ABSTRACT
Durkheim argued that crime is normal in society because there is actually no extra social, or natural, dividing line between criminal activity and other more acceptable activities. The dividing line is a process of demarcation and labelling, which serves to distinguish the acceptable and the unacceptable conduct. The use of the concept of crime is merely the strongest labelling procedure or processes which work to maintain social solidarity. Its effectiveness actually comes from the process of punishment and social emotions which are engendered. For by observing the punishment of people, and participating in the feeling of moral and social outrage at the offence, individuals become bound to the common perception of the justified and unjustified, of the right and wrong. The process of punishment is inescapable, as Durkheim points out in a famous example:
Even if the behaviours that are labelled criminal at time X in a society, were to be discontinued at time X2, new behaviours would be considered as crime. Crime therefore is an inevitable concept of organised society to respond to the inescapable diversity of behaviour within society. Durkheim calls upon us to consider that crime is actually a factor in public health, an integral part of social organisation. That does not mean to say that there are not abnormal or pathological levels of crime, but that both the absence of crime and a surplus of crime is pathological. A society in which there is no crime would be a rigidly overpoliced oppressive society. But a society which is experiencing too high a rate of crime is a society in which the balance between regulation and individuality has broken down.
