Vandalism is damage to other people’s property for the sake of causing harm. It is a part of property crimes that is most frequent in different parts of the world, and indeed Hong Kong. Some examples of vandalism include graffiti, egging a house, or straddling a line, but it all depends on the outcome. The consequence of vandalism covers damage to parts of the premise for which one is responsible and personal property. Different crime theories will play an integral role in explaining vandalism. Therefore, this report presents vandalism in Hong Kong and uses other crime theories, such as functionalism, symbolic interactionalism, and conflict theory, to explain it.
Vandalism in Hong Kong
Vandalism is a common problem in Hong Kong, especially during protests. In a recent incident, as early as 2022, two women and one man pleaded guilty to eight counts of criminal damage to power boxes, lampposts, and other public facilities subject to vandalism during the Tiananmen crackdown (Ho, 2023). Aside from that, in 2019, there were protests in Hong Kong that led to vandalism (Griffiths & Yeung, 2019). Over 460 traffic lights were subjected to vandalism and were tampered with, 40 lamps were damaged, and two 900 square meters of pedestrian blocks were removed from the footpaths (Griffiths & Yeung, 2019). Other incidences included missing plastic barriers, water-filled barriers, CCTV cameras, and Chinese-owned shops were rooted, to mention a few (Griffiths & Yeung, 2019). Tear gas canisters were thrown back at police during the protests, and all these incidences make up part of vandalism. While the cause of protests may have been valid, this did not make their vandalism legal or right. Vandalism leads to the destruction of personal property and drives people to undergo different forms of loss. Reparation and bouncing back from the harm caused by vandalism is expensive and affects the progress of business, tourism, and other day-to-day activities in a city.
Vandalism as a Personal Trouble and Public Issue
Vandalism is a crime that affects an individual, family, friends, and community. It is a crime characterised by intentional destruction, defacement, and mutilation of private and public property (Ceccato & Wilhelmsson, 2011). Typically, vandalism is seen in public spaces and is considered a quality-of-life crime as it affects the overall safety and well-being of the community members. For an individual, vandalism can make one pay for destroyed property. An example of this would be a situation where one’s property is vandalised, such as a car or home, becomes a personal problem as it directly affects an individual’s safety, well-being, and financial status (Ceccato & Wilhelmsson, 2011). In such situations, a person should deal with the consequences and take action and steps for reparation and replace the damaged property.
Further, vandalism could be a public issue. Notably, vandalism is viewed as a public problem as it occurs on a large scale and affects the community. Typically, it is a public problem with wide-reaching consequences (Ceccato & Wilhelmsson, 2011). The actions committed in these criminal activities undermine the sense of safety and security in neighbourhoods. Vandalism often targets public spaces such as parks, buildings, and transportation networks. The financial burden of cleaning up and repairing the vandalised property falls on taxpayers. Local governments divert resources that would have been spent on further community improvements to repair and clean up a city that has been subject to destruction by protestors. Aside from that, vandalism leads to a deteriorating neighbourhood. The presence of graffiti and damaged properties could attract criminality. Addressing vandalism is a collective effort that involves law enforcement agencies, community organisations, and residents who work together to prevent the public problem, thus leading to safe and vibrant communities.
How Functionalists Explain Vandalism
The functionalist view on crime explains that crime results from social structures instead of a consequence of an individual’s choices. The theory holds that deviance is a critical function of society’s functioning. The functionalist approach to crime is a combination of different criminal ideas. One of the theories is by Emily Durkheim, who held that crime is inevitable. From Durkheim’s perspective, crime happens even in the most privileged societies (Thompson, 2022). Not everyone will be devoted and willing to comply with the set social standards and norms. However, deviance beyond specific amounts could be risky, harming society and leading to dysfunction. Vandalism results from different factors and is not limited to less privileged neighbourhoods. Durkheim introduced a concept that he referred to as anomie, a breakdown in social norms. The anomie could be vandalism and may result when individuals feel disconnected from a sense of belonging in a community setting. They lack a drive to adhere to social standards and norms. As a consequence, these people could indulge in vandalism.
Additionally, vandalism could be associated with the lack of social integration. As Thompson (2022) argued, social bonds and community integration are critical elements of crime prevention. Vandalism and other deviant tendencies would likely occur when people notice any form of separation from a community. When well-integrated, people have a limited need to indulge in criminal behaviours. Also, collective consciousness is another element that could explain vandalism from a functionalist point of view. According to Emile Durkheim, collective conscience represents shared beliefs and norms. In a well-integrated society, individuals are less likely to be deviant as they internalise the shared norms (Thompson, 2022). Lastly, anomic conditions such as rapid societal changes and economic instability could result in high anomie levels. In such situations, individuals are likely to become disintegrated and could be disconnected. Such people would result in vandalism as a part of recognition as essential members of society.
Apart from Emile Durkheim, there is another view of the functionalism theory in the form of strain theory by Robert Merton. The strain theory was introduced by Robert Merton, who took and expanded his idea based on Durkheim’s concept of anomie conditions (Thompson, 2022). The vision of success in any community today is primarily linked to material and financial posterity. Success is achieved through legal means such as formal qualifications and skill enhancement. The goal of material success is a part of the ethos of a culture that states that every person has a chance at career advancement and should make it to the top of the ladder. The main argument is that anomie results from the pressure to accomplish the goals. Along the process of achieving these goals, a person will likely encounter challenges in the form of legislation or social barriers, such as discrimination and lack of fair opportunities to succeed (Thompson, 2022). In this case, there exists a strain between the expectations of society and the means of living up to them and meeting them therein. As a form of wanting to gain more equal opportunities to succeed, people could indulge in protestors, but when their pleas are unheard, they could turn to vandalism. People turn away from the legal means of being successful and comfortable in their lives and take vandalism to air their grievances and achieve their needs or have people look into them.
How Conflict Theorists Approach Vandalism
Conflict theory was developed from the sociological views of Karl Marx and Max Weber. The idea would explain vandalism by focusing on society’s innate issues and conflicts. Society is characterised by different elements and aspects of social inequality, where other groups have unequal access to power, resources, and opportunities (Morin, 2014). The marginalised and disadvantaged people could feel excluded and unwanted in society. At the same time, conflict theory holds that a community has conflicting situations and triggers. The conflicts are typically between the dominant and marginalised groups. The conflicts are a consequence of competition due to limited resources and protection of interests.
Further, deviance is a form of response. From a conflict theory point-of-view, deviant behaviours such as vandalism are a form of response to social inequalities and the perceived injustices existing in society (Morin, 2014). Marginalised people and groups could use vandalism as a form of expression. They could use it to air their frustration, anger, and resistance against the privileges only enjoyed by the dominant groups. Aside from that, vandalism acts such as property damage or graffiti are acts of resistance. The opposition is often against those in authority or influential positions. The actions could be a way for people to challenge the values and norms established in society that they may consider oppressive or discriminative. Further, the conflict theory’s social control and repression aspect could be used to explain vandalism from a conflict theorist perspective (Morin, 2014). The conflict theory argues that those in power use social institutions, including the criminal justice system, to control and suppress any forms of dissent. In this case, illegal actions could ensue, and behaviours such as vandalism could play out. Such behaviour may expose a society or city to different imminent threats. From this, one can see some correlation between conflict and vandalism exists. Vandalism is a way that marginalised people use to express their grievances and resistance, and there is a need to address the root causes of the inequality for the issues to scale down.
How Symbolic Interactionist Explain Vandalism
Symbolic interactionism explains crime through the labelling theory. The theory views crime and deviance as socially constructed. Crime and deviance from a symbolic interactionism viewpoint, crime and deviance are socially generated and result from deviancy amplification spirals caused by processes of trying to acquire meaning that single out certain groups as likely to be deviant. Symbolic interactionism is focused on how people view the world around them and how they try to understand it. As people continue their day-to-day activities, they often observe other people and objects or events surrounding them. For instance, as people proceed with their daily activities, they would likely see a group of protestors; they speak to others, hear about an event, or work in a team to complete a project. The point of symbolic interactionism is the fact that people do not observe situations from an objective viewpoint. Rather, they interpret and define what is seen subjectively. Instead of objectively analysing what others are doing, people tend to have certain beliefs about what another person is doing. How one gives meaning to such a situation is essential since it helps determine one’s behaviour.
Symbolic interactionism is a perspective that is concerned with interpretations of symbols, meanings, and social interactions. When applied to the crime of vandalism, it could enhance the meaning of the crime. The theory emphasises that people attach meaning to objects, actions, and symbols based on their experiences and interactions. In vandalism, the act and the ensuing graffiti or damage hold different meanings. For some people, it could be self-expression ways, and for others, it could be rebellion. Some people may use vandalism to relay a particular message or portray their identity.
Aside from that, symbolic interactionism is concerned with the labels that have been assigned to individuals and their behaviour. Vandalism is considered deviant (Labeling and Symbolic Interaction Theory, 2023). However, how a society labels vandals could affect their future actions and next steps. Being labelled as a vandal could lead people towards adopting the identity. As a consequence, this further reinforces deviant behaviour. Thus, symbolic interactionalism associates vandalism with labelling (Labeling and Symbolic Interaction Theory, 2023). For instance, if the marginalised black people in Hong Kong are continually subjected to marginalisation, the notion that they are vandals could create vandalism in the group as they try to self-express and deal with the labels that cause discrimination and further abuse.
The symbolic interactionism perspective also explores how people form subcultures and group identities. Notably, vandals belong to subcultures and groups where vandalism is normalised or celebrated. Symbolic interactionism helps people understand the dynamics of a group, shared meanings, and peer influence that could perpetuate these criminal activities. For some groups, such as gangs, peer influence could help in contributing to vandalism. Such groups experience different challenges and may coerce or motivate each other into vandalism to make a statement. Gangs tend to have different goals. For some, the goal is petty crime and property destruction. For others, the goal is drugs and substance use associated with criminal activities such as vandalism. All these gang activities can best be explained using the symbolic interactionism theory. Some people lack a sense of association and could find meaning in certain social groups, such as gangs. Symbolic interactionism underscores the essence of social interactions in shaping behaviour. Vandals are likely to indulge in vandalism as a response to interacting with peers, authority, and members of a given social environment.
Conclusion
Vandalism is a prevalent crime in Hong Kong. Most of the people engaging in vandalism activities are usually protestors. Mainly, vandals protest to air their grievances while others do so for lack of consciousness and knowledge on right or wrong. Different sociological theories help to explain criminal activities. In this report, the three approaches, conflict, functionalism, and symbolic interactionism, are used to describe the illegal activity of vandalism in the context of the vandalism activities in Hong Kong. The conflict theory associates vandalism with imbalance and unequal opportunities in society. Symbolic interactionism associates vandalism with peer influence and how people interact with society members. The functionalist approach associates vandalism with strain in society and Durkheim’s notion that crime is inevitable.
References
Ceccato, V., & Wilhelmsson, M. (2011). Acts of vandalism and fear in neighbourhoods: Do they affect housing prices? The Urban Fabric of Crime and Fear, 191-213. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4210-9_8
Griffiths, J., & Yeung, J. (2019, December). Hong Kong protests: How unrest criminalised a generation. Breaking News, Latest News and Videos | CNN. https://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2019/12/asia/hong-kong-6-months-intl-hnk/
Ho, K. (2023, August 29). 3 Hongkongers plead guilty to criminal damage charges over vandalism on the 2022 Tiananmen crackdown anniversary. Hong Kong Free Press HKFP. https://hongkongfp.com/2023/08/30/3-hongkongers-plead-guilty-to-criminal-damage-charges-over-vandalism-on-2022-tiananmen-crackdown-anniversary/
Labeling and symbolic interaction theory. (2023, March 4). Criminal Justice. https://criminal-justice.iresearchnet.com/criminology-theories/labeling-and-symbolic-interaction-theory/
Morin, R. (2014). Conflict theory. The Encyclopedia of Theoretical Criminology, 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118517390.wbetc124
Thompson, K. (2022, November 16). The functionalist perspective on crime and deviance. ReviseSociology – A level sociology revision – education, families, research methods, crime and deviance and more! Retrieved October 2, 2023, from https://revisesociology.com/2016/04/03/functionalist-explanations-of-deviance/#:~:text=The%20Functionalist%20analysis%20of%20crime,Emile%
write