Capital Punishment

[thinkerOFthoughts]

aka the death penalty for serious offenders....... what is the communist view? I know that someone explained to me a while back that the community in a stateless society would decide all together what to do with such a offender... so I am wondering can you agree with capital punishment for serious offenders (rapists, murders, ect.) and still be revolutionary? how many of you are FOR capital punishment of such serious crimes anyway?

[LOLseph Stalin]

I don't know about the common Communist view, but I can give my personal view. I am against it. There could be somebody convicted who's innocent. They could be killed and after their death they could be pardoned. Now that pretty much defeats the purpose.

[thinkerOFthoughts]

I dont know what I think.... I think yeah kill the guy (who raped and killed some little girl) but then when I see or here about how he was strapped in to that chair I immediattly despite what he had done feel really bad about it...... I dunno.... I think if their is a 100%... then. ughh I dunno.

[thinkerOFthoughts]

well for instance!! Saddam died! I think he deserved it! we all know what he did.... was it still wrong to kill him tho? same thing... like say if we caught Hitler, kill him or leave him alive in some prison?

[LOLseph Stalin]

well for instance!! Saddam died! I think he deserved it! we all know what he did.... was it still wrong to kill him tho? same thing... like say if we caught Hitler, kill him or leave him alive in some prison?

Well I guess there could be exceptions. We know for sure Saddam and Hitler killed millions of people. We wouldn't have to kill Hitler though. He kinda did that for us. :laugh:

[Absolut]

Personally, I prefer rehabilitation before execution or imprisonment.

[Comrade Anarchist]

I dont believe in it but maybe for the Bourgouise.

[Invincible Summer]

I wish the choices weren't so black and white...


But I voted "yes." If the person is found guilty of a heinous crime (by a people's/community court of democratically elected members, of course) they should be rehabilitated. If that doesn't work and/or they re-offend with a similar degree of disregard for society, then I believe it should be possible for the people to vote for executing the criminal.

[Black Dagger]

aka the death penalty for serious offenders....... what is the communist view?



There is no single 'communist view' on the subject - peoples responses seem to be quite diverse, especially on this forum. However, most either oppose the death penalty entirely or support it only for the 'worst' crimes.

Though it should be clarified if you mean the death penalty in a communist society or in contemporary society? If it is the former then see my response above, if it is the latter i would amend my comment to say that most communists oppose capital punishment, that is murder by the state. The two are distinguished by the context of crime and the flawed/prejudiced nature of the 'criminal justice system', i.e. a lot of innocent folks end up dead.



I know that someone explained to me a while back that the community in a stateless society would decide all together what to do with such a offender... so I am wondering can you agree with capital punishment for serious offenders (rapists, murders, ect.) and still be revolutionary? how many of you are FOR capital punishment of such serious crimes anyway?

Well in a communist society i would enjoy freedom of association, meaning i would choose to live in a community that did not use killing to solve its problems. There is no 'justice' in the death penalty, it's simply a form of revenge, totally and utterly without meaning or purpose - well, at least that person won't be alive to do anything wrong again! Well yeah i guess, but that's coz you put a bullet in his head? For me, communism aims at removing violence from social relationships (whether it be social domination, poverty or authority) - unfortunately it will take some violence to break the chains but once we are free i see no reason why we should emmulate our 'masters'.

It is truely an archaic (biblical!) conception of justice - which says 'an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth' - that 'justice' is analogous with punishment, rather than rehabilitation or reconciliation. I think this conception of justice solves no problems but simply raises new ones.

For example, once someone has been sentenced to death and this sentence is carried out there can be no appeal. What of new evidence? Purgery etc? The death penalty assumes complete authority and a monopoly of truth that is simply beyond reason.

Also note: I distinguish between capital punishment - death as a punishment for crime - and revolutionary violence, armed struggle of the oppressed.

[SocialismOrBarbarism]

Well, Marx was against it:


it would be very difficult, if not altogether impossible, to establish any principle upon which the justice or expediency of capital punishment could be founded, in a society glorying in its civilization. I'm not entirely sure of my position on this. I support rehabilitation, but I don't think this will always be an option. In these cases my views on capital punishment shift back and forth a lot. I'd have to know what the alternative punishment would be. If it was being locked up in a prison that drains lots of resources, then I'd be more likely to support capital punishment. If it was some sort of labor camp like a prison farm where they actually had to work in exchange for their food and whatnot, then I'd most likely support that instead. It really depends on a lot of factors.

[Revulero]

I'am also in between, but at the end of the day I say its necessary especially during a revolution where there will be lots of traitors and influential bourgeosie political figures that can potentially harm the revolution's success.

[Black Dagger]

I'am also in between, but at the end of the day I say its necessary especially during a revolution where there will be lots of traitors and influential bourgeosie political figures that can potentially harm the revolution's success.

Capital Punishment is state punishment for civilian crime - what you're talking about is revolutionary violence or terror - whether such things are justified is another matter entirely - but they are not the same thing. It's possible to support one and not the other.

[Glorious Union]

There are things worse than death, and that is why I am opposed to it. Why give them a quick and speedy release when they could spend the rest of their lives in hell?

Just my personaly thoughts on it.

[Black Dagger]

So you advocate torture or cruel punishment? To what end?

[EqualityandFreedom]

I can't speak for all leftists but personally I am opposed to it. I oppose the death penalty not just from a moral perspective but also from a rational perspective in that killing the accused is not going to reverse what they did nor do I believe in free will (and therefore moral responsibility) anyway.

[Qayin]

End justifys the means?

The bourgeoisie only understands one thing and that is force.

[Revulero]

Capital Punishment is state punishment for civilian crime - what you're talking about is revolutionary violence or terror - whether such things are justified is another matter entirely - but they are not the same thing. It's possible to support one and not the other.

Well if you mean it like that then I still think its necessary, but first I believe that we should try to rehabilitate the people in prison. If the person is sane and still doesn't change his/her ways and commits multiple crimes again and again then I see no reason on why not to execute this person unless the person is insane.

[Qayin]

Well most people in prison are in their for non-violent crimes such as drug use,problems with their capital,and so forth.

[Revulero]

Yeah, the judicial system is shit. Hopefully we'll have it figured out by the time capitalism is exterminated.

[Black Dagger]

End justifys the means?

No, i think the whole sum of human experience on this point (!) shows that the 'ends do not justify the means' (warning: slight hyperbole). Simply becauses the two are not separate entities - you do not arrive at the end of the road as the same person who first embarked on your great journey. The journey is what makes the person, not the destination. This should be self-evident.



The bourgeoisie only understands one thing and that is force.

This sounds like a quote from a video-game, it's not politics but simplistic political rhetoric - and (creepy) dehumanising rhetoric at that! Yes it sounds very militant, but really it lacks substance.

'The bourgeoisie' are human beings - it is class society that is our real enemy not individuals. Whilst the bourgeoisie as a class are reactionary and an obstacle to social revolution they are just people, and most will probably fall away (read: runaway!) when the going gets tough.

Force is necessary only to resist force or the threat of force - and although the bourgeoisie rule by sophisticated violence they are not a class of simple brutes who understand only violence - this is something they pay others to do for them. They do not understand violence, real violence because they are protected from this by virtue of their class.

Though if you are saying simply... it is inevitable that it will take revolutionary violence to abolish class society then yes, i agree - otherwise, no i think you are overemphasising/romanticising violence.

[Black Dagger]

If the person is sane and still doesn't change his/her ways and commits multiple crimes again and again then I see no reason on why not to execute this person

This seems like a rather thoughtless 'solution':

'Oh well we tried'

*gunshot*

:confused:

Anti-social behaviour occurs for a reason - crime is not random stuff that happens - if as you say the problem is not psychological than there must be social factors to be considered. I find your flippant attitude to the death penalty a little worrying tbh.

[Qayin]

I am not romanticizing violence, I am just saying their system is keeping us down
and a minority of them(not all of them,but the ones who are REALLY responsible for US imperialism) only understand violence. For example you can protest all you want and they will just get state force to smash you and continue with what they do.

[Black Dagger]

Sure, i don't disagree with any of that. I'm just weary of overemphasising the use of violence, it's a dehumanising thing and something we should avoid unless necessary.

[Revulero]

This seems like a rather thoughtless 'solution':

'Oh well we tried'

*gunshot*

:confused:

Anti-social behaviour occurs for a reason - crime is not random stuff that happens - if as you say the problem is not psychological than there must be social factors to be considered. I find your flippant attitude to the death penalty a little worrying tbh.

Well what other solution is there? What if we can't find the problem, do we let them rot in jail by constantly trying to rehab this person back to society? Now if we know this person has mental issues then off course we can't execute them because of the simple fact that we know whats wrong with them and we can help them seek treatment. Like I said if we can't rehab them and they still wreaking havoc on society when they're released, I believe we should execute after multiple times. I don't think it's very humane to keep them in a jail cell waisting their life, when we can't find the solution.

[Revulero]

So what choice do we have? Either let them rot or just simply end thier troubled life when we can't figure out the problem?

[Invincible Summer]

So what choice do we have? Either let them rot or just simply end thier troubled life when we can't figure out the problem?


I don't think that a death penalty should be totally out of the question, but it should not be the only thing to resort to if rehab doesn't work the first time. Like I said earlier, the punishment should be voted for in the community which the criminal resides/committed the crime.

It's not as black and white as "rotting in a cell" or shooting them.

[Revulero]

I don't think that a death penalty should be totally out of the question, but it should not be the only thing to resort to if rehab doesn't work the first time. Like I said earlier, the punishment should be voted for in the community which the criminal resides/committed the crime.

It's not as black and white as "rotting in a cell" or shooting them.

What if theres people in the crowd that dislikes the person for personal reasons or the person has friends and family who favor the the persons life no matter what criminal activity the person commited? Wouldn't that be unfair, having people who are already biased, if it were me I would rather have people who I don't know that are unbiased, judging me.

[Demogorgon]

I am entirely against the death penalty. The cruelty and injustice of it, quite apart from the fact that it is shown to actually raise crime rates rather than deter crime is enough to be utterly against it. It is time to do away with this barbaric practice entirely.

[Invincible Summer]

What if theres people in the crowd that dislikes the person for personal reasons or the person has friends and family who favor the the persons life no matter what criminal activity the person commited? Wouldn't that be unfair, having people who are already biased, if it were me I would rather have people who I don't know that are unbiased, judging me.

True. But I'm looking at it from the perspective that if the people judging him aren't going to be affected by the consequences, then their punishment may not bode well with the community.

And the number of people that don't like the criminal personally and his family are so limited that it shouldn't matter much, IMO.

[Decolonize The Left]

The death penalty is state sanctioned murder.

As one who opposes the state, I cannot support the death penalty.

- August

[CommieCat]

No, I don't support it at all. I met a lawyer who did work for the Innocence Project and we talked about some of the people who were later released after their convictions were dismissed via the courts (we're talking like being wrongly locked up for > 10 years). I don't think killing someone after they have been interrogated for a day and beaten up to sign a false confession is remotely related to 'justice.'

[kiki75]

If there is no state, how is there a death penalty?

[CommieCat]

Typically its called 'mob justice.'

[cccplikai]

Violent revolution is necessary！
The bourgeoisie does not automatically give up the leadership，Parliamentary struggle road that leads to nowhere~

[Charles Xavier]

Depends on the time, the crime and place.

[mikelepore]

In the U.S. at least, if the death penalty exists at all in the law, then it cannot be applied only to cases of near certain guilt. It would also be applied to cases in which convictions are based on superficial simliarities. In the famous 1966-1967 case of Rubin Carter and John Artis, the call on the police radio was that murders in a bar were committed by "two black men" who left the scene "in a white car." The next time the local police saw any white car with any two black men inside it, they arrested them. Then the prosecution manufactured "witnesses" by paying random people large sums of money to claim that they had been there and saw the suspects do it, which is legal and routine in the U.S. The twelve members of the jury, fully aware of the any-two-black-men action and the production of supposed witnesses by an offer to pay anyone willing to testify against the suspects, voted unanimously that this constituted evidence of guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt." This kind of outcome cannot be prevented except by abolishing the death penalty. U.S. law makes no distinction between a conviction based on the most solid evidence imaginable and a conviction based on hiring "witnesses" and minor similarities between a perpetrator and a suspect.

[Bitter Ashes]

I think we should be trying to hold the moral high ground tbh.
Killing is always a has high emotions eminate from it. I wouldnt count on the support of anyone who's brother/lover/child was somebody you put against a wall. It just doesnt seem to me like a good way to make friends and frankly, we should be better than that anyway. Even the capitalists will not kill a civilian on purpose!
There does seem to be some objection to the idea of releasing offenders after rehabilitation too. Surely, even if you did have a death penalty, you'd be reserving it exclusivly for those who would have otherwise spent a life in jail? I doubt prisoners would become so hard to support anyway when, ultimatly, they wouldnt be that much different to anywhere else, with the capitalists gone, except with guards, worse food and no demand on high end products.
There would be less people going into jails too when the biggest motive for crime, money, isnt an issue. The ones that are there would make a good work force for jobs that honest workers would prefer to avoid too.
And on top of all this was the first thing that was mentioned. You cant bring people back from the dead. Mistakes do happen and we have appeal courts to root them out. Denying that chance of appeal just silences a voice from bieng heard.
I really cant see any excuse for capital punishment

[Rangi]

Murder at the hands of the state is pure oppression. I think that if you believe in capital punishment then you have some overtly fascist tendencies.

What gives anyone the right to take another persons life?

[thinkerOFthoughts]

sorry guys I think you where getting the wrong impression. I did not mean this in a "state sponsored" way at all. I am talking about, in a communist society (no state) will their ever be a circumstance where the death of a criminal who had committed severe crimes will be justified? I am borderline however in our current system of the death penalty, I feel bad (even if the guy/girl murdered a bunch of people) I dunno. it comes down to me thinking about how we render some person filled with life, and suddenly take it away! snatch it away as if it has no value... for this... going against my gut reaction I will use my sense of "reason" and say I am no longer for the death penalty.

[Rangi]

So it's not okay for the state to kill someone but it is okay for an organised commune to kill someone? You sound very confused.

[thinkerOFthoughts]

I never said that

[Demogorgon]

So it's not okay for the state to kill someone but it is okay for an organised commune to kill someone? You sound very confused.Sadly a lot of people here seem to think this way.

[senorsassycat]

i would support for different crimes than what it punishes now.

the idea behind the death penalty is that "evil" people will go to what ever "evil" place exists (hell) and will endure excruciating punishment there. seeing how the general opinion off communists is that no god (and thus no "evil") exists death is not a punishment.

when you kill a criminal only his family and people who liked him are punished while he merely ceases to exist.

criminals should be forced into heavy labor to do something productive.

only those who cannot stop from harming people should be killed. and i cannot think of anyone (aside from superheros/villans) who literally cannot exist with out harming people.

[NecroCommie]

Yes, I think that capital should be punished!

[brigadista]

DP is an easy, barbaric and immoral answer to a difficult question..we should try to find the answer to the question not resort to barbarism

[Dr.Claw]

I understand why people want the death penalty and i don't think its totally barbaric because i can understand the anger of people.
But lets just say hypothetically, that I killed your child. Would executing me some how magically resurrect your child? Would the emotional pain of your child being dead disappear as soon as they flipped the switch or gave me the injection?

[Coggeh]

I think its easy for people to rant on about how paedophiles , rapists or murderers of little children should be put to death . These are the extreme of extreme cases . But what solution is their in killing them ? what do we do next time just kill them after one has comitted the crime in the hope it will scare others off it ?

It has been proved time and time again that the death penalty does not effect crimes one little bit .It is NOT a deterrent.

Education , counselling , psychotherapy and studies into what causes someone to rape another . If we can find this out we can put measures in place . The death penalty is basically barbarianism IMO .

Its the same type people who support capital punishment and the death penalty as those who are pro-life . Their issue attacks and pulls on the heart strings and toys with your emotions ,logic and rationale are completely disregarded .

[Glorious Union]

So you advocate torture or cruel punishment? To what end?

I would like to see cruel and ironic punishments. If it is a wealthy capitalist with thousands working in poverty, starving to death, then I would punish him by making him work in his own factories with the same conditions as his workers did untill he has actually earned all the wealth he had. Stuff like that.

[Coggeh]

I would like to see cruel and ironic punishments. If it is a wealthy capitalist with thousands working in poverty, starving to death, then I would punish him by making him work in his own factories with the same conditions as his workers did untill he has actually earned all the wealth he had. Stuff like that.
Do you think capitalists are born with an evil gene or something ? they are people like you and me at the end of the day . Giving them punishments for being a "winner" in capitalism is stupid .

[Glorious Union]

Do you think capitalists are born with an evil gene or something ? they are people like you and me at the end of the day . Giving them punishments for being a "winner" in capitalism is stupid .
I was just giving an example. And besides, criminal punishment is decided by the law, not your genetics or origins.

And I did not just say that we should punish the "winners" in capitalism, but I do think that we should punish those who "win" at capitalism at the extreme expence of others. If you don't think that starving poor people to death in a foreign nation just for a few bucks isn't cruel, then what is?

[brigadista]

I would like to see cruel and ironic punishments. If it is a wealthy capitalist with thousands working in poverty, starving to death, then I would punish him by making him work in his own factories with the same conditions as his workers did untill he has actually earned all the wealth he had. Stuff like that.


something like the year zero?

[Coggeh]

I was just giving an example. And besides, criminal punishment is decided by the law, not your genetics or origins.

And I did not just say that we should punish the "winners" in capitalism, but I do think that we should punish those who "win" at capitalism at the extreme expence of others. If you don't think that starving poor people to death in a foreign nation just for a few bucks isn't cruel, then what is?
Capitalists are doing this because its pretty much natural for someone in that position to do it . They aren't evil , does that make it right ? hell no .The very point of a lot of marx's writings were to show this . Workers act this way because were workers and the bourgeois will act this way because of their polar opposite positions . That is the fact of the matter .

[jesper]

I am for the death penalty though only in extreme cases.
To make an example. Why should we not punish war criminals who have killed let's say a thousand others with death?

I do not see why societywe should not punish a person who has comitted murder with death. except if the murder is comitted in the act of self defence, or the the proof is not clear enough to make sure the person is guilty.

[Black Dagger]

I was just giving an example. And besides, criminal punishment is decided by the law, not your genetics or origins.

And I did not just say that we should punish the "winners" in capitalism, but I do think that we should punish those who "win" at capitalism at the extreme expence of others. If you don't think that starving poor people to death in a foreign nation just for a few bucks isn't cruel, then what is?

There is no (sound) logic to this at all. Cruely punishing people who are cruel to others sends a confused message at best. I.E. It is okay to be cruel to others - but only if it is the state or 'community' doing it. And at worst, emulates the society - premised on authority and violence - that we seek to abolish. I.E. You have replaced the states monopoly on 'legitimate violence' with a community monopoly on 'legitimate cruelty'.

[Glorious Union]

There is no (sound) logic to this at all. Cruely punishing people who are cruel to others sends a confused message at best. I.E. It is okay to be cruel to others - but only if it is the state or 'community' doing it. And at worst, emulates the society - premised on authority and violence - that we seek to abolish. I.E. You have replaced the states monopoly on 'legitimate violence' with a community monopoly on 'legitimate cruelty'.
Well how should we treat unlawful people then? It is my personal beleif that when you do wrong to others then an equivelent wrong should be done to you. But hey, I'm not running things around here (or anywhere for that matter) so likely we will never see this idea put into effect.

[thecoffeecake1]

there's a very powerful movie with sean Penn on this subject. I cannot think if the name of it right now though. I bet someone here knows the title

[Black Dagger]

Well how should we treat unlawful people then?

It depends on what they've done.

I'm not a law student, so i'm sure there would be people with a better idea of 'alternative justice' systems (if you're genuinely interested, try to get your hands on to alternative law journals or books from a library, there's heaps out there) then I - but it doesn't take a law student to figure out that things like capital punishment, imprisonment etc. do not alter or deter peoples behaviour. This has been a longstanding criticism of the criminal justice system as it is now - this and the treatment of drug offences and property offences by the law.

We have to remember, a lot of 'crime' or 'problems' that exist in a society such as this would not be the same in a communist society. Will we still feel the need to punish people for using drugs? For cultivating or making them? The abolition of the state and of class will also dramatically change societies approach to 'property offences' - Suffice to say that common crimes like theft and property damage will have a completely different meaning.

If someone is in a situation where they commit crime because of social factors or mental health (these account for a large proportion of crime) then i see no reason to employ anything but non-coercive responses, like Participatory justice (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Participatory_justice)systems, education, community work or support programs etc. The point is, people who commit crime do not do so because of some kind of innate criminality - they're just people - often desperate people or people with problems.

This all entails a shift in perspective, and for some perhaps this is a bit radical. Basically, instead of responding to crime by saying 'hey you! stop that *insert punish*' Instead of that, i think we need to look at ways we can improve peoples lives so they will not 'need' to commit crime. To provide alternatives, just punishing people ('do to them what they did to others') is not going to prevent re-offending, it certainly doesn't help the offender or wider society (i don't think justice should be predicated on pleasing the victim of crime, as it regards to punishment - that is vigilante-ism). Instead of treating people who commit crime as 'criminals' we need to treat them as humans (!) - yes people need to understand that they have done something wrong - that is a part of participatory justice - but once this has been established we need to move forward to helping them, with the aim of preventing re-offending. I.E. Actually deal with social problems or issues that create crime rather than just punishing the people who act out because of these things.



It is my personal beleif that when you do wrong to others then an equivelent wrong should be done to you. But hey, I'm not running things around here (or anywhere for that matter) so likely we will never see this idea put into effect.

Actually, as i pointed out in earlier post - this conception of 'justice' is very old and can be found in the bible for example. It has been used for thousands of years, though i think perhaps we should look for more innovative and humane methods?

NB: Rather than advocating 'participatory justice' as it is currently defined as the method of communist justice, i'm merely suggesting that this type of approach is something communists should aim for... just that sort of direction, rather than the punitive direction taken by the state and some communists.

[StalinFanboy]

Yes, I think that capital should be punished!
I think you're on to something here...

[Dr.Claw]

Well how should we treat unlawful people then? It is my personal beleif that when you do wrong to others then an equivelent wrong should be done to you. But hey, I'm not running things around here (or anywhere for that matter) so likely we will never see this idea put into effect.

somebody once said,I forget who it was,"If we keep taking an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth,then the world will be blind and toothless."

It makes me sick thinking about what the bourgeois does to the people of this world but what would make me even more sick is if I did the same thing to Anybody even if it was the bourgeois themselves.

I say that after the revolution that we try to rehabilitate them an educate them, because most of them haven't been taught anything else.

[ZeroNowhere]

somebody once said,I forget who it was,"If we keep taking an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth,then the world will be blind and toothless."
"An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind", said by Gandhi.


I would like to see cruel and ironic punishments. If it is a wealthy capitalist with thousands working in poverty, starving to death, then I would punish him by making him work in his own factories with the same conditions as his workers did untill he has actually earned all the wealth he had. Stuff like that.
Isn't that basically schadenfreude?

[SocialRealist]

I cannot support capital punishment due to the fact I cannot support executing an unarmed and captured man or woman no matter how bad and evil they may have been. I feel that it is only granting them their wish if we execute them. Instead what we need to do is rehabilitate these people no matter how dangerous they are considered I truly and deeply believe that we can rehabilitate these people.

[Wtf]

I voted no. Killing someone for killing someone isn't going to bring the first-killed back to life. I think rehabilitation would at least give us the chance to try to make them less dangerous to anyone in society, if dangerous at all still.

[Anonymous]

I am against capital punishment. It is a colder act than murder and the most injust form of justice.
Especially nowadays when authorities seem more concerned about image/PR than solving cases, they would punish scapegoats with cold blood just too look good in the press.
I'll give you an example: Andrei Chikatilo, Russia's most prolific serial killer with a body count of 52 was arrested in 1990. Before this, 3 other innocent men were executed for his crimes.

I recommend the movie A Short Film About Killing by Kieslowski. It is a masterpiece, in Poland the impact of this film made the authorities ban capital punishment.