IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/crimin/v62y2022i5p1158-1174..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ideologies, Power and the Politics of Punishment: The Case of the British Conservative Party

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas Guiney

Abstract

Recent scholarship has underscored the limitations of a theoretical repertoire that reduces the politics of punishment to debates over punitiveness, neoliberalism or penal exceptionalism. In this paper I argue that greater understanding of the dynamic interplay between ideologies and power can provide a richer account of the complex and contradictory landscapes of contemporary penal politics. I seek to show that political parties occupy a prominent position within representative systems of government and this mediating role, at the intersection between ideology and power, is closely associated with the production of penal policy outcomes. Reflecting upon the recent history of the British Conservative Party, I conclude that the politics of punishment is shaped, not only by inter-party competition (and consensus), but the dynamics of intra-party conflict.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas Guiney, 2022. "Ideologies, Power and the Politics of Punishment: The Case of the British Conservative Party," The British Journal of Criminology, Centre for Crime and Justice Studies, vol. 62(5), pages 1158-1174.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:crimin:v:62:y:2022:i:5:p:1158-1174.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/bjc/azac031
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alan Finlayson, 2007. "Making sense of David Cameron," Public Policy Review, Institute for Public Policy Research, vol. 14(1), pages 3-10, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:crimin:v:62:y:2022:i:5:p:1158-1174.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/bjc .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.