athena wrote:Not all cultures have prisons. Historically prisons have been used for power, by cultures that are divided between powerful and those who do not have power. The bigger picture needs to evaluate the social organization that makes prisons a reality or makes them non existent.
What you say is correct.
Jacques Ellul said, "if technology can, it must". Prison only became technologically possible after the invention of brick and mortar and cement. Chains did not exist before iron. Modern hand-cuffs were impossible before advancements in tool and die. Prison as punishment came into being with the state. Prior to the 'doing time system' which only became cognitively possible with capitalism, prisons were holding centers for torture or execution. The modern legal system could not exist without mandatory-public-education and mass media: propaganda is necessary to create the citizens who irrationally and paradoxically love and also fear the system. If not for the manufacture of a fascistic subconscious: the sado-masochistic desire to simultaneously punish and also be punished, there could be no modern prison system.
What this means is, there are many many levels to attack the problem of prisons on. We can attack the actual prison walls, we can attack the media who reinforce this internal War of Terror, we can attack the sado-masochistic fascistic psychology that generates and perpetuates criminal
law, and so on and so on. What are we going to do with killers and rapists? is in-the-box thinking unworthy of a creative human race who has landed on the Moon, abolished slavery, cured Polio, etc, etc.
I think some form of prison will always be necessary, but the first line of social defense is education. Only highly moral people can have liberty, and education for good moral judgment is essential to manifesting a highly moral society.
While I agree that a perverse psychology underlies the prison-system, we will be waiting for Doomsday if we have to enlighten everyone before taking action. Anti-racism and women's equality have both gone ahead in a World that is still predominantly sexist and racist.
I think our debate about evolution is essential to all other questions of moral decisions. We need to base our moral decisions on science, and doing so can reduce all forms of crime, and make our justice system more just.
Scientism is a form of fascism. How about we base our moral decisions on our consciences?
Scott wrote:The problem of absent fathers is major. It may not be as much of an issue in the case of a literal sperm donor, but that's beside the point because in most cases the father leaves or dies after a few years--usually calling or checking in every now and then just enough to remind his child that he doesn't care much about them. Anecdotally, I've seen the massive, deep emotional damage done to a person now an adult whose father abandoned them and only checked in a few times in their life. Being abandoned by a parent after birth is traumatizing, I think. I can't imagine anyone would seek to deny this problem, and I think we can all agree that if more parents particularly fathers took care of their children rather than abandoning them that we'd have less violent crime and thus less potential prisoners.
Over-all I agree with your analysis, however on this point I can not follow.
Many people have no mother and father. Millions of war-children are in this situation: their parents have been killed, or with the family home gone and no phone-books, it is impossible for family ever to be reunited. The idea that these millions of people all over the world are now doomed forever to a life of crime is absurd. A little research easily reveals that very many orphans have become good people in their adult lives.
Blaming someone's parents, or lack there of, can not sit well with people who believe in freedom and responsibility.
Belinda wrote:I suggest two methods:
1. Put money and energy into the criminal justice system until the prisons are run entirely as retraining establishments.
2. Put money and energy into alleviating poverty until no person has to be hungry, unsheltered, unclothed, uneducated(including leisure facilities), and deprived of adequate health care.
Sure. And there are a hundred more ideas to come.
I would just not worry too much about the money however, 1. law and order budgets are already so massive in developed countries that even a diet of caviar and lodging in five-star hotels would not have much of an effect. And 2., a person's life is not on the same worth scale as money is.
Juice wrote:If someone believes that these ideas can be fostered in a traditional family, he is fascist?
Do I understand you correctly?
Yes. Now let's go back and look at some of the things you wrote:
Juice wrote:the role a mother and father,
Let's do some reading, you'll have to google for the source as I can not post links yet, (hmm... fascism?),
- "During World War II German occupation of France, the moto of "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity" was replaced on the Nazi’s puppet Vichy regime's new coins with the phrase, "Work, Family, Fatherland.""
- "the ideal right wing ideological family structure for breeding "values" and "traditions" is a strictly authoritarian family, in which children are brought up with a "natural" respect for the father and, as they grow older, unquestioningly extend their respect and obedience to other authorities in society as well as pass the ideology on to their children."
- "check list for Fascism"
3) "Family values" are used as a propaganda and brainwashing devise to reinforce absolute Hierarchy within the society.
Within the family father is boss, within the society the father of the State is boss, within the universe God-the-father is boss. Society and its sub-groups are "family" to its members and this is used to oppress criticism of "the family."
Good children don't criticize their parents in time of family crisis so family crises are created when criticism gets too loud. This is clearly seen when the President starts a military action and it is a taboo to criticize the President's actions or motivations."
- From Reich:
"...the family cannot be considered the basis of the authoritarian state, only as one of the most important institutions which support it. It is, however, its central reactionary germ cell, the most important place of reproduction of the reactionary and conservative individual. Being itself caused by the authoritarian system, the family becomes the most important institution for its conservation."
- From Foucault:
"...a structure forming a microcosm where all the great, massive structures of bourgeois society and its values had their own symbol: the relationship between Family and Children structured around the theme of paternal authority; the relationship between Fault and Punishment around the theme of immediate justice; and the links between Madness and Disorder around the theme of social and moral order."
the formation of stability.
Reactionary. Change is inevitable. "All things are flowing."
By no means does this mean that a nurturing family structure should be without rules
Rules are the corner-stone of authoritarianism. Humans made rules: they are beneath us. This is why Islam says: "Submit only to Allah!" Submission to social rules and laws is against God.
Do as I say, not as I do? I thought you were a professional killer for the US war machine, or am I projecting that?
Contract law is a simulacra.
This promotes acceptance of roles which promote the general welfare.
Do we need to destroy the family as Plato proposed? For sex-economy, isn't the family the homunculus for the sado-masochistic paradox of the child who is loved and also punished by the mother and father? Isn't this duplicity, this dualism of a loving punisher: the righteous prosecutor or police officer, germinated in the repressionary sexual dynamics of the family where the child is slapped away from the breast, incest is taboo, etc? The original polymorphous perversity of the youth that best grow a non-fascist mature personality can not be planted in the sterility of family?
Those who feel oppressed are generally oppressed out of weakness and this and this weakness is developed from a lack of a proper family basis
The weak deserve to be oppressed by the strong? Do you take this stuff right out of Mein Kampf
? The Nazi Uber Menschen, the "blond beast"? What are you saying!?
We see the results of fascist victimization in the powerful film, "American History X"
Ugg. I watch the first half; couldn't stomach the rest, the American propaganda is thick like butter.
unfortunately, see this in society today where individuals are not noted for their individual qualities and characteristics but what their ethnicity requires them to be to the demonization of one and the victimization of the other.
Do you think that "felon" and "criminal" might actually be similar irrational prejudiced and stereotypical categories?
As MLK entreated us to begin, let no man be judged by the color of his skin but by the content of his character.
I pilgrimaged to MLK's house, so don't be defiling his name!