Despite Weber's definition of power, implying “that those who hold power do so at the expense of others” otherwise known as the “constant sum concept of power” (socguide: 2018), Parsons argues against this, instead like Susen seeing power as productive as well as repressive. Parsons sees power as something throughout society and something belonging to society (socguide:2018). Through this, he believes that within society, power leads people to create a new form of social action based around a on a unified consensus and so power becomes a ‘hypothetical entity representing any and all instances of meaningful human social behaviour’ (Fox, Lidz and Bershady, 2005: 3). As a result of this, for Parsons, power allows society and people to make use…show more content… Parsons (241) thinks that power itself has become such an integral part of society due to its “capacity to ensure that obligations are "really" binding” through methods which can be associated with “negative sanctions” should people not follow. Dean (2017: 25) further supports this through Bourdieu, believing that “Bourdieu’s social project sought to expose how the elite “players” have not only been heavily involved in the design of the game’s rules but also have the power to decide what a winning hand looks like”. This is a prime example of how power itself can be a repressive force within society because it enables society itself to be produced in accordance to how certain people wish it to be. In terms of the working class and upper classes, Bonger also theorised that society and the criminal justice system is rigged to be criminalise the deviant actions of the poor whilst condoning the actions of the rich. Therefore, when looking at the link between power and crime, Chambliss (1975: 152) sees crime as a “reality which exists only as it is created by those in the society whose interests are served by its
