Societal Development, Social Equality, and Homicide: A Cross-National Test of a Durkheimian Model

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to formulate and test a Durkheimian model of societal development and homicide. Relying heavily on Anthony Giddens' recent reinterpretation of the Division of Labor, we argue that development has no overall effect on the societal homicide rate primarily because the egalitarian changes accompanying development make for new forms of social solidarity. Our theory leads us to predict that there will be no significant zeroorder relationship between development and homicide, a positive partial effect of measures of moral individualism on homicide, and a negative partial effect of a measure of equality on homicide. The results of a cross-sectional analysis for a sample of 50 nations provide partial support for the theory. In a series of works spanning roughly the past decade, Anthony Giddens (a, b, c) has challenged the orthodox interpretation of Durkheim's social theory. This interpretation, developed most fully by Parsons and Nisbet, stresses the conservative nature of Durkheim's thought. Durkheim is depicted as an order theorist. His main concern, according to this view, is to propose a solution to the Hobbessian problem of order, a solution which emphasizes the need for a strong consensus to prevent the degeneration of society into the war of each against all. Social change, the argument continues, potentially threatens the strength of the extremely fragile societal consensus. Durkheim is thus seen as being highly suspicious of social change and fearful of its consequences. Giddens argues forcefully against this conservative interpretation of Durkheim's thought and proceeds to draw out the implications for political sociology of a revised reading of Durkheim. These implications, however, are not confined to political sociology per se. It is our position that Gid