Ryan Streeter
As a long-time fan of James Q. Wilson's work over the years, I really enjoyed Holman Jenkins' Wall Street Journal feature on the great thinker today. This passage about the effects of the now well-known "broken windows theory" caught my eye:
It's now clear that a long and mysterious decline in America's serious crime rate began just about the time the article appeared. Like a true conservative, though, Mr. Wilson doubts government policies, including his own contributions, were all that important. Better policing and greater use of prison may have played a role, but he is convinced the major factor lies elsewhere. He believes "cultural change" was the important variable, albeit in a fashion he's still puzzling over...
In the 1960s, the baby boom obviously enlarged the number of male teenagers, but what also changed conspicuously was the type of crimes they committed, from petty theft and the like to more serious crimes, such as armed robbery, grand larceny and homicide.
"So there was cultural change as well as a numerical change, and what caused the culture change? Whatever it was, it was powerful. I think it's best summarized by saying people abandoned the idea that self-control was the standard by which life should be led. That's my rough summary of what the '60s meant. And today I'm willing to guess that's less common today. But how do I prove that? I have no idea."
Wilson comes off in the piece as his characteristically humble self. He's quick to point out that broken windows theory was not his idea alone, and he's cautious about ascribing too much importance to the theory's impact on crime.
The whole article is worth reading.
Comments