Reversible Comparisons: Policing Criminality and Criminal Policing in South Africa

0 ANTHROPOLOGY
Sociology Lens Pub Date : 2024-02-25 DOI:10.1111/johs.12448
Mesrob Vartavarian
{"title":"Reversible Comparisons: Policing Criminality and Criminal Policing in South Africa","authors":"Mesrob Vartavarian","doi":"10.1111/johs.12448","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>John D. Brewer’s (1994) seminal study of the South African Police claimed that structural factors would inhibit democratic reforms in law enforcement agencies, regardless of which political party controlled the public administration. Thirty years of majority rule, and a series of subsequent works (Altbeker 2005, 2007; Steinberg, 2008; Lamb 2018), demonstrate that Brewer’s thesis remains relevant. Occasional efforts at fully reconstructing state security agencies never took hold and the South African Police Service remains mired in the sordid practices of its colonial past. McMichael and Brown concur with this established narrative while Shaw’s study on vigilantism adds insightful subtleties that deromanticize subaltern social movements. All three authors tackle sharp distinctions between policing and criminality, arguing that the two processes often intertwine and are frequently interchangeable. This review article combines structural determinants of coercive law enforcement with elite political agency. Political choices made by South Africa’s ruling African National Congress reinforce criminal practices in policing and precipitate the formation of volatile vigilante organizations.</p>","PeriodicalId":101168,"journal":{"name":"Sociology Lens","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/johs.12448","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sociology Lens","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/johs.12448","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

John D. Brewer’s (1994) seminal study of the South African Police claimed that structural factors would inhibit democratic reforms in law enforcement agencies, regardless of which political party controlled the public administration. Thirty years of majority rule, and a series of subsequent works (Altbeker 2005, 2007; Steinberg, 2008; Lamb 2018), demonstrate that Brewer’s thesis remains relevant. Occasional efforts at fully reconstructing state security agencies never took hold and the South African Police Service remains mired in the sordid practices of its colonial past. McMichael and Brown concur with this established narrative while Shaw’s study on vigilantism adds insightful subtleties that deromanticize subaltern social movements. All three authors tackle sharp distinctions between policing and criminality, arguing that the two processes often intertwine and are frequently interchangeable. This review article combines structural determinants of coercive law enforcement with elite political agency. Political choices made by South Africa’s ruling African National Congress reinforce criminal practices in policing and precipitate the formation of volatile vigilante organizations.

可逆比较:南非的刑事治安和刑事治安
约翰-D-布鲁尔(John D. Brewer,1994 年)对南非警察的开创性研究声称,无论哪个政党控制公共行政部门,结构性因素都会抑制执法机构的民主改革。30 年的多数统治以及一系列后续著作(Altbeker,2005 年、2007 年;Steinberg,2008 年;Lamb,2018 年)表明,布鲁尔的论断仍然具有现实意义。偶尔为全面重建国家安全机构所做的努力从未站稳脚跟,南非警察署仍然深陷殖民时期的肮脏做法之中。麦克迈克尔(McMichael)和布朗(Brown)同意这种既定的说法,而肖对私刑主义的研究则增加了一些有见地的微妙之处,将次等社会运动去神圣化。三位作者都对警务和犯罪进行了鲜明的区分,认为这两个过程经常交织在一起,而且经常可以互换。这篇评论文章将强制执法的结构性决定因素与精英政治机构相结合。南非执政党非洲人国民大会(African National Congress)做出的政治选择强化了警务工作中的犯罪做法,并促成了动荡不安的私刑组织的形成。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信