Explaining Corruption: As Inevitable in a ‘System’ of Conflict?

Theoretical approaches attempting to explain crime as a biological, psychological or social problem associated with offenders often ignore the way crime, real or imagined, is constructed. Labelling (see Chap. 9) makes some attempt to correct this oversight by explaining the process and its consequences and appreciation for the way in which political interests and power affects social reaction, but does little to explain the struggles between individuals and/or sets of people in terms of power differentials. This chapter reaches beyond labelling and considers those theoretical approaches that fall under the umbrella of conflict. The sources of these conflicts, how they are developed and the elimination of them are all considered by drawing on the work of Bonger (1916), Sellin (1939), Vold (1958), Dahrendorf (1958), Turk (1969), Chambliss (1962), Quinney (1969) and Taylor et al. (1973). The main thrust of this chapter is explaining conflict under capitalism, which is what the above authors discussed rather than dictatorships or an absolute monarchy, even though there are power differentials in all systems and corrupt individuals and organizations.