Reinterpreting social harm
This chapter states the case for a social harm perspective. Initially, the chapter outlines the emergence of social harm as an extension of criminological investigation through the suggestion that entirely legal processes and actions can engender harmful consequences. The strengths and limitations of harm perspectives are outlined before contemplating the question harm from what? This evidences Pemberton’s ‘human needs’, Yar’s ‘search for recognition’, and deviant leisure’s ‘ethical responsibility for the other’. Following this, an ultra-realist interpretation of society is proffered. Synthesising ultra-realism with social harm perspectives extends the social harm perspective by recognising the systemic violence of capitalism and neoliberalism, the negative motivation to harm, is complemented by the positive motivation to harm and the transcendental materialist subject. This emphasis on motivation delineates intentional and unintentional action and links the subject (micro) with organisational culture (meso) and political-economic ideology (macro). Finally, the crucial role of causative absence is outlined; negativity or absence has as much causal power as a positive or presence; both intentional and unintentional harms stem from problematic absences at a structural, cultural and interpersonal level.