A society that operates on its normal health crime or deviance changes a little. However, if the society operates normally, and the crime changes drops or increases significantly, it indicates an abnormal or sick society. One of the reasons for such changes is a division of labor. For instance, developed countries with complex labor division depend on their difference in their social positions for moral authority. Durkheim referred to the situation as organic solidarity. However, societies with rapid changes in occupational and social positions, people experience forced labor division. Crime and deviance would arise automatically in such areas. Without such deviance, the person gets oppressed within their labor patterns. Secondly, development of anomie changes the rates of crime and deviance. The condition could result due to lack of collective consciousness within the people; moral authority fails thus increased crimes. On the other hand, if the society operates normally, crime and deviance remain in a stable condition. Moral values also accompany particular …show more content…
For example, the legalization of marijuana in some States in the US, provided understanding to the topic of study. Some States provide strict rules against the drug while other they legalize the use of the drug. In the State that the drugs are legalized, it is not a crime while to the other countries it a crime. To strengthen Durkheim argument, Kai Erickson established an argument on Wayward Puritans that explained the advantages of deviance and crime within the society. Erickson provided two hypotheses: deviance serves basic roles in society and the second one deals directly with the explanation that deviance remains constant. He stated that all the communities are forming a society own certain moral boundaries. He claimed that each community set aside unique styles of deviance. Therefore, according to Erickson, moral boundaries provide distinct identification for people from the certain community, thus providing the members with a feeling of identity, and belonging. He argues that those crimes act as a fine lens through which boundaries are brought to focus while clarifying collective conscience. He supported Durkheim’s argument that groups tend to sustain, induce, and permit certain crimes within the