发病前现代性(这在犯罪学的背景下,我们可以追溯到1970年代)法律和秩序的概念仅限于国家和其刚性的解释了违法和犯罪在社会(花环,2001)。的异常行为,违背了主流公民社会,犯罪被视为本质上是一种异常现象和异常;因此,那些与预谋犯罪是设想在相同的条款,即作为一种异常现象和异常。因此,罪犯必须离开主流公民社会为了维护法律和秩序,决定社会和政治领域的模式(福柯,1977)。这构成了监狱的概念的诞生作为一种分离的“好”“坏”和“纯”从“邪恶”监禁构成“遏制”的最好的方式(Emsley 2007:122 - 139)。这样,刑事司法系统成为一种包含那些不受欢迎的元素在社会的向下的句子视为最可行的方式,确保社会的其余部分是免费的从罪犯和犯罪所代表的文化“疾病”(Soothill 2007:27-49)。监狱,我们应该注意到,不仅是分离的设想是不受欢迎的元素的社会理想的主流社会的元素在这个时候;相反,被送进监狱的“恐吓”被许多neo-authoritarian决策者制定康复通过惩罚。因此,社会的一员,谁触犯了法律可以从他或她的“治愈”犯罪被送进监狱。通过这种方式,认为异常或偏差可以与不道德行为解决刑事能够被成功地集成到“正常”主流社会在释放的结果成功地接种治疗一直被灌输的任期内容器。然而,促进“正常化”的模式,正如大卫·斯科特(2007:57)所观察到的,一个内在矛盾的调查。
Prior to the onset of modernity (which in the context of criminology we can trace back to the 1970s) the concept of law and order was confined to the state and its rigid interpretation of what fuelled lawlessness and delinquency in society (Garland, 2001). As an abnormal act that went against the grain of mainstream civil society, crime was seen as essentially an aberration and an anomaly; thus, those people who committed crimes with malice aforethought were conceived of in the same terms, namely as an aberration and as an anomaly. As such, criminals had to be taken out of mainstream civil society in order to preserve the law and order which dictated the pattern of both the social and political spheres (Foucault, 1977). This constituted the birth of the concept of the prison as a means of separating the ‘good’ from the ‘bad’ and the ‘pure’ from the ‘evil’ with jail terms constituting the best possible means of ‘containment’ (Emsley, 2007:122-139). In this way, the criminal justice system became a way of containing those undesirable elements within society with the passing down of custodial sentences viewed as the most viable way of ensuring the remainder of society was free from the cultural ‘disease’ represented by criminals and crime (Soothill, 2007:27-49). The prison, we should note, was not only envisaged as a means of a separating the undesirable elements of society from the desirable elements of mainstream society at this time; rather, the ‘scare’ of being sent to prison was seen by many neo-authoritarian policy makers as constituting rehabilitation via punishment. Thus, a member of society who broke the law could be ‘cured’ from his or her criminality by being sent to prison. In this way, a perceived abnormality or aberration could be addressed with the wrong-doing criminal able to be successfully re-integrated into ‘normal’ mainstream society upon release as a result of the successfully inoculated cure having been imbued within the term of containment. Yet this promotion of the paradigm of ‘normalisation’ is, as David Scott (2007:57) observes, an inherently contradictory line of inquiry.