Browse Exhibits (3 total)
“Debunking the Mythology of Crime”, the Wall Street Journal’s feature article on Wilson published in 1975, highlighted the intellectual and political appeal of Wilson’s thoughts on the great crime debate of the 1970s. This snapshot of public reaction toward Wilson’s arguments illuminated how and why Wilson rose to prominence as the intellectual powerhouse behind “tough on crime” policies enacted under the Nixon and Reagan Administrations. The author, Edwin Harwood, explained how Wilson’s perspective on the problems of crime differed from traditional liberal and conservative camps. Specifically, Harwood described how Wilson’s “contribution to the series of seasoned and scholarly challenges to the liberal perspective…offers refreshing insights into the crime problem that go beyond the stereotyped either-or policy choices of liberals and conservatives.”
 Harwood, Edwin. “Debunking the Mythology of Crime (1975).” Wall Street Journal (1923 -Current File). July 7, 1975.
One of the most prolific writers on crime and criminal behavior in the twentieth century—James Q. Wilson—rose to national prominence in the 1970s by making controversial proclamations against the liberal tradition of “curing root causes of crime.” Wilson famously debunked commonly held assumptions about lower class, crime-prone youth by presenting pointed critiques of criminological theorists of the 1960s. Ultimately, Wilson’s intellectual and political popularity demonstrated the receptiveness and deference that national policymakers and American citizens had toward public intellectual thought in the 1970s. Furthermore, Wilson’s ideas shed light on a host of public policy related challenges (in regards to criminal justice reform) that profoundly transformed traditional academic attitudes toward crime, urban violence, and policing throughout the decade.
In his National Affairs article published in 1966, “Crime in the Streets,” Wilson directly addressed accusations regarding racism and policing. When discussing the arrests rates and hysteria over the “urban crime wave,” Wilson asserted, “Some well-intentioned people believe that crime figures are inflated by the propensity of the police to arrest Negros for every little infraction…If the police didn’t discriminate against the Negro in this way, the argument goes, the crime figures would be lower and, in addition, the Negro would lose his undeserved reputation for having higher a crime rate than whites.” Wilson went on to claim, “Nobody who has spent much time with the police in Negro sections of our big cities could accept this argument…Residents of lower-class Negro neighborhoods tolerate more disorder, are less trusting of police, and are less willing to inform on their neighbors than are residents of higher-status neighborhoods.”
Essentially, Wilson understood that policing activities disproportionately affected African Americans. However, he dismissed the possibility that police discrimination alone caused disparate amounts of contact between law enforcement and people of color in cities when compared to whites living in the suburbs. Instead, Wilson emphasized how rates of “Negro crime” and rampant trends of “disorderly conduct” in minority neighborhoods, in his mind, justified increased police surveillance in urban areas. Furthermore, he accused lawmakers and intellectuals of promoting this flawed logic in order to shackle the police, encourage urban violence, and “mollycoddle” street criminals.
 James Q. Wilson, "The Urban Unease," The Public Interest, Number 5, Fall 1969.
 James Q. Wilson, "The Urban Unease: Community vs. City," The Public Interest, Number 12, Summer 1968.
 James Q. Wilson, "Crime in the Streets," The Public Interest, Number 5, Fall 1966.