Western Michigan University ScholarWorks at WMU Dissertations Graduate College 6-2012 Winds of Change: The Historical Contingency of State Crime Kelly L. Faust Western Michigan University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/dissertations Part of the Criminology and Criminal Justice Commons, and the Politics and Social Change Commons Recommended Citation Faust, Kelly L., "Winds of Change: The Historical Contingency of State Crime" (2012). Dissertations. 39. https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/dissertations/39 This Dissertation-Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate College at ScholarWorks at WMU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at WMU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. WINDS OF CHANGE: THE HISTORICAL CONTINGENCY OF STATE CRIME by Kelly L. Faust A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of The Graduate College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Sociology Advisor: Susan M. Carlson, Ph.D. Western Michigan University Kalamazoo, Michigan June 2012 THE GRADUATE COLLEGE WESTERN MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY KALAMAZOO, MICHIGAN Date May 17, 2012 WE HEREBY APPROVE THE DISSERTATION SUBMITTED BY Kelly L. Faust ENTITLED Winds of Change: The Historical Contingency of State Crime AS PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF Doctor of Philosophy Sociology (Department) susan M. Carlson, Ph.D. Dissertation Review Committee Chair Sociology /&yj (Program) Gregory HowarcLPh.D. DissertatKM-v Revie^r Committee I £S David Kauzlarich, Ph.D. Dissertation Review Committee Member APPROVED Date \ ^W ML Dean of The Graduate (College WINDS OF CHANGE: THE HISTORICAL CONTINGENCY OF STATE CRIME Kelly L. Faust, Ph.D. Western Michigan University, 2012 Destruction of the built environment during a natural disaster is by no means a new phenomenon. What has changed over time is how we as a society react to such destruction, as well as what we expect from the state in terms of protection from, and responses to, said destruction. This dissertation explores these changes through a political economic lens with the goal of gaining increased knowledge of the phenomena that constitute state crime. Social structure of accumulation (SSA) theory provides the basis for a view of the state as a social institution which acts according to the goals of accumulation and legitimization. SSA theory identifies specific social structures of accumulation that facilitate capital accumulation for a given time period. Each social structure of accumulation then incorporates distinct relations between the state and different groups in society, including civil society in general. This analysis includes case studies of four hurricanes that span the previous two identified social structures of accumulation, the 1900 Galveston Hurricane, Hurricane Hazel in 1954, Hurricane Camille in 1969, and Hurricane Katrina in 2005. Within the existing research on natural disasters as state crime there are several issues that have not yet been addressed. The most important of these issues concerns when the injuries, deaths, and destruction of the built environment during and in the aftermath of a natural disaster is a state crime versus merely a result of natural causes. Drawing on existing definitions of state crime as well as more traditional elements of crime I propose a definition of natural disasters as state crime that has four elements; social harm actus reus, mens rea, and sanctions. Each of the four hurricanes in this study is analyzed in regards to these four elements to determine whether each was or was not a state crime. This work stands to benefit the study of state crime by deepening the theoretical understanding of the state in a historical context and providing criteria for further analysis within the area of natural disasters as state crimes. Copyright by Kelly L. Faust 2012 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to start by thanking my dissertation advisor, mentor, and friend, Susan Carlson, who went above and beyond in her commitment to me and this process. She never wavered in her support and for the last nine months has spent a good part of her Friday afternoons discussing whatever challenges I encountered and reaffirming her excitement about this project. I would also like to thank my other committee members, especially David Kauzlarich whose Explaining Crime class ignited a passion in me that I hope never dies. More than just this though, David kept in contact with me while I worked for two years before finally being able to return to school. Upon my return, David worked with me on my Master’s thesis and my first publication, helping me to produce research that I am still very proud of today. Without that class and David’s continued support, I most certainly would not be here today. I would also like to recognize the sociology department at Western Michigan University for its support over the last six years. Mostly, I want to thank the other graduate students with whom I now share a life-long bond; especially Emily Lenning, Sara Brightman, Liz Bradshaw, Jackie Doyon, Lisa Kruse and Cody Wedge. There were so many times when their support really was the only thing that kept me going. In a similar vein I would like to recognize the faculty of the sociology and anthropology department at Ohio University. I am so lucky to have been able to surround myself by so many supportive colleagues during the past nine months. All of my friends and family have been very supportive throughout the last six years but I would like to thank my dad and my mother and step-father, Vicki Stevens and Jim ii Acknowledgments—continued Royston for their never-ending support which came in just about every form imaginable. Lastly, I would like to dedicate this to my dear friend, Tracy Hall (because I know you can do it too!) and to my Aunt, Janet McCarthy, who has encouraged me from the start with her genuine interest in my subject matter. Kelly L. Faust iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...................................................................................... ii CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................... 1 II. DEFINITIONS OF STATE CRIME .......................................................... 10 Natural disasters as state crimes .......................................................... 31 Elements of a crime ............................................................................. 38 III. SOCIAL STRUCTURE OF ACCUMULATION THEORY AND HISTORICALLY CONTINGENT STATES ............................................. 44 The Monopoly SSA ............................................................................. 47 Post-World War II SSA ....................................................................... 55 Hypotheses .......................................................................................... 61 IV. METHODS ................................................................................................. 63 Research design ................................................................................... 65 Data sources......................................................................................... 67 The 1900 Galveston Hurricane ............................................................ 67 Hurricane Hazel ................................................................................... 68 Hurricane Camille ............................................................................... 69 Hurricane Katrina ................................................................................ 70 Limitations........................................................................................... 71 V. WAS THERE EVIDENCE OF STATE CRIME IN THE 1900 GALVESTON HURRICANE? .................................................................. 73 Social harm .......................................................................................... 84 Actus reus ............................................................................................ 85 iv Table of Contents—continued Mens rea .............................................................................................. 89 Sanctions ............................................................................................. 90 Conclusion ........................................................................................... 91 VI. WAS THERE EVIDENCE OF STATE CRIME IN HURRICANE HAZEL? ...................................................................................................... 93 The capital-state citizen accord in the post-World War II SSA .......... 94 Hurricane Hazel ................................................................................... 102 Social harm .......................................................................................... 112 Actus reus ............................................................................................ 112 Mens rea .............................................................................................. 114 Sanctions ............................................................................................. 115 Conclusion ........................................................................................... 116 VII. WAS THERE EVIDENCE OF STATE CRIME IN HURRICANE CAMILLE? ................................................................................................