The Invisible Hand of the State: A Critical Historical Analysis of Prison Gangs in California

• Published date: 01 June 2020
• DOI: 10.1177/0032885520916817
• Date: 01 June 2020
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/0032885520916817

The Prison Journal

2020, Vol. 100(3) 312 –331

© 2020 SAGE Publications

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/0032885520916817

journals.sagepub.com/home/tpj

Article

The Invisible Hand of

the State: A Critical

Historical Analysis

of Prison Gangs in

California

Robert D. Weide1

Abstract

This article provides a critical historical analysis of the formation and

proliferation of some of the earliest and most well-known prison gangs in the

California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) and the

conflicts between them. This analysis provides an alternative explanation for

prison gang formation that contrasts with existing pathological perspectives

on prison gangs by examining the role of the prison staff and administration

in the formation and proliferation of prison gangs and the provocation of

conflicts between them. The historical narrative and analysis is constructed

from existing literature, qualitative research using both formal and informal

interviews, and descriptive data acquired from CDCR Annual Reports.

Keywords

critical penology, prison gangs, Mexican Mafia, Black Guerilla Family

Introduction

Since the first attempt to apply positivist research methodologies to the issue of

crime (Lombroso-Ferrero, 1972), the idea of criminal pathology has persisted

1California State University, Los Angeles, USA

Corresponding Author:

Robert D. Weide, Department of Sociology, California State University, Los Angeles, 5151

State University Drive, Los Angeles, CA 90032, USA.

Email: rweide@calstatela.edu

916817TPJXXX10.1177/0032885520916817The Prison JournalWeide

research-article2020

Weide 313

in the field of criminology. As Brotherton (2015) recounts, despite widespread

condemnation, pathological perspectives found particular traction in crimino-

logical research on gangs, especially among positivist-oriented researchers

who cast gangs as inherently violent and criminogenic groups (Klein, 1995;

Miller, 1980; Yablonsky, 1963). This pattern has recurred in much of the aca-

demic literature on prison gangs, which rely exclusively on positivist research

methodologies and portray prison gangs as inherently violent, criminogenic,

and incorrigible (Buentello et al., 1991; Camp & Camp, 1985; Fleisher &

Decker, 2001; Fong, 1990; Fong et al., 1992; Gaes et al., 2002; Knox, 1999,

2012; Pyrooz et al., 2011; Trulson et al., 2008; Pyrooz and Decker, 2019).

These pathological perspectives are mirrored in publications on prison

gangs intended for law enforcement and the public as well (Adams, 1977;

California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation [CDCR], 2012;

Morrill, 2005; Orlando-Morningstar, 1997; Porter, 1982). One of the most

often cited publications describes prison gang members as, “psychologically

amoral and psychopathically oriented” (Camp & Camp, 1985, p. 39). Two of

the most prolific prison gang researchers described prison gangs as “vicious,

ruthless, violent, dangerous, anti-authority, terroristic” (Fong et al., 1992, p.

66). The pathological perspective has persisted in contemporary research,

with gang researchers declaring the “key psychological attributes” of prison

gang members to be “Oppositional, intimidation, control and manipulation”

(Pyrooz et al., 2011, p. 14).

This article aims to provide an alternative narrative and critical analysis of

prison gang formation and conflict, in contrast to existing pathological per-

spectives, by exploring how formal and informal policies and practices imple-

mented by prison staff and/or administration have repeatedly played a

historical role in creating the circumstances that led to the emergence and

proliferation of prisons gangs and the conflicts between them. In contrast to

pathological perspectives that situate prison gangs as inherently violent and

criminogenic, this critical historical analysis resituates prison gangs as prod-

ucts of an environment over which they have little formal control, subject to

constant manipulation and provocation on the part of prison staff and

administration.

This argument is not dissimilar from Goodman (2008) and Lopez-Aguado’s

(2018) argument that racial sorting practices by correctional staff play a signifi-

cant role in the perpetuation of racialized gang factions, both in carceral set-

tings and in the hyper criminalized communities inmates hail from. However,

where they err is in implying that racial sorting practices by correctional staff is

primarily responsible for the existence of racialized prison gang factions in

California’s carceral contexts. They are correct in surmising that correctional

staff and administrative practices and policies played a significant role in the