privatization, deregulation and wealth redistribution. The one-punch killing laws is an all-encompassing alterations aimed at tackling alcohol-triggered violence (Burgess 2016). This law seeks to make people more responsible by having a mandatory 8-year jail sentence for the fatal single-punch attacks triggered by the alcohol or drugs remain among the raft of mechanisms to curb alcohol-linked violence. This law improves responsible behavior since it is no longer allowable for one to go out and subsequently drink oneself stupid, take illegal substances, commence a fight, coward punch individuals or even engage in additional forms of assaults thinking that you will easily get away with such irresponsible conduct (Cullen 2014). Being a mandatory law, it leaves judges with no option but to sentence people, and hence it is a proactive mechanisms to help drive the concept of responsibilisation by reduction risks of attempting to punch someone once drunk. This law in essence is a neo-prohibition that emerges from the concepts of neoliberalism. It will effectively blur the responsibility of violent offenders with the regulations in alcohol. It is a proven neo-prohibition public health policies since people will be more responsible as it limits mandatorily the bottle shop closures at 10:00 pm besides a 1:30 am pub, along with no pub service after 3:00 am. The society will be more responsible since it shifts the responsibility to them proactively rather than wait to have perpetrators of violence engage in their bad behavior and inflict unnecessary harm to other innocent people. The law is more of offence-oriented than offender which is a proactive way to prevent the alcohol-triggered violence. Focusing on the offence arise from a more justice model than welfare model and it is increasingly proving effective in reducing the alcohol-linked violent crime. This shift from welfare on a global perspective is in line with the neo-liberal ideology of governance. This is because the fundamental alteration in criminal along with juvenile justice has shifted emphasis on social settings of crime and state protection measures to increased prescription of individual or family or community responsibility alongside accountability being effectively captured in the neo-liberal ideology of governing at distance (Muncie 2005). Unlike the extremely critiqued welfarism, neo-liberal has filled the gaps by discouraging state dependence, refuting overloading state responsibility that only determines the ability of a person to be responsible for his individual actions. The neo-liberal ideology has encouraged the family, individual and community to be more responsible without having to dependence on the state by transforming ancient notions of social benefits, social engineering, social welfare and social work to a more responsible and autonomous framework (Liebenberg, Ungar and Ikeda 2013). The move will also make the alcohol vendors to be more responsible by bringing into a halt the act of having the perpetrators to ply with liquor while lazy politicians will take their regulatory duties more seriously and having music videos halting the glorification of drinking. A reduction in the time people can drink is also a responsible strategy. This is because it is a self-evident truth that alcohol is directly correlated with violence. Alcohol is directly related to violence since much violent crime is triggered by intoxicated individuals. The availing theory indicates that alcohol lowers inhibition. It unswervingly anesthetizes the regions of brain which people use in the regulation of daily behavior. Alcohol alters people physically, and in a manner which makes certain individuals increasingly aggressive. Conclusion From the above discussion, it is a self-evident truth that both political actions and public debates associated with alcohol-affiliated violence and one punch killings seemed to be linked to neoliberal ideology. Both responsibilisation and risk concepts have been referenced to affirm this undisputed association. References Burgess, C.N., 2016. Critical analysis of the law surrounding" one punch" killings. Cullen, J., 2014. Wa's'one punch'law: solution to a complex social problem or easy way out for perpetrators of domestic violence. Griffith Journal of Law Human Dignity, 2(1). Giroux, H.A., 2015. Against the terror of neoliberalism: Politics beyond the age of greed. Routledge. Giroux, H.A., 2015. Schooling and the struggle for public life: Democracy's promise and education's challenge. Routledge. Liebenberg, L., Ungar, M. and Ikeda, J., 2013. Neo-liberalism and responsibilisation in the discourse of social service workers. British Journal of Social Work, p.bct172. Muncie, J., 2005. The globalization of crime controlthe case of youth and juvenile justice Neo-liberalism, policy convergence and international conventions. Theoretical Criminology, 9(1), pp.35-64.