Western Societies, The Raise of Neo-Liberalism and Punitiveness
Do you think that in the Western Societies, the raise of Neo-Liberalism has brought a more punitive approach in the Justice System in recent years?
Do we generally aim to punish more than to rehabilitate? Does prison overcrowding, death penalty, tougher on crime, ''three strikes on you're out'', approaches kind of suggest we have gone more punitive?
Is punishing rather than restoring, something which is inevitable in highly capitalist societies we live in? (ie, does capitalism require 'removal' of anything which stands in the way of its smooth operation, like for example, poor people).
Or do you on the contrary believe that we have gone far more restorative than punitive in recent years.
(people who are not from the west, feel free to say what you think regarding out justice systems and punishment)
I don't think England's justice system is great, I've never had to deal with it personally, but I will say that I feel it's better than most purely because we don't have the death penalty.
Gender: Unspecified Location: With Cinderella and the 9 Dwarves
Well, I never saw either as the important part of a justice system. I think the main point is to protect society. And that works either way.
At least where I am from I think they are trying to rehabilitate offenders.
I also don't get how capitalism got into that. It's not that capitalism needs to lock everyone away (especially not poor people..you know, cheap labour).
although the prison system was concieved as a means of rehabilitation, its quite obvious that it does just the opposite, at least on the level of state prisons (u.s.).
of coarse ideals are hard if not impossible to reach, but it seems that people are quite content with this failing system and how it goes against the very point in which it was concieved. "good! let him rot" "i hope he gets raped every night" "have fun spooning with bubba" etc. although i am also guilty of feeling pleased by the poetic justice of a rapist getting a force feeding of man juice, i have to admit that its a terrible way to think toward anyone.
the fact is that the ideal of punishment is also difficult if not impossible to reach, especially since this punishment is not even handed and certainly not well placed. the most hardened and violent criminals are basically royalty behind bars...basically rewarded, while the weak (far less hardened and violent) are punished with more cruelty and persistance than any rational person can bear to here, let alone witness. i fail to see any justice in that.
its not that the system has failed...failure is just part of how we as humans progress and learn. what bothers me greatly is the acceptance and celebration of that failure, and the degeneration of our ideals and moral code...and overall logic which goes with it...
The reason people keep endorsing tough punishment policies is that, endictment on our progress as Humans as they are, they actually look better than pretty much everything else we have tried. Our social-based rehabilitation/caring efforts with offenders inevitably fail totally, and get extremely bad press.
__________________
"We've got maybe seconds before Darth Rosenberg grinds everybody into Jawa burgers and not one of you buds has the midi-chlorians to stop her!"
As far as prison goes, I think you can comftably assume the conditions are no better here in England.
Also, I strongly believe that punishment and the way it is handed out has a lot to do with social class, gender and ethnicity.
But that aside, do you think we should look more towards rehabilitation?
Let me give you an example.
The max security prisons (I siad this in another thread) are in great demand these days. They consist of ONE solitary cell for each individual in which he/she spends 23 hours a day, years at the time, without any reading material, conversation or any GOOD use of his time.
So basically he is technically rotting in there, but he is also being phychilogically damaged, and well..bored. By the time he is left out, he/she has lost the little social skills he/she had, NO way to get back into work, NO skills (considering how high number of prisoners cannot read or write) and no means of reintegrating into society.
Taking a less extreme example, of non max security prison, but just a normal prison - the prisoners are all lumped together in overcrowded prisons, where they are not offered any kind of education or operrtunity to gain skills, so when they go back into society they just re-offend again. Kind of ''revolving doors'' really.
Oh and I forgot to ask in the original post - do you think our societies are more punitive because for the most part general public gives more support to punishment than rehabilitation?
Do you think general public does indeed support punishment over rehabilitation?
__________________
في هذا العالم ثلاثة أشخاص أفسدوا البشرية : راعي غنم , طبيب و راكب الجمال , و راكب الجمال هو أسوأ نشال و أسوأ مشعوذ بين الثلاثة
Rehabilitation has to go beyond the prison walls to be effective. I feel we are in a society that supports punishment.
"Taking a less extreme example, of non max security prison, but just a normal prison - the prisoners are all lumped together in overcrowded prisons, where they are not offered any kind of education or opportunity to gain skills, so when they go back into society they just re-offend again. Kind of ''revolving doors'' really."
I feel as though there is opportunity in a great many places in prisons. However just like most people unless its spoon fed to them then all of a sudden they are less fortunate. This isn't true for everyone just most everyone thats incarcerated.
the way i see it, the system was created as a means of rehabilitation...the very theory it revolves around, however never coming close to meeting. the reason it came about was the hope that execution would no longer be necessary. execution, however motivated by the individual, is rooted in the idea that its for the good of everyone's safety and the ends justify the means and blah blah. point is, there was the supposed moral high ground of "we need to protect the women and children." etc and they really didnt have any other options to keep them restrained.
but now the dilemma. we have a failed prison system not based on a failed theory, but rather an abandoned one: to rehabilitate. its ineffective for rehabilitation as it stands, yet completely effective as a means of restraint.
...but the theory stands, and it is a noble one.
then the alternative: execution, which is no longer a matter of protecting all the innocents, given the option of prison...however it is still effective. as joseph stalin said, "death solves all problems. no man, no problem." but why? why do we non-paranoid-dictators feel the need to kill others and hide behind the law of the land for justification?
the only mentallity it has left to stand on is revenge.
anyway, with that said:
i think the answer is to reinvent the prison system and make it useful. make it punish the hardened criminal with more severity than the common criminals. let there be proper gaurd to prisoner ratio so that there is more control and thus less criminal activity such as murder/rape/drugs etc. allow them education in trades etc. make it as useful as possible.
the other option is to speed up the death penalty so its more of a conveyer belt of death, which seems to be many people's wet dream.
this scares me.
i think far too many people get off on revenge...so yes i think much the general public supports it, or else why bother? since it costs the state far more to execute, it would make no sense for them to be so fiscally irresponsible unless the public demanded it....well thats different. the public demands blood, they vote for blood, and they are given blood.
makes me wonder why they dont just get it over with and start feeding prisoners to the lions in front of a packed stadium audience.
I think PVS is right. I think all punishment is meant as a form of rehabilitation. I wasn't put in the corner when I was a kid because my mother wanted to be mean, she did it to prevent me from repeating the behavior that got me put there.
But, I think someone said this earlier in the thread, the element of society that finds itself in your typical prison influences others in prison and it ends up reinforcing the bahavior that got them put in prison in the first place.
At this point, the only rehabilitation factor that would be effective in prison is if white collar criminals were placed in jail alongside serial rapists and other violent criminals.
And I'm not sure where the equation of liberalism and punishment is formulated. In this country, it's the conservatives that support punishment and the liberals who support touchy-feely, proactive rehabilitation.
__________________ "If I were you"
"If you were me, you'd know the safest place to hide...is in sanity!
Last edited by Devil King on May 31st, 2006 at 10:15 PM
I could go Marx&ENgels on you and the entire concept of PROPERTY! What is the reason for example, that violent crimes are often punished far less harshly than, say, theft and robbery?
Well, then... What is it about "poetic justice" that appeals to you, PVS?
Perhaps we'd be getting somewhere, if society wasn't so set on portraying the victims as VICTIMS, as people who have been "hit" by crime, and are completely unable to move beyond their status as "victims"??
A person who has committed a crime against you, will hold powre over you, as LONG as you view yourself as a victim.
__________________ "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
-Voltaire
"That includes ruining Halloween because someone swallowed a Bible."
"I just thought you were a guy."
"... Most guys do."
its a knee jerk feeling. first you feel anger over what they've done, then hear news of the agony that will likely be done to them, then its "well GOOD!!!".
this however does not appeal to me when properly thought through without passion distorting any sense of justice. i have to come to the conclusion that 'punishment', as the current prison system defines it, is a crock which rewards the 'creme de la creme' of societies purest excrament while punishing all others down the ladder more and more harshly depending on how much of hardened criminals they are not.
so...if their brand of justice wasnt served ass backwards, and their regement was more productive giving people a chance to better themselves, even if there is no chance of getting out...then i'm for that. if its just carryiong out 'gods judgement' and even creating a concrete dungeon to simulate hell on earth...i am horrified by it.
Tell me last time you heard a Corporate manager who conciously manufactured a product he knew will injure and kill people, (and who's product has done exactly that), get thrown in prison?
Besides, as The Omega said, Marx's theory on owning of the propery.
Punishment has ALWAYS been less inflicted on those with higher social status.
Gender: Male Location: Welfare Kingdom of California
Wrong lil...very wrong. When you said "Punishment has ALWAYS been less inflicted on those with higher social status." you have to remenber Enron executives who cheated and exploited their workers. They're now facing a court of law.
As for Marx theory....is just a theory. Would Marx have given his personal property to others? No he didn't...instead he kept borrowing money from Engels.
It's not that I do not follow you. We have a horrible paedophile-case at court here in DK, and I silently wish someone would chop of these monsters’ … and force-fed them to them.
I think I understand your sentiment. But it’s difficult not to have our sense of justice distorted by passion. But that is also because of the way the media serves crime and punishment to us, and how it’s portrayed on TV… Paedophiles are often a result of abuse when they were kids themselves… Without proper habilitation and an attempt to understand how these sociopaths and psychopaths come to be, we, as a society, will never be able to prevent them from “developing”.
__________________ "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
-Voltaire
"That includes ruining Halloween because someone swallowed a Bible."
"I just thought you were a guy."
"... Most guys do."
They are facing a court law. That is it. They will get a sentance, and even if they do have to do time, they will do it in an 'open prison'. Its been done before.
And they only EXPLOITED workers. Ford killed 700 people conciously manufacturing cars with a fault, and everyone knows it - yet I don't see him being in electric chair.
And punishment has always been less inflicted on those with status. Even when execution had to historically occur, people with higher status were beheaded rather than hunged, they paid fines rather than spend time in prison, and more recently, they pay good lawyer to ''make it go away''.
__________________
في هذا العالم ثلاثة أشخاص أفسدوا البشرية : راعي غنم , طبيب و راكب الجمال , و راكب الجمال هو أسوأ نشال و أسوأ مشعوذ بين الثلاثة
Since you haven't READ it, please don't talk nonsense like that.
Marx didn't exactly live in an era where he could give his stuff away and survive, did he? Read Marx and Engel's theory, then talk about it...
(-Bangs head into nearest wall-)
__________________ "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
-Voltaire
"That includes ruining Halloween because someone swallowed a Bible."
"I just thought you were a guy."
"... Most guys do."
Gender: Male Location: Welfare Kingdom of California
Thank you for assuming I haven't read Marx bio or his works The Omega. Keep banging your head since you assume things about others. Obviously you missed the point I was trying to make. Which is Marx ideas were never apply to himself. Yes, I know he was sick and how he died and poverty and etc...yet as a youth he kept borrowing money from Engels. Thank you again.
marx's ideal only applied to a sovereign population/state...i dont know maybe he could have applied it to his town as a microcosm...but to apply it to only himself is pointless and proves nothing for or against the theory.
KMC Community Forums
May 31st, 2006 05:51 PM
