Justice in an Anarchist Society

[The Advent of Anarchy]

I have a question.

Let's say one guy murders someone else, obviously an authoritarian act. What's the society going to do about it? Death penalty is authoritarian, and jails are abolished. What's his punishment?

[Marsella]

Sorry, but why is the death penalty authoritarian?

Why is murder authoritarian?

If a community decides to sentence a criminal to death (who has already abused his 'rights') then how is that authoritarian?

Is self-defence authoritarian?

Also, why do we need punishment?

And there have been numerous threads on this by the way.

But following your logic, there are other methods of 'punishment' available: exile, forced labour, corporal punishment...I am not saying I support such things but they are available.

Edit: wow 5 questions in a row...sorry! :lol:

[Tower of Bebel]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17, 2007 08:28 pm
I have a question.

Let's say one guy murders someone else, obviously an authoritarian act. What's the society going to do about it? Death penalty is authoritarian, and jails are abolished. What's his punishment?
Everthing seems to be authoritarian these days. It's kind of scary.

If someone murders someone else, then this person should go to court. There will be an inquiery and there will be a judgement.

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17, 2007 07:28 pm
I have a question.

Let's say one guy murders someone else, obviously an authoritarian act. What's the society going to do about it? Death penalty is authoritarian, and jails are abolished. What's his punishment?
Your argument presupposes that punitive measures are the only solution.

[Tower of Bebel]

We should try to integrate everyone in society when possible.

[BobKKKindle$]

It is often argued that, without the pressure and hardship that exists in a capitalist society, many crimes, especially those arising from a lack of basic necessities, would not occur. This is a fair argument. We still have to think about how we should deal with instances of criminal deviance when they do occur however, as crime (which, broadly interpreted, means a breach of the accepted norms of society) is a universal characteristic of all human societies. Any socialist judicial system for non-political crimes will doubtless be based on rehabilitation, instead of retribution and depriving people of their rights. Rehabilitation is preferable, not only from a practical viewpoint, (that is, it is better to treat criminals as human beings if they are to become useful members of society) but also from an ethical viewpoint, as a crime is never (solely) a conscious act to which an individual can be held accountable.

The issue of deviance is a matter of concern for anarchists because interning a deviant is coercive, and presupposes the existence of some armed body of men (the police force) which could be interpreted as constituting a state. Colin Ward in 'Anarchy in Action' argues that the pressure of a community would be sufficient to force a deviant to behave, or to leave and live elsewhere.


If a community decides to sentence a criminal to death (who has already abused his 'rights') then how is that authoritarian?

You have a skewed view of democracy. Although the power of the majority is an essential feature, democracy also includes a system of checks, to ensure that the rights of vulnerable social groups, such as ethnic minorities and those who have been convicted of a crime, are protected regardless of the majority's will. In the context of serious deviance, a failure to implement these checks, possibly in the form of a bill of rights, could lead to arbitrary punishment including death, because the community is unable to rationally discuss what has occurred, such is the immediate emotional impact.

[Tower of Bebel]

Originally posted by [email protected] 18, 2007 08:35 am
The issue of deviance is a matter of concern for anarchists because interning a deviant is coercive, and presupposes the existence of some armed body of men (the police force) which could be interpreted as constituting a state. Colin Ward in 'Anarchy in Action' argues that the pressure of a community would be sufficient to force a deviant to behave, or to leave and live elsewhere.
We can't just send a criminal somewhere else? That is no solution at all!

[MarxSchmarx]

Also, why do we need punishment?


We don't. Punishment (1) acts as a deterrent, (2) "restores the balance of the universe", (3) satisfies bloodlust, or (4) secures society from further harm. As bobkindles notes, none of these are compelling rationales that can't be dealt with through rehabilitation.


Colin Ward in 'Anarchy in Action' argues that the pressure of a community would be sufficient to force a deviant to behave, or to leave and live elsewhere.

Of course, there will still be dangerous transgressions (albeit much less). Some form of physical coercion will have to be taken to protect the community from deranged deviants. Odds are this will initially take the form of compulsory psychiatric institutionalization for those that pose a serious physical threat.

I think with time, we will come to understand the biological underpinnings of dangerous deviance and we can treat it more humanely.

In the interim, anarchists shouldn't let the perfect become the enemy of the good.

[guerilla E]

Originally posted by [email protected] 18, 2007 06:34 am
It is often argued that, without the pressure and hardship that exists in a capitalist society, many crimes, especially those arising from a lack of basic necessities, would not occur.
This arguement relies upon the principle that in an Anarchist society, materialistic urges of the individual would be purged out. Maybe the concept of mutual-support or communial interaction can prevent the majority of the crimes or criminal impulses, due to the community (its benefits and fear of exile) acting as the deterrent, and even punishment.

We must also understand that in Anarchist societies, the individual is free but not entirely independent, the idea of communes and communities is primary. In capitalist societies the individual is not free, but can attain independence at the cost of harming others; the winners and losers theory. Therefore justice will reflect upon that link between the individual and the community.

Perhaps the justice of an Anarchist society is that of, as mentioned earlier, major involvement of the community and then a punishment suited to the crime - keeping in mind that exile, rejection, from the community is more severe than we realise.