AbstractPartisan criminological analysis is characterized by dogmatic theories whose volidity is politically rather thon scientifically determined. Methods of inquiry ore used to demonstrate rather thon test theoretical propositions. Standard methodological tactics include assertion, anecdote, association, and analogy. In contrast, nonpartisan conflict analysis treats as entirely problematic the processes by which conceptions of deviance are socially constructed and become the official concerns of those who wield state power. What, how, why, and by whom behavioral or nonbehovioral attributes are labeled deviant is viewed as o function of the relative power of parties in conflict over the distribution of life chances.