Posted on 04/26/2005 4:10:01 PM PDT by CHARLITE
As a Criminology Professor, I take every opportunity to attempt to attach one theory of crime causation or another to current events. There are numerous, and often repetitive, theoretical models intended to help us understand and explain criminality. Some of these focus on personality and upbringing. Others look at social conditions and neighbourhood deterioration. Still, others attempt to link criminality to the evils of capitalism (the dinosaurs may be extinct but there’s a whole breed of belly-dragging Criminologist that refuses to make its way to the tar pits). That’s what living in your mom’s basement till you’re thirty-five will do to you.
So how does one go about explaining the childish antics of liberals lately? Like undisciplined three year olds sitting in the high chair at Denny’s they seem to have found a new past time – throwing food. Disguised as protest, liberals seem consumed with taking every opportunity to throw food and condiments on those they disagree with. The recent assaults on Ann Coulter, Pat Buchanan, David Horowitz and others are interesting; not just for revealing liberals as the intolerant jack boots that they are, but for illustrating just how juvenile the left has become.
So, sociologically speaking, what does this mean?
There’s one criminological model that is quite effective in shedding some light on these childish shenanigans. It’s called “Drift Theory”. Conceived in the 60’s by David Matza and Gresham Sykes, Drift Theory demonstrates how otherwise law-abiding citizens can so easily move between conforming behaviour and blatant criminality. The theory suggests that many offenders may behave civilly on most occasions and to an extent, embrace pro-social values and more or less respect the law. But through a series of rationalizations and justifications, they are able to willingly engage in blatantly illegal behaviour and still come away with a clear conscience.
Oh yes, and the theory was specifically developed to understand juvenile offenders; which makes it highly appropriate for analyzing liberals.
A quick perusal of liberal websites and blogs reveals a plethora of excuses and justifications for the food throwing. Liberals have gone into overdrive to justify the recent assaults. This is quite intriguing because the essence of “Drift Theory” is to rationalize illegality. Sykes and Matza claim that delinquents do so by employing one or more of the five “techniques of neutralization.”
First, is the Denial Of Responsibility. Offenders typically seek to blame someone else for the allegations made against them. Liberals have been burning up the web lately arguing that the conservative organizers of these speaking events are the real culprits. They’re the ones who brought on the pies and other projectiles because of the hostile and intolerant beliefs of the scheduled speakers. By holding these events at universities and other bastions of liberal orthodoxy, the organizers should have expected problems and are ultimately the ones responsible.
Second, we have the Denial Of Injury. In this case, offenders argue no one was physically hurt by their actions; it’s not a big deal. Liberal apologists are adamant that pie throwing is an age-old form of civil disobedience and should not be considered in the same context as an actual assault. Even though throwing pies at someone legally constitutes an assault and battery, to liberals, as long as no one needed medical treatment there was no harm done. It’s just social protest.
Next is Condemning The Condemners. Here, the offenders portray their accusers as hypocrites and argue they’re just doing what conservatives always do. While browsing liberal web sites one will instantly note a recurring theme; conservatives routinely heckle and disrupt liberal speakers. This is sheer nonsense as we all know. Conservatives are much to busy working, paying taxes and raising families to spend all their free time causing a ruckus at forums they have no interest in. But lying seems to serve the left quite well so why stop now?
Fourth, is Appealing To Higher Loyalties. In this instance, offenders may admit committing the criminal act but because of loyalty to a particular cause or a higher order, breaking the letter of the law is justified. Liberals, in their twisted little worlds, are convinced that every conservative speaking engagement is akin to a hate crime; full of racism, homophobia, poor-bashing and fascism. Consequently, an illegal act of mischief or minor assault is thoroughly justified to shut down hate speech. Yes, these creatures actually think like this.
The fifth and final technique of neutralization is called Denial Of Victim. Denying the victim refers to instances where the offender is adamant that rather than consider the injured party an innocent victim, we should understand that “he had it coming” or “it’s his own fault”. In this case, liberals insist that the opinions and writings of those being pied make them fair game. By holding and disseminating their brand of hate and intolerance, conservative speakers have created the aggravating factor that precipitated the attacks. Blaming the victim is a tactic liberals have consistently used with success since 911.
Of course, I don’t pretend that a sociological perspective is the definitive way to understand liberals’ behaviour. I’d be quite interested in what a child psychologist has to on all this pie throwing say as well.
John Martin is a Criminologist at the University College of the Fraser Valley and can be contacted at John.Martin@ucfv.ca
Liberals = criminals and delinquents. Period.
Liberalism is a mental disorder.
"All are sh-t don't necessarily apply to us."
Notice how libs leap at every chance to bash the US, while strongly supporting those illegally slipping in to find a "better life"? Why aren't the libs alerting these folks to avoid this place at ALL costs?
.......because the more of them, the more potential liberal Democrat voters. When liberal politicians see numbers like 4,000 per day, their eyes light up like ringing slot machines at Vegas casinos. More Democrat voters pouring into the country every day.......for them,. That's what it means to them.
LOL! I love this guy.
I wish I had said this.
(Free Republic in unison) -- You WILL, Laz, you WILL!
Criminal brats.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.