Orientalism

 

1) What is Orientalism? What are its key arguments?

2) What are the Orientalist explanations of Middle East’s underdevelopment?

3) Do you agree with them? Why/Why not (in your answer consider also the assigned reading by Chang)

Sample Solution

Orientalism

Orientalism is a style of thought based upon an ontological and epistemological distinction made between `the Orient` and `the Occident` in which an essentialized image of a typical oriental is represented as culturally and, ultimately, biologically inferior. The basis of Said`s argument in Orientalism is that the concept of the “Orient” as understood and used by the West – specifically France, England, and the United States – is not the “real” Orient. Rather, it is a constructed understanding of what citizens believe the Orient to be. Said describes how this style of thought produced the image of the Orient, for example, the Middle East and Islam, as a threatening, inferior, and underdeveloped “Other.” The image of Arabs in the popular mind is that of camel-riding terrorists, arose with the decolonization of the Middle East.

contributions, some juvenile courts no longer release the names of young offenders, and proceedings are kept private to prevent this social label from forming or sticking (Braithwaite & Drahos, 2002). Another contribution is the finding that youth rehabilitation programs may be better than juvenile detention centers for juvenile offenders because rehabilitative programs do not have the same stigmatizing effects, thus potentially shielding them from the loss of opportunities and the self-fulfilling prophecy in the future (Kroska et al., 2016).

Another policy effort that has resulted from labeling theory is the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s 2012 change to United States federal guidelines, which now require employers to make individual assessments to consider the type of crime and the age of the criminal record, the relevance of the offense to the job, and evidence of good conduct and rehabilitation when reviewing applications (Denver et al., 2017). This is meant to give offenders a better chance with re-entry, helping both offenders and those they encounter to recognize that people are more than their labels. Finally, in 2016, the United States Department of Justice implemented a policy change that requires person-first language when describing offenders: instead of “convicted felon,” one would say “person with a felony conviction” (Denver et al., 2017). This change in language is meant to reduce the chance of a label sticking to an individual. As history has shown, labels often do not stick to powerful offenders (Gottschalk, 2016). This is where theories regarding crimes of the powerful come into play.

Crimes of the Powerful

​Background

Crimes of the powerful are ill-defined, as the powerful are the ones who define crimes and decide punishments, and they are not likely to punish themselves or their cohorts. Theorists have tried to conceptualize crimes of the powerful through anomie (normless corporations) and control (general theory of crime) (Ruggiero, 2015). Sutherland has been frequently cited for his definition of crimes of the powerful that considers crime as a norm infraction:

The essential characteristic of crime is that it is a behavior which is prohibited by the state as an injury to the state…The two abstract criteria… as necessary elements in a definition of crime are legal descriptions of an act as socially harmful, and legal provision of a penalty for the act (Sutherland, 1949, p. 9).

Sutherland’s definition includes corporations as recidivist offenders, with privilege instigating the learning processes that lead to crime (Ruggiero, 2015).

​Despite the difficulties and ambiguities in its conception and definition, crimes of the powerful have merit in considering structural power theories of crime. Hagan and Thio assert that those with power and privilege have stronger motivations, more opportunities, and weaker social controls, and are therefore more likely to commit crime (Friedrichs, 2010). Other advantages of theories of crimes of the powerful include explanations of how those in power get away with crimes, how certain acts are or are not considered criminal, and the importance of national conversation and punishments when dealing with these crimes (Anello & Glaser, 2016; Olejarz, 2016).
​Aside from the definitional and conceptual issues, there are a few other disadvant

This question has been answered.

Get Answer
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 Hi, Welcome to Compliant Papers.