Depression and repression: Global capitalism, economic crisis and penal politics in interwar Greece
| Author | Leonidas K. Cheliotis |
| DOI | 10.1177/14773708211053129 |
| Published date | 01 May 2022 |
| Date | 01 May 2022 |
| Subject Matter | Special Issue: Penal changes, crises, and the political economy of punishment |
Depression and repression:
Global capitalism, economic
crisis and penal politics in
interwar Greece
Leonidas K. Cheliotis
London School of Economics and Political Science, UK
Abstract
Notwithstanding the significant advances made over the last twenty years in terms of charting and
explaining the ways in which state punishment is influenced by economic and political forces, little is
still known about the penal effects of conditions of economic crisis and about the role the incumbent
government’s political orientation plays in this regard. Because the few available studies on these questions
have been preoccupied with the Anglo-American sphere and only in the context of recent decades at
that, even less is known either about the implications that different types or experiences of economic
crisis carry for state punishment, or about the influence exerted in this respect by government political
orientations other than those found in established democracies. Irrespective of geographical or temporal
scope, moreover, the impact that different extranational factors and actors may have in terms of eco-
nomic, political or directly penal matters domestically remains poorly understood. With a view to helping
fill these gaps in the literature, this article explores the effects on state punishment that economic crisis
and government political orientation had in interaction with one another in the context of interwar
Greece. Attention is first paid to various ways in which global capitalism was decisive in creating within
Greece an environment conducive to increased punitiveness on the part of the state. The focus is on the
economic, social and political consequences of the Wall Street crash of 1929 and Britain’s exit from the
gold standard in 1931, as these were exacerbated by Greece’s long-term exposure to predatory lending,
speculative investing and external interference in her domestic affairs in the context of engaging inter-
national capital markets. The article then proceeds to discuss how the Liberal government of 1928–
1932 sought to handle the situation, particularly the approach it took towards punishment.
Keywords
Economic crisis, global capitalism, interwar Greece, government political orientation, political
economy of punishment
Corresponding author:
Leonidas K. Cheliotis, Department of Social Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science,
Old Building, Houghton Street, London WC2A 2AE, UK.
Email: l.cheliotis@lse.ac.uk
Special Issue: Penal changes, crises, and the political economy of punishment
European Journal of Criminology
2022, Vol. 19(3) 419–441
© The Author(s) 2021
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/14773708211053129
journals.sagepub.com/home/euc
Introduction
Over the last two decades, scholarship has made significant advances in charting and
explaining the ways in which state punishment is influenced by economic and political
forces. Most notably, we now understand a great deal more about the penal implications
of different economic systems and political institutions (see e.g. De Giorgi, 2006; Lacey,
2008; Wacquant, 2009a). Further progress in this area, however, requires avoiding ana-
lytic tendencies that have to date been restrictive. Six such tendencies, interrelated with
one another, stand out: first, what could be referred to as penological reductionism, in the
sense that state punishment has been customarily conceptualised and operationalised
solely in the form of conventional imprisonment (Cheliotis and Xenakis, 2016, 2020;
Hamilton, 2014; Newburn, 2020; Tonry, 2007); second, what may be termed normalcy
bias, inasmuch as disproportionate attention has typically been paid to periods of relative
economic or political stability (Cheliotis and Sozzo, 2016; Cheliotis and Xenakis, 2016,
2020); third, ahistoricism, to the extent that limited to no concern has usually been shown
with the long-term historical trajectories of the variables at issue, be they the economy,
politics or state punishment in itself (Gottschalk, 2006; Lacey and Soskice, 2021;
Melossi and Pavarini, 2018; Reiner, 2021; Rock, 2005); fourth, occidentalism,inthat
the focus has been almost fixed on the Western world and, even more so, on
Anglophone cases within it (Karstedt, 2013; Lappi-Seppälä and Tonry, 2011; Nelken,
2009); fifth, statism, insofar as analysis has mostly been restricted to the nation-state at
the risk of leaving any local-level variations obscure (Barker, 2009; Lynch, 2010;
Phelps, 2017); and sixth, methodological nationalism, given that developments inside
nation-states have commonly been investigated without consideration of the inter-
national, transnational or global networks of which the states in question are part
(Anderson, 2018; Jones and Newburn, 2007; Wacquant, 2009b; Xenakis and Ivanov,
2017).
Thus, knowledge is lacking about the effects that conditions of economic crisis have
on state punishment, especially beyond conventional imprisonment, and what role the
incumbent government’s political orientation plays in this connection. Because the few
available studies on these questions have been preoccupied with the Anglo-American
sphere and only in the context of recent decades at that, even less is known either
about the consequences that different types or experiences of economic crisis carry for
state punishment, or about the influence exerted in this respect by government political
orientations other than those found in established democracies (e.g. Left–Right,
Labour–Conservative, Democratic–Republican). Similarly, reliance on state-centric per-
spectives has precluded insights into whether –and if so, how and why –the relationship
between economic crisis, government ideology, and punishment plays out differently in
different parts of a single nation. Irrespective of geographical or temporal scope, more-
over, the impact that disparate extranational factors and actors may have in terms of eco-
nomic, political or directly penal matters domestically is still poorly understood.
With a view to helping fill these gaps in the literature, this article explores the effects
on state punishment that economic crisis and government political orientation have had in
interaction with one another in the context of Greece. Prior relevant research on the Greek
case has been concentrated on the contemporary period and mainly on the years during
420 European Journal of Criminology 19(3)
To continue reading
Request your trial