James Bulger The Reactionaries rallying Cry.

[Little Bobby Hutton]

At ten years of age John Venables and another boy tortured and stoned to death toddler james bulger, both boys were victims of abuse at home and were from poor backgrounds.
When they commited these horrific crimes, reactionaries the public and the tabloids said these children should be hanged, which to me is a disrace, at 10, they were so young and were victims of abuse which no doubt was the key factor in this dreadfull incident.
After 8 years the boys were released, and a few weeks ago john venables was sent back to prison for breaching his probation or some order, it was probably something minor or maybe not, but people and the press are calling for his crimes to be made public, to do so would be hugely reactionary.
The issue i want to bring up is why do people, even some communists seem to hate the idea that people, even those guilty of the most henious crimes, be rehabilitated, to me everyone is capable of redemption, pedophiles, rapists, murderes, isnt it wrong to say who can/cant be rehabilitated?

[Demogorgon]

All people should be given the opportunity for rehabilitation. Even those for whom this fails should still be allowed to live some form of life even if it means they have to be kept under close supervision. There should certainly never be any form of death penalty.

[Little Bobby Hutton]

I would just like to state my position, i feel everyone has the right to rehabilitation, but honestly if i was in a room with them both i probably would have killed both of them and not very quickly, the things they did to that poor boy are horrific, but you cant carry out law based on emotive predjudice.

[Chambered Word]

Is it wrong to deny some offenders can be rehabillitated and let back into society?
yes its reactionary
not sure
Let them hang

You don't give us many options. I think they should be given the chance if they're as young as 10, but in this case fuck them.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

As said, everyone should be given the chance of rehabilitation. It's my opinion that the sentencing given to the children was in fact quite lenient, however one should really respect the rule of law in such a case, it is far more informed and well-judged than mob justice.

So now this youth has re-offended. Clearly, he should face a harsh punishment if he has committed a serious offence. However, that should be within the confines of the law, not mob justice 'let him hang', type things.

Seems a pretty open and shut case to me. Only in Britain could there be such a pathetically reactionary fervour about what really should not be a case dictated to by peoples' emotions.

[Bitter Ashes]

Up here theres more hysteria about the possibility of the Yorkshire Ripper bieng released, but it's the same thing. At the end of the day, there's no reason why somebody shouldnt be able to fit into society unless they have a serious mental illness, in which case I would place my faith, in a kinda technocratic way, in the trained doctors to determine whether the individual is a risk to others.

I remember James Bulger bieng murdered very well as I was living near Liverpool at the time and I was about the same age as John Vennables and couldnt fathom why they would do it. I know better now that although monsters, they were made monsters by parents put under extreme stress by a capitalist system. Can the be rehabilitated? Yes. Should we try? Yes. But more importantly, shouldnt people take more steps to make sure that monsters like this are not created again in the first place?

There's also the issue of presumption of innocence, but I'd be going offtopic with that one I think.

[bailey_187]

They have been given the chance to be rehabilitated. The one who got caught with child Porn has shown that despite the attempts at rehabilitation, he still has not been. So lock him up for life or hang him; i dont care.

The other one though, if he has been rehabilitated should be left alone and his identity secret.

I accept that what they did was influenced by being abused at home themselves. But many, many kids are abused at home; most do not kidnap, torture and kill a 2 year old.

[Little Bobby Hutton]

No offence but you sound like a fucking tory with that remark comrade.
The extremely conservative populist paper the sun CLAIMED he had been sent back for child porn, but as no one knows what he has been sent back for, why are you sprouting that bullshit, in all probability it was due to breach of curfew or something tiny, also over 100 people have been wrongly accused of being venables, my mum recieved a text from a womean giving a guys name and adress out as venables, im proud to say my mum rang her up, told her to shut up and stopbeing a rumor spreading hysteria mouthpiece.

[bailey_187]

No offence but you sound like a fucking tory with that remark comrade.
The extremely conservative populist paper the sun CLAIMED he had been sent back for child porn, but as no one knows what he has been sent back for, why are you sprouting that bullshit, in all probability it was due to breach of curfew or something tiny, also over 100 people have been wrongly accused of being venables, my mum recieved a text from a womean giving a guys name and adress out as venables, im proud to say my mum rang her up, told her to shut up and stopbeing a rumor spreading hysteria mouthpiece.

Not taken. In the same spirit, i think you sound like a soppy Liberal.

Well if the allegations of Child porn are wrong, then fine. If it was due to a small break in his terms of release, obviously i dont think he should be punished in that way.

[Little Bobby Hutton]

Not taken. In the same spirit, i think you sound like a soppy Liberal.

Well if the allegations of Child porn are wrong, then fine. If it was due to a small break in his terms of release, obviously i dont think he should be punished in that way.


HAHA, at least you have a sense of humor you bloody tory :)

[Robocommie]

I think that when really horrendous crimes like this have been committed, people's natural instinct is to be repulsed on the deepest level, even more so because this crime was committed by children. This kind of thing disturbs people, on a deep emotional level, it's like a big hairy black spider sitting across the room, staring at you. And just like with spiders, I think it's a very common, and frankly understandable instinct to squash it. People want these kids to hang because they want to attack the very repulsiveness of everything that happened. I believe most justifications for the death penalty arise from this, later, as a justification of this reaction.

But I don't think it's very helpful. Because while it's understandable, maybe even laudable to the degree it condemns brutality and cruelty, it is itself a bit brutal and cruel in it's response.

I think people can be extremely prejudicial in deciding who can and cannot be rehabilitated, most certainly ethnicity and class plays a role - to use a US example, a black teenager who kills another teenager in a gangland shooting is often marked as a "hardened criminal" and he's treated that way, and in a sick irony, this ensures he's never going to get the chance to rethink the decisions he's made and turn his life around.

Naturally I don't think everyone CAN be rehabilitated, and the responsibility for rehabilitation is ultimately going to be on the criminal themselves, not society. But in general, I do think terms like "sociopath" and "hardened criminal" get too easily thrown about. People should always have the chance to fairly prove themselves able to re-enter society, just like it's society's responsibility to isolate people who cannot re-enter it. It's the only way to have real justice.

[Demogorgon]

I think it goes a bit further than that. There is an unfortunate tendency to desire more and more extreme punishment of offenders and that of course indirectly drives up the crime rate as it reduces rehabilitation, but this case stands out because I don't think I have ever known such hysteria as surrounds it. Not even Ian Huntley.

The fact is that terrible crimes happen. People suffer, the tabloids then cause even more suffering, some reactionary "bring back hanging" cries are heard and the world moves on. But this case was different. People got more angry, yet in this case it was two ten year olds that committed the crime. Surely ten year olds are less culpable than adults for the crimes they commit? It is only common sense that an adult has to be treated more severely than a child for equivalent crimes committed.

yet in this case, such common sense has broken down entirely. The question is why? I believe there is guilt here and people are lashing out to try and keep it down. Society was allowed to get to the point where ten year olds committed brutal murder. That simply should not happen, it goes beyond any standard of decency that homes can be so broken, circumstances so dire that something like this takes place. Nobody likes blaming themselves though, and those who are most hysterical about this probably carry some blame (many will have voted for Thatcher after all), so they cover it by joining the baying mob and imagine that ten year old criminals are worse than their adult equivalents.

Moreover of course the right wing tabloids do not want there to be any soul searching as to why this happened, as it will call into question the policies they back. So they fan the flames of the mob to protect their position.

[Revolutionary Pseudonym]

Rehabilitation should always be the first reaction against any crime. If they then go onto to commit another crime it must be descided either 1) The rehabilitation was insufficent, or 2) The person is unrehabilitable. In the first instance they must continue with rehabilitated, in the second then they may be kept within a secure commune where they will able to access all the stuff others can but there are gaurds and they have to produce for themselves and all surplus be shared with the greater community - it's a lot more productive than hanging them.

[bailey_187]

kept within a secure commune where they will able to access all the stuff others can but there are gaurds and they have to produce for themselves and all surplus be shared with the greater community - it's a lot more productive than hanging them.

lol, i agree pretty much with doing this. Be honest though, what we are talking about is a GULAG. Long live Stalin! (serious).

[Little Bobby Hutton]

lol, i agree pretty much with doing this. Be honest though, what we are talking about is a GULAG. Long live Stalin! (serious).

He is a leftcom HaHA

[Robocommie]

It would be wrong to redistribute their surplus to the greater community, that's exploitative labor, it would create a class of slaves and frankly give the administrators of the penal communes inordinate control of wealth that they did not produce personally. However, the idea of a separate commune where violent offenders who can't be reintegrated are kept isolated from the rest of society, is a good one, I think.

Organize it like a monastery with guards, like the modern prison system was supposed to be. They wouldn't be allowed to leave without genuinely demonstrating their rehabilitation, but they would otherwise be able to make a life for themselves within the confines of the commune.

[Revolutionary Pseudonym]

It would be wrong to redistribute their surplus to the greater community, that's exploitative labor, it would create a class of slaves and frankly give the administrators of the penal communes inordinate control of wealth that they did not produce personally.
I didn't mean it in an exploitive manner, I meant that their surplus shouldn't be soley used by themselves - I'd hope that all surplus would be shared equally amongst all people, not just within the commune.

[Robocommie]

I didn't mean it in an exploitive manner, I meant that their surplus shouldn't be soley used by themselves - I'd hope that all surplus would be shared equally amongst all people, not just within the commune.

I suppose that makes sense. The details aren't really extremely important unless we reach a point where we can implement it as policy, in general though I think that's a good idea.

[Dr Mindbender]

I dont think anyone can comment without knowing the neurology or state of mental health of the individuals concerned. While i dont condone what they did this lynch mob mentality about paedophiles and other social deviants we have that is cheerled by the tabloids really aggrivates the fuck out of me.

[Little Bobby Hutton]

Mindbender you seem very level headed im glad to say, unfortunately four people chose hang them, this is reactionary bile.

[Bitter Ashes]

I dont think anyone can comment without knowing the neurology or state of mental health of the individuals concerned. While i dont condone what they did this lynch mob mentality about paedophiles and other social deviants we have that is cheerled by the tabloids really aggrivates the fuck out of me.
Rupert Murdoch is much happier to have the headline of "Hang Vennables now!" than "Hang Murdoch now!". While it was a disgusting crime, it's thankfully still a very rare occurance. Same as with terrorism. Compare that to the millions killed by cars, a vital component of capitalism and it's clear where the media bias is.

We're told what to fear, whether it's Al Queda on the underground, or murderous caretakers hiding in our schools, but never the things that are actualy present and tangible threats to our lives.

[Little Bobby Hutton]

Was their hanging under Mao, and if so how do Maoists defend this.

[Saorsa]

These are kids. They've been mentally scarred and hurt in a terrible way by things that other people did to them in the past. This isn't their fault. When a rape survivor internalizes violence rather than externalizing it, and cuts themselves to try and get rid of the pain they're feeling, do we blame them for it? Do we say it's their fault they do it? Of course not.

These kids need mental help. Perhaps they need to be isolated from the rest of society - perhaps they're a danger to other people. But they were hurt in a way nobody should ever be hurt, and the scars from that haven't healed, probably won't heal and continue to affect their behaviour today.

These kids are victims. They deserve to be treated as such.

[chegitz guevara]

First, I don't think everyone should necessarily ought to have the right to rehabilitate themselves and reintegrate into society. Society, the collective's interests come before those who have shown in interest in harming the collective.

Whether or not someone should be have a chance to show the ability to be rehabilitated depends on whether or not it is in society's interest. A serial killer, for example, cannot be rehabilitated, so there's no point in even bothering. We don't need to kill him, but he should certainly be separated from society for the rest of his life (although, once life extension technology is finally worked out, this will raise an serious ethical problem).

[I.Drink.Your.Milkshake]

Some people do deserve to die, the issue is that no-one else has the right to take a life. I question the motivations of the "bring back hanging" lot, it seems this itself is bourne purely out of bloodlust. No doubt they would be front row centre if capital punishment were ever to come back. Were capital punishment ever needed again then it would be a failure of society and ultimately a sad occasion, not a reason to celebrate. We should never be so quick to judge, there are so many conditions that can create crimes of this sort the simple fact is that we all are subject to the whims of our biology. Any of us is capable of very bad things.

But it really depends. Some people can be rehabilitated and should be given the chance, some people can be rehabilitated and should not be given the chance (IMO). Some people are obviously beyond rehabilitation, for whatever reason.

[Revolutionary Pseudonym]

But it really depends. Some people can be rehabilitated and should be given the chance, some people can be rehabilitated and should not be given the chance (IMO). Some people are obviously beyond rehabilitation, for whatever reason.

But how could you justify not giving people a second chance, if there was a way to make sure that they could not commit a crime but still enjoy relative freedoms, ie. a secure working comune, surely that is better in every logical and moral way - they would be providing for themselves and not be a danger to anybody. Also, who would descide who should or who shouldn't be given a second chance, particually if the descision is to be democratic because people can easily be tricked into believing exagerated or nonexistent claims (hence I believe the populist/sensationalist trend in media and society as a whole to be the largest enemy to the left in the 21st century) thus leading to people being unfairly convicted to death.
And to those who cannot be rehabilitated: why should they be killed, surely if the can't be helped then there is something mentally wrong with them, in which case it clearly isn't their fault, so they should be kept safe and secure and made to conform to the rest of society as much as possible, be it within a secure working comune.

[I.Drink.Your.Milkshake]

But how could you justify not giving people a second chance, if there was a way to make sure that they could not commit a crime but still enjoy relative freedoms, ie. a secure working comune, surely that is better in every logical and moral way - they would be providing for themselves and not be a danger to anybody. Also, who would descide who should or who shouldn't be given a second chance, particually if the descision is to be democratic because people can easily be tricked into believing exagerated or nonexistent claims (hence I believe the populist/sensationalist trend in media and society as a whole to be the largest enemy to the left in the 21st century) thus leading to people being unfairly convicted to death.
And to those who cannot be rehabilitated: why should they be killed, surely if the can't be helped then there is something mentally wrong with them, in which case it clearly isn't their fault, so they should be kept safe and secure and made to conform to the rest of society as much as possible, be it within a secure working comune.


woah! none of the section of my post that you quoted was intended to be an argument for capital punishment! Rather they were arguments for not allowing certain people back into society. Im all for secure working communes. There are probably multiple murderers that could be rehabilitated and could go on to live fulfilling lives within society. But they shouldnae be allowed to, they should be in some kind of prison, work farm, whatever you want to call it.

[Proletarian Ultra]

1. It's legitimate to ask whether someone with Venable's past can ever be meaningfully rehabilitated. And it's important that leftists not fall into the trap of tear-jerking liberal pity.

2. What is necessary is to push that question further "WTF was going on in Merseyside in the '80's that something like this was even possible?" You don't see shit like this happening in nice London suburbs. Why not?

3. Also, why is British society so hysterically prone to moral panics?

[Bitter Ashes]

3. Also, why is British society so hysterically prone to moral panics?
Pot. Kettle. Black.
We didnt have a national scandal when a nipple was shown during a sporting event, or have big demonstrations in the capital against free healthcare.

[Proletarian Ultra]

Pot. Kettle. Black.
We didnt have a national scandal when a nipple was shown during a sporting event, or have big demonstrations in the capital against free healthcare.

Touche!

[Red Commissar]

There are cases like this that come up, the media and other pertinent groups try to make it look like it is a common occurrence. Things like this don't happen much, and it's sad when people try to take these media-saturated events as a platform to push for "tougher" justice.

[brigadista]

They have been given the chance to be rehabilitated. The one who got caught with child Porn has shown that despite the attempts at rehabilitation, he still has not been. So lock him up for life or hang him; i dont care.

The other one though, if he has been rehabilitated should be left alone and his identity secret.

I accept that what they did was influenced by being abused at home themselves. But many, many kids are abused at home; most do not kidnap, torture and kill a 2 year old.


because the "most" you refer to had an adult who intervened in some way - these two boys had no intervening person- they were children when this happened-not adults

[I.Drink.Your.Milkshake]

2. What is necessary is to push that question further "WTF was going on in Merseyside in the '80's that something like this was even possible?" You don't see shit like this happening in nice London suburbs. Why not?

I think Merseyside is incidental to this. It really could have happened anywhere.



3. Also, why is British society so hysterically prone to moral panics?


I dont think this is unique to Britain.

[Proletarian Ultra]

I think Merseyside is incidental to this. It really could have happened anywhere.

I disagree. This happened in the industrial heartland of England after more than a decade and a half of the hollowing out of British industry and the simultaneous evisceration of the welfare state. Complete devastation of working-class communities. I think that's relevant.

[I.Drink.Your.Milkshake]

I disagree. This happened in the industrial heartland of England after more than a decade and a half of the hollowing out of British industry and the simultaneous evisceration of the welfare state. Complete devastation of working-class communities. I think that's relevant.


Incidental. A few years ago a lad in Milford, Staffordshire (an affluent, well-to-do, upper-middle class area - a nice Midland suburb, if not London) tried to kill both of his parents. So stuff like this does, can happen in nice areas. Horrific as it was these incidents are not limited to the working class. You're trying to put this into a political context and im not sure there is one, entirely.