NEW 'CONVENTIONAL WISDOMS' OF THE 1970'S REFLECT PUBLIC FRUSTRATION WITH THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM. ONE SUCH DEVELOPMENT IS THE REVIVAL OF THE CLASSICAL THEORY OF CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY, WHOSE PROPONENTS ARGUE THAT THE CAUSES OF CRIME ARE TOO COMPLEX TO BE UNDERSTOOD, THAT CRIME MUST BE TREATED AS A GIVEN, AND THAT CRIMINAL JUSTICE AGENCIES ARE NOT DOING WHAT THEY SHOULD AND CAN DO, I.E., REMOVING CAPTURED OFFENDERS FROM SOCIETY. THE 'NEW CLASSICISTS' ACCEPT PUNISHMENT AS AN ACT OF RETRIBUTION. THE RADICAL, OR CRITICAL, CRIMINOLOGISTS, ON THE OTHER HAND, VIEW CRIME AS AN ARTIFACT OF THE ECONOMIC ORGANIZATION OF SOCIETY. ALTHOUGH THEIR VIEW WOULD SEEM TO BE OPPOSED TO THAT OF THE NEW CLASSICISTS, BOTH THEORIES REFLECT A DISENCHANTMENT WITH, AND AN ATTACK UPON, THE MODERN LIBERAL DEMOCRATIC STATE. THE NEW CONVENTIONAL WISDOMS ABOUT CRIME ARE LIMITED, FUNDAMENTALLY IDEOLOGICAL RATHER THAN EXPLANATIONAL, INCOMPLETE IF NOT ACTUALLY INVALID, AND BOTH SHORTSIGHTED AND IRRELEVANT WITH REGARD TO UNDERSTANDING AND AMELIORATING THE CRIME PROBLEM. HOWEVER, THE REAL PROBLEM WITH THE NEW CONVENTIONAL WISDOMS IS THAT PREOCCUPATION WITH THEM CREATES A DISINCLINATION TO PURSUE OTHER, MORE MODERATE COURSES. (LKM)