Political prisoners

Have philosophical discussions about politics, law, and government.
Featured Article: Definition of Freedom - What Freedom Means to Me
Georgeanna
Posts: 423
Joined: October 29th, 2017, 1:17 pm

Political prisoners

Post by Georgeanna » November 4th, 2018, 1:15 pm

When politicians don't listen and people protest.Why are they flung in prison ?

Does it depend on the personal interests of the judge in question - the greed of energy giants and politicians ?
Who is more guilty of dishonesty and incompetence with far-ranging consequences ? Why are they never held to account ? Indeed, some are not even fired but get the chance to resign with golden handshake. And then return to government later. Others are given knighthoods...

I don't think I would be brave enough to protest with a prospect of spending time in jail. And that is what they are counting on.
Isn't this an abuse of power and misuse of prison?
'Prison is s***, but it's worth it': Freed fracking protester jailed for 16 months vows to keep fighting injustice

Prison is ****,” he says. “But compare that to the threat of fracking and climate change – if me being in there for three weeks draws attention to that threat or galvanises support, it’s a no brainer that’s worth it.”
He wants to talk today about those environmental dangers, as well as injustice, inequality and the failure of democratic accountability in the UK.

One guy asked if I was a political prisoner,” recalls Blevins, a 26-year-old soil scientist. “I said maybe we all are in a way. He said, ‘No, I’m here because I’m greedy. You’re here because you care about the planet’. That was pretty humbling.”

Blevins – soft of voice, with a bear-like handshake – is speaking to The Independent a fortnight after the sentence was quashed. Lord Chief Justice Ian Burnett called the term “manifestly excessive”, and released the three on conditional discharges.

Questions have since been raised about the original trial judge, Robert Altham, and his family links to the shale industry: his father runs JC Altham and Sons, a company understood to be part of the supply chain for energy giant Centrica, which invests heavily in fracking.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/h ... 13681.html

Alias
Posts: 2396
Joined: November 26th, 2011, 8:10 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Terry Pratchett

Re: Political prisoners

Post by Alias » November 4th, 2018, 9:03 pm

Georgeanna wrote:
November 4th, 2018, 1:15 pm

Isn't this an abuse of power and misuse of prison?
Of course it is. Power can do that. Power always does that. Therefore, power must be curbed.
Those who can induce you to believe absurdities can induce you to commit atrocities. - Voltaire

Eduk
Posts: 2110
Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
Favorite Philosopher: Socrates

Re: Political prisoners

Post by Eduk » November 6th, 2018, 4:15 am

Wasn't his sentence quashed?
Unknown means unknown.

Steve3007
Posts: 5572
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Eratosthenes
Location: UK

Re: Political prisoners

Post by Steve3007 » November 6th, 2018, 5:16 am

As far as I can see this guy's sentence was excessive, and it was rightly quashed. But presumably climbing on top of someone else's lorry and refusing to come down is actually a crime, albeit a relatively minor one.

So what constitutes a "political prisoner"? In the strictest most unambiguous sense of the word I guess it means somebody who is imprisoned purely for their political beliefs and not because of any law that they might have broken by their actions. But, of course, in countries where it is illegal to hold and express certain political beliefs, even this distinction is blurred.

Georgeanna
Posts: 423
Joined: October 29th, 2017, 1:17 pm

Re: Political prisoners

Post by Georgeanna » November 6th, 2018, 6:10 am

From the article : He was sentenced to 16 months of which he only served 3 weeks in jail, thanks to an appeal.

He was a prisoner.
He had political motives.
He was a political prisoner.

The original trial judge was linked to the fracking industry the prisoner was protesting about. The judge was wrong. The sentence was excessive.
What happened to him ? A slap on the hand ?

Georgeanna
Posts: 423
Joined: October 29th, 2017, 1:17 pm

Re: Political prisoners

Post by Georgeanna » November 6th, 2018, 7:47 am

Alias wrote:
November 4th, 2018, 9:03 pm
Georgeanna wrote:
November 4th, 2018, 1:15 pm

Isn't this an abuse of power and misuse of prison?
Of course it is. Power can do that. Power always does that. Therefore, power must be curbed.
Not all power must be curbed, some who feel powerless should be encouraged to gain some.

In the case of those who abuse political and judicial power, how can that be curbed ?
In the case of people power how might that be encouraged ? And at what point is enough enough ? If as you say 'power is always abused' ?
How can power be controlled ?

Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 1540
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Political prisoners

Post by Belindi » November 6th, 2018, 8:55 am

Amnesty International differentiates between "recognisable crimes" and trumped up allegations which are sometimes applied to prisoners of conscience.It looks like the judge was not disinterested and that the sentence was excessive. Thank God for the independent press!

I think that abuse of power can be curbed only through the democratic process. When most of the poorer people have more and better information about political- environmental issues the democratic process has biting teeth.

Personally I have doubts about subscribing my little £4 a month to the Labour Party because of its support for Brexit. What should I do about this?

Alias
Posts: 2396
Joined: November 26th, 2011, 8:10 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Terry Pratchett

Re: Political prisoners

Post by Alias » November 6th, 2018, 11:19 am

Georgeanna wrote:
November 6th, 2018, 7:47 am
Not all power must be curbed, some who feel powerless should be encouraged to gain some.
No, that isn't how it works. When the underdog becomes top dog, he tends to bite just as hard and arbitrarily as the dog he defeated.
All power must be curbed, just as all dogs must be trained.
In the case of those who abuse political and judicial power, how can that be curbed ?
That's what constitutions and rules of procedure are for. Political power is mitigated by elections, coups d'etat and revolutions (when the electoral process fails). Judicial power is usually administered by a professional body, such as the Bar Association that upholds the standards of jurisprudence, very much as the College of Physicians and Surgeons arbitrates the professional standard of doctors.
In the case of people power how might that be encouraged ? And at what point is enough enough ? If as you say 'power is always abused' ?
How can power be controlled ?
Simply by making sure nobody gets any. Autonomy, yes. Rights and freedoms, yes. Respect and dignity, yes. Representation, yes. Efficacy, yes.
Power over others - No.
People-power tends to look like a mob or a rabble: unfocused and indecisive, except in anger, when it's destructive.
The facile answer is functional democracy based on a robust constitution - but that requires a lot of assiduous maintenance. People become complacent, lazy, inattentive, slipshod, negligent.... pretty soon, somebody steals their vote.

Georgeanna
Posts: 423
Joined: October 29th, 2017, 1:17 pm

Re: Political prisoners

Post by Georgeanna » November 7th, 2018, 6:22 am

Alias wrote:
November 6th, 2018, 11:19 am
Georgeanna wrote:
November 6th, 2018, 7:47 am
Not all power must be curbed, some who feel powerless should be encouraged to gain some.
No, that isn't how it works. When the underdog becomes top dog, he tends to bite just as hard and arbitrarily as the dog he defeated.
All power must be curbed, just as all dogs must be trained.
In the case of those who abuse political and judicial power, how can that be curbed ?
That's what constitutions and rules of procedure are for. Political power is mitigated by elections, coups d'etat and revolutions (when the electoral process fails). Judicial power is usually administered by a professional body, such as the Bar Association that upholds the standards of jurisprudence, very much as the College of Physicians and Surgeons arbitrates the professional standard of doctors.
In the case of people power how might that be encouraged ? And at what point is enough enough ? If as you say 'power is always abused' ?
How can power be controlled ?
Simply by making sure nobody gets any. Autonomy, yes. Rights and freedoms, yes. Respect and dignity, yes. Representation, yes. Efficacy, yes.
Power over others - No.
People-power tends to look like a mob or a rabble: unfocused and indecisive, except in anger, when it's destructive.
The facile answer is functional democracy based on a robust constitution - but that requires a lot of assiduous maintenance. People become complacent, lazy, inattentive, slipshod, negligent.... pretty soon, somebody steals their vote.
I disagree that all power must be curbed as in training dogs.

I am thinking about the power that minorities or those the traditionally suppressed can have when they realise that there are issues of injustice and ethics that need to be corrected. They may need leaders, for sure, those who can manage the project so that the aims are achieved. I agree that this could result in an abuse of power but essentially the role of leaders is not to have 'power over others'. Rather it would be to harness the energy, the awakened sense of self-empowerment as it transcends the individual and becomes a collective force.
This is to prevent the very problems you indicate; 'people power' looking like a rabble, indecisive and potentially destructive if anger gets out of control.

I read a little about the mid-term results in America where there seems to have been a surge in young females voting for the Democrats. That is a vote against Trump.

Written by Richard Wolffe
It is no coincidence that among the Democrats who won the House there are significantly more women than the old Republican majority. They will be led by the first female speaker, taking control of half of Congress for the second time – which counts as two historic achievements.

So it will be no coincidence when the leading Democratic contenders for the presidency in 2020 – and the right to take the fight directly to Donald Trump – will be female candidates. The 2018 midterms weren’t a blue wave for Democrats, but they were a landslide for women voters and women candidates.

For a man who famously thought he could grab women by the genitals, Donald Trump is about to experience just how painful a squeeze that can be.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... d-midterms
Remember the sea of pink pu$$y hats at the Washington March, not long after the President's Inauguration ? That was the start.
Some opponents thought them ridiculous and perhaps they were but the effect was a visual symbol of power.
[ A bit like the White KKK robes and hoods. But less cowardly brutal.]

I'm reminded of the Suffragettes who experienced far worse in their fight for the Women's Right to Vote. They started off relatively peacefully then became more violent as they experienced the full weight of male political power against them.
The Suffragettes refused to bow to violence. They burned down churches as the Church of England was against what they wanted; they vandalised Oxford Street, apparently breaking all the windows in this famous street; they chained themselves to Buckingham Palace as the Royal Family were seen to be against women having the right to vote; they hired out boats, sailed up the Thames and shouted abuse through loud hailers at Parliament as it sat; others refused to pay their tax. Politicians were attacked as they went to work. Their homes were fire bombed. Golf courses were vandalised. The first decade of Britain in the twentieth century was proving to be violent in the extreme.

https://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/t ... fragettes/

Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 1540
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Political prisoners

Post by Belindi » November 7th, 2018, 6:31 am

Georgeanna wrote:
I am thinking about the power that minorities or those the traditionally suppressed can have when they realise that there are issues of injustice and ethics that need to be corrected. They may need leaders, for sure, those who can manage the project so that the aims are achieved. I agree that this could result in an abuse of power but essentially the role of leaders is not to have 'power over others'. Rather it would be to harness the energy, the awakened sense of self-empowerment as it transcends the individual and becomes a collective force.
This is to prevent the very problems you indicate; 'people power' looking like a rabble, indecisive and potentially destructive if anger gets out of control.
But, for instance, the Palestinians became the victims of the Israelis who formerly had been Jewish victims. I agree with Alias: "all power must be curbed".

Alias
Posts: 2396
Joined: November 26th, 2011, 8:10 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Terry Pratchett

Re: Political prisoners

Post by Alias » November 7th, 2018, 12:10 pm

Georgeanna wrote:
November 7th, 2018, 6:22 am
I disagree that all power must be curbed as in training dogs.
Okay, but are you sure your definition of "power" - in the political sense - is accurate?
I am thinking about the power that minorities or those the traditionally suppressed can have when they realise that there are issues of injustice and ethics that need to be corrected. They may need leaders, for sure, those who can manage the project so that the aims are achieved. I agree that this could result in an abuse of power but essentially the role of leaders is not to have 'power over others'.
Power over others is invariably abused. Unless it's limited in some way - as by a constitution, or professional ethics, a pre-set term of office, a system of checks and balances, a legislative body or steering committee - a leader, however well-intentioned at the outset, always oversteps the bounds of his good judgment and natural caution; always grows overconfident and overbearing. The bad monkey lurking in all humans (more aggressively in males, but to some extent in all humans) revels in the chance to dominate and doesn't readily give that up.
Rather it would be to harness the energy, the awakened sense of self-empowerment as it transcends the individual and becomes a collective force.
That is what I referred to as "efficacy" - the ability to shape events and affect outcomes.
This is to prevent the very problems you indicate; 'people power' looking like a rabble, indecisive and potentially destructive if anger gets out of control.
Nothing humans devised so far has ever prevented that - not even in the most civilized modern nations.
I read a little about the mid-term results in America where there seems to have been a surge in young females voting for the Democrats. That is a vote against Trump.
Maybe so, but look again at those numbers. They're very, very close. That means nearly half of Americans are okay with Trump, okay with bigotry, okay with criminals in office, okay with aggression, systemic lying, and okay with sending five heavily armed soldiers to stop each hungry, exhausted beggar at the border. Almost half are very bad monkeys.
I'm reminded of the Suffragettes who experienced far worse in their fight for the Women's Right to Vote. They started off relatively peacefully then became more violent as they experienced the full weight of male political power against them. [Politicians were attacked as they went to work. Their homes were fire bombed.]
Not unlike a rabble. Thank you.

Eduk
Posts: 2110
Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
Favorite Philosopher: Socrates

Re: Political prisoners

Post by Eduk » November 7th, 2018, 12:16 pm

a leader, however well-intentioned at the outset, always oversteps the bounds of his good judgment
Do you have evidence for this?

Also I am struggling to understand what this proposed removal of power would look like. Let's imagine for example that I was a citizen of such a country and I wanted to use the toilet. How would an effective waste disposal system be built?
Unknown means unknown.

Alias
Posts: 2396
Joined: November 26th, 2011, 8:10 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Terry Pratchett

Re: Political prisoners

Post by Alias » November 7th, 2018, 12:52 pm

Eduk wrote:
November 7th, 2018, 12:16 pm
a leader, however well-intentioned at the outset, always oversteps the bounds of his good judgment
Do you have evidence for this?
[url]ttps://www.theobjectivestandard.com/issues/201 ... ilization/[/url]
Also I am struggling to understand what this proposed removal of power would look like.
It would look very much like a constitution, a set of laws and legal limits and a system of checks and balabces\. It would look like a functional democracy, before it's been corrupted.
Let's imagine for example that I was a citizen of such a country and I wanted to use the toilet.
Stay out of the Carolinas, you should be okay.
How would an effective waste disposal system be built?
Don't look at me. I'm not a sanitation engineer. But I don't see how not letting the president get away with shooting people on the street affects waste disposal design.

Alias
Posts: 2396
Joined: November 26th, 2011, 8:10 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Terry Pratchett

Re: Political prisoners

Post by Alias » November 7th, 2018, 12:54 pm

checks and balances. I noticed too late.

Eduk
Posts: 2110
Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
Favorite Philosopher: Socrates

Re: Political prisoners

Post by Eduk » November 7th, 2018, 1:26 pm

Alias how does that article demonstrate that all leaders overstep the bounds of their good judgement?
Also what do you mean by leader?
How would an effective waste disposal system be built?
Don't look at me. I'm not a sanitation engineer. But I don't see how not letting the president get away with shooting people on the street affects waste disposal design.
I have no idea how getting away with shooting someone follows from anything I asked? This is why I asked you what you meant by leader. Do you mean a dictator?
Unknown means unknown.

Post Reply