No Escape: Male Rape in US Prisons

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

LINK (http://www.hrw.org/legacy/reports/2001/prison/report.html)

"I've been sentenced for a D.U.I. offense. My 3rd one. When I first came to prison, I had no idea what to expect. Certainly none of this. I'm a tall white male, who unfortunately has a small amount of feminine characteristics. And very shy. These characteristics have got me raped so many times I have no more feelings physically. I have been raped by up to 5 black men and two white men at a time. I've had knifes at my head and throat. I had fought and been beat so hard that I didn't ever think I'd see straight again. One time when I refused to enter a cell, I was brutally attacked by staff and taken to segragation though I had only wanted to prevent the same and worse by not locking up with my cell mate. There is no supervision after lockdown. I was given a conduct report. I explained to the hearing officer what the issue was. He told me that off the record, He suggests I find a man I would/could willingly have sex with to prevent these things from happening. I've requested protective custody only to be denied. It is not available here. He also said there was no where to run to, and it would be best for me to accept things . . . . I probably have AIDS now. I have great difficulty raising food to my mouth from shaking after nightmares or thinking to hard on all this . . . . I've laid down without physical fight to be sodomized. To prevent so much damage in struggles, ripping and tearing. Though in not fighting, it caused my heart and spirit to be raped as well. Something I don't know if I'll ever forgive myself for."

---

Sickening. I've heard people gleefully cackling about this sort of thing happening, but the full horror of what goes on in US prisons was unknown to me until I'd read this report.

It confirms what I've suspected all along - that if you cage humans like wild animals, then they'll start acting like them, the prison guards as well. Homophobia, racism, all the ugliest aspects of humanity are in revoltingly strong force in US prisons.

The screws are complicit in this ongoing atrocity. But worse than that, this rot feeds into the greater part of society - and do we really want that?

I think not!

[Dóchas]

wow i knew that it happened no and then but when i read the report it really put it into context. thats really scary and disturbing to think about. like imagine that happening every one or two days for two years. its a pity that prisons are so over crowded these days. imagine the difference it would make if each inmate had their own cell.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

wow i knew that it happened no and then but when i read the report it really put it into context. thats really scary and disturbing to think about. like imagine that happening every one or two days for two years. its a pity that prisons are so over crowded these days. imagine the difference it would make if each inmate had their own cell.

Call me utopian, but personally I would rather not have humans caged in prisons at all. Once the rot sets in it's hard to stop it - if prison life is percieved as too "soft" then there's a backlash and prisons are turned into shitholes, if they aren't already, in which case they become worse.

Not only that, but what kind of mentality does it take to be a keeper at a "human zoo"? Actually, I take that back, zoo animals are treated like fucking royalty in comparison to human prisoners, who are percieved and treated like subhuman beasts - with the tragic result that if you treat a man like a beast, he turns into one. Being a prison guard enables one to act like a sadistic piece of shit and get away with it.

It's a vicious cycle for both the screws and the inmates.

[Dóchas]

good point...i wasnt thinking, why have prisons at all!!!! my bad :blushing:

[Dr Mindbender]

good point...i wasnt thinking, why have prisons at all!!!! my bad :blushing:
I think even in a post revolutionary society, there will be a need for prisons of some sort. I would support a custodial reprimand for the old beourgiose rather than killing them outright (after all, they must work to pay off their debt). I don't agree with single sex prisons however, they serve no purpose.

[Dóchas]

ye i spose prisons wouldnt be needed after the establishment of the communist society and who ever opposed it was gone

[Dr Mindbender]

ye i spose prisons wouldnt be needed after the establishment of the communist society and who ever opposed it was gone

its not about silencing dissenters but punishing the beourgiose as the theives that they are.

If you are familiar with the labour theory of value you will know what i mean.

[Dóchas]

its not about silencing dissenters but punishing the beourgiose as the theives that they are.

If you are familiar with the labour theory of value you will know what i mean.

i know this sounds pretty bad but whats the theory of value i think i know what it is but im not sure :confused: :blushing:

[Dr Mindbender]

i know this sounds pretty bad but whats the theory of value i think i know what it is but im not sure :confused: :blushing:

its the theory postulated by Karl Marx that all capital is the product of labour, therefore all capital including profit is the rightful property of the workers.

[Dóchas]

ye thats what i was thinking but i wasnt a 100% sure... sorry bout that :blushing:

[Dr Mindbender]

ye thats what i was thinking but i wasnt a 100% sure... sorry bout that :blushing:

s' alright. If theres any more blind spots in your theory just ask in the learning forum.

[Dóchas]

s' alright. If theres any more blind spots in your theory just ask in the learning forum.

thanks i appreciate it :)

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

I have no objection to short-term "holding cells", equivalent to what would nowadays be a local jail, but it would be best if they were more along the lines of "secure acommodation"; it looks more or less like a normal single-person apartment, except you can't leave at will. Such small establishments with relatively temporary occupants would be orders of magnitude more amenable to transparency than the massive prison complexes we currently have housing inmates for decades at a time, which more or less form a world of their own, along with their own uniquely brutal culture.

As for the bourgeouisie, I think confiscation of "their" property would be enough, and if they want to leave the region we should by all means let them. If they engage in counter-revolutionary activities, then they should be put on trial and, if found guilty, shot. War criminals would possibly meet the same fate.

[Dr Mindbender]

As for the bourgeouisie, I think confiscation of "their" property would be enough, and if they want to leave the region we should by all means let them. If they engage in counter-revolutionary activities, then they should be put on trial and, if found guilty, shot. War criminals would possibly meet the same fate.

how do you deal with beourgiose who both refuse to leave and conform to the ways of the new system? Furthermore i think it would be innapropriate for such idle people to enjoy the fruits of the system they prevented for so long, i think there needs to be some justice in the context of them being 'punished'.

[Dóchas]

Furthermore i think it would be innapropriate for such idle people to enjoy the fruits of the system they prevented for so long, i think there needs to be some justice in the context of them being 'punished'.

tie them to a post in the village square and throw rotten fruit at them?

[Dr Mindbender]

tie them to a post in the village square and throw rotten fruit at them?

thats probably the primmie answer. :lol:

[butterfly]

I prefer the term negative reinforcment

[Sean]

1) I know ex cons who were not raped constantly funnily enough. A lot of it is ooga-booga stuff to scare you away from crime and objecting to authority. I'm not saying its fiction, I'm saying its hammed up a lot.
2) Male rape is terrible isn't it? People react with a terrible shock as if non-consensual sex has some how been reinvented if a vagina isn't involved. Its not like it adds a whole new dynamic other than the one concocted in your own head. There are women who get raped on a daily basis and yet only with the male prefix on the term does anyone seem to get shocked or outraged enough anymore. I'm not pointing my finger at posters above in any way at all, I mean about society in general, not you guys.

The instruction seems to be: Do not commit crime. If you go to prison, you will get raped. You don't really hear that said as loudly about female prisons, in fact thats a popular porno genre. I think more than anything this indicates how lightly we treat rape towards girls. I'm not exluding myself, either.

[jake williams]

The situations in prisons are atrocious, especially in the US (compared to the rest of the industrialized world), and we shouldn't ever forget their class character. Something similar but I wouldn't say analogous to a prison is probably necessary, especially in the short/medium term. But in its present conception it's in large part a weapon of class warfare, and a vicious one at that.


1) I know ex cons who were not raped constantly funnily enough. A lot of it is ooga-booga stuff to scare you away from crime and objecting to authority. I'm not saying its fiction, I'm saying its hammed up a lot.
I expect there's a lot of truth to this. Some of the more honest stories I've heard about prison make it a lot more about boredom than about violence. Depends where, partly, and maximum/minimum security.


2) Male rape is terrible isn't it? People react with a terrible shock as if non-consensual sex has some how been reinvented if a vagina isn't involved. Its not like it adds a whole new dynamic other than the one concocted in your own head. There are women who get raped on a daily basis and yet only with the male prefix on the term does anyone seem to get shocked or outraged enough anymore. I'm not pointing my finger at posters above in any way at all, I mean about society in general, not you guys.
This is a very important point.

[black magick hustla]

Furthermore i think it would be innapropriate for such idle people to enjoy the fruits of the system they prevented for so long, i think there needs to be some justice in the context of them being 'punished'.

sorry, but you are not a communist.

[scarletghoul]

What is the point in punishing the bourgeouis when they have been overthrown?

[synthesis]

Call me utopian, but personally I would rather not have humans caged in prisons at all. Once the rot sets in it's hard to stop it - if prison life is percieved as too "soft" then there's a backlash and prisons are turned into shitholes, if they aren't already, in which case they become worse.

Not only that, but what kind of mentality does it take to be a keeper at a "human zoo"? Actually, I take that back, zoo animals are treated like fucking royalty in comparison to human prisoners, who are percieved and treated like subhuman beasts - with the tragic result that if you treat a man like a beast, he turns into one. Being a prison guard enables one to act like a sadistic piece of shit and get away with it.

It's a vicious cycle for both the screws and the inmates.

Something tells me you've never heard of the Stanford Prison experiment.

http://www.prisonexp.org/legnews.htm

[which doctor]

how do you deal with beourgiose who both refuse to leave and conform to the ways of the new system?
If you strip away their property and capital, then they cease to be bourgeoisie.

[Rascolnikova]

I highly recommend parts of two books on this:

The Lucifer Effect, by Phillip Zimbardo (the guy who did the Stanford prison experiment)--annoying as hell and not very well written, but there's several sections on what makes prisons prisons, and the implications of this on how to fix it. He's studied it for like 50 years, can't help but have some good material.

Rape, by Joanna Bourke, has a chapter more or less devoted to prison rape. This book is very well written, the best I've seen on the topic, with a great deal of insightful social analysis.


I've heard Foucalt has written pretty extensively on this (the nature of imprisonment) as well, but haven't read any of it.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

how do you deal with beourgiose who both refuse to leave and conform to the ways of the new system?

Well, that would depend exactly on what they were doing/not doing, wouldn't it?

Social pressure would deal with all but the most obnoxious and disruptive, who would most likely end up exiled if they push things too often.


1) I know ex cons who were not raped constantly funnily enough. A lot of it is ooga-booga stuff to scare you away from crime and objecting to authority. I'm not saying its fiction, I'm saying its hammed up a lot.

So fucking what? It still happens, and those targeted tend to be the physically weak, the openly homosexual, and anyone else percieved as "weak".


2) Male rape is terrible isn't it? People react with a terrible shock as if non-consensual sex has some how been reinvented if a vagina isn't involved. Its not like it adds a whole new dynamic other than the one concocted in your own head. There are women who get raped on a daily basis and yet only with the male prefix on the term does anyone seem to get shocked or outraged enough anymore. I'm not pointing my finger at posters above in any way at all, I mean about society in general, not you guys.So if you think we're so goddamn enlightened, why bring it up at all? This thread deals with a specific phenomenon, not rape in general. Rape of females is just as unacceptable, and I support hanging the rapist no matter the sex of the victim.

If you want to start a thread on the rape of females in general society, I won't get in your way. Don't bring up irrelevancies, it makes you look dishonest.


The instruction seems to be: Do not commit crime. If you go to prison, you will get raped. You don't really hear that said as loudly about female prisons, in fact thats a popular porno genre. I think more than anything this indicates how lightly we treat rape towards girls. I'm not exluding myself, either.Rape in female prisons is not dealt with in the report due to a lack of data. You can't really compose a report without data. I shouldn't have to say this, since it should be realised by the vast majority of the members of this board, but female-on-female rape in prisons also unacceptable.

Rape is unacceptable, period. If you really think we realise that Taig, why did you even mention it?


Something tells me you've never heard of the Stanford Prison experiment.

http://www.prisonexp.org/legnews.htm

That only serves to reinforce my point. If the role of prison guard can turn even the nicest fellow into a monster, why the fuck should we have that role in society?

[Dr Mindbender]

If you strip away their property and capital, then they cease to be bourgeoisie.

It doesnt erase their past though. It comes back to the old 'communism recreating a class situation'. If you take away their property, then they become a sub-prole vagrant class without homes. But since they've done no work to deserve property, it would be unfair on those who've genuinely busted their arses working their whole lives. How do you appease angry workers all of sudden put in the same boat as workshy, smooth handed bosses?

[Dr Mindbender]

sorry, but you are not a communist.

because i want to punish the beourgiose? How do you draw that conclusion?

:huh:

[Dr Mindbender]

If you strip away their property and capital, then they cease to be bourgeoisie.

it doesnt make them workers either, they become free-riders

[black magick hustla]

because i want to punish the beourgiose? How do you draw that conclusion?

:huh:


Because the whole idea of an "eye for an eye" is not a communist position. Violence is a tool for us, nothing more than that. You are basically advocating "punishing" all rich folk beyond stripping them from their property.

[Dr Mindbender]

Because the whole idea of an "eye for an eye" is not a communist position. Violence is a tool for us, nothing more than that. You are basically advocating "punishing" all rich folk beyond stripping them from their property.

i think you're confusing communism with christianity. :glare:


I think it's also more about pure punishment, but also debt repayment. Don't forget we're going to be talking about people that havent done a days work in their lives. How on earth can you say ''Mr Bilderburg the fat bastard here deserves the same as Mr Smith the roadsweep?'' That would be an outrage IMO.

[black magick hustla]

On the contrary. you are confusing christianity with communism. You "sin" therefore you need to be punished.

My point is that this sense of justice reminds me of maoists and their glorious cultural revolution, and we know how that went.

[Dr Mindbender]

On the contrary. you are confusing christianity with communism. You "sin" therefore you need to be punished.

My point is that this sense of justice reminds me of maoists and their glorious cultural revolution, and we know how that went.

I think i'm taking a purely materialist perspective here. If you take something, there must be an appropriate amount of labour on your part to deserve it. This is fundamental to the labour theory of value.

Equally, it is unfair that an idle beourgiose recieves the same amount as a hard working prole.

[Decolonize The Left]

I think i'm taking a purely materialist perspective here. If you take something, there must be an appropriate amount of labour on your part to deserve it. This is fundamental to the labour theory of value.

Equally, it is unfair that an idle beourgiose recieves the same amount as a hard working prole.

You are most certainly not adopting a 'materialist perspective' here. You are correct that the value of labor is attached to material goods, almost all of us here agree on the labor theory of value.

But you then continue on to make a moral claim based on this theory - this is not a materialist perspective in any sense, rather, it is your own personal moral feelings towards the situation. You make several huge assumptions:
1) The working class won't be able to decide how to handle the issue.
2) They will make the wrong decision, according to you.
3) That there exists some sort of "repayment" to be made, and this insinuates that there exists some sort of 'cosmic scale' by which all deeds are measured.
4) That the overthrown capitalist class will receive the 'same' as the working class.

Etc... Much of this is speculation on your part, the rest simply ignoring the fact that the working class will enact such a revolution, and therefore will decide for themselves what will happen - nay, they will make it happen.

- August

[Dr Mindbender]

You are most certainly not adopting a 'materialist perspective' here. You are correct that the value of labor is attached to material goods, almost all of us here agree on the labor theory of value.

But you then continue on to make a moral claim based on this theory - this is not a materialist perspective in any sense, rather, it is your own personal moral feelings towards the situation. You make several huge assumptions:
No, this is based on logic. If there is no sort of reprimand taken, then you have an entire section of people who are rewarded for their laziness (ie the old beourgiose in this case)


1) The working class won't be able to decide how to handle the issue.
When on earth did i state this?


2) They will make the wrong decision, according to you.
What?!


3) That there exists some sort of "repayment" to be made, and this insinuates that there exists some sort of 'cosmic scale' by which all deeds are measured.
Yes there will be a repayment to be made, unless you are implying that the beourgiose should recieve the rest of us for doing absolutely nothing.


4) That the overthrown capitalist class will receive the 'same' as the working class.
What do you propose then?


Etc... Much of this is speculation on your part, the rest simply ignoring the fact that the working class will enact such a revolution, and therefore will decide for themselves what will happen - nay, they will make it happen.

- August

I don't understand what that is supposed to mean.

[Decolonize The Left]

No, this is based on logic. If there is no sort of reprimand taken, then you have an entire section of people who are rewarded for their laziness (ie the old beourgiose in this case)

A reward is something which is provided to an individual for an action. How are the bourgeoisie rewarded in any fashion when the working class seizes the means of production?


When on earth did i state this?

You speak for the working class rather than with them?


What?!

The revolution has not occurred. It does not appear likely to occur in the near future. The working class with enact this revolution, hence they will decide what to do with the capitalist class - if you feel the need to demand that the capitalist class be 'punished' for X, or Y, you insinuate the the working class will not make such a decision, or that it is unlikely.


Yes there will be a repayment to be made, unless you are implying that the beourgiose should recieve the rest of us for doing absolutely nothing.

What, exactly, are they receiving?


What do you propose then?

I propose nothing other than allowing the working class the freedom to decide the fate of the capitalist class upon successfully enacting the revolution - until this point, I propose that we concentrate on raising class consciousness.

- August

[synthesis]

That only serves to reinforce my point. If the role of prison guard can turn even the nicest fellow into a monster, why the fuck should we have that role in society?Well, there will always be the need for a place to keep serial killers and recidivist child rapists - communism can't change the innate deviance of (some) human psychology. And as long as there will be a need for a place to keep these people, there will be a need for other people who make sure the first group stays in that place.

I'm curious to hear your alternatives.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Well, there will always be the need for a place to keep serial killers and recidivist child rapists - communism can't change the innate deviance of (some) human psychology.

Why would we want to keep such individuals? Why should we?


And as long as there will be a need for a place to keep these people, there will be a need for other people who make sure the first group stays in that place.This sounds suspiciously like "there will always be order givers and order takers".

No.


I'm curious to hear your alternatives.Well, depending on the crime, hanging/shooting, exile, seperation of the involved parties, being moved to the bottom of the list for any rationed/luxury goods, basically anything not involving locking people up and basically forgetting about them - out of sight, out of mind.

Take for instance murder or rape. For the first offence, I would recommend exile, with a region-wide announcement of why that person has been exiled. This gives them a chance to start anew elsewhere and/or clear their name if they feel they have been wrongly convicted. They should not, however, get a second chance.

[Os Cangaceiros]

Yes, the situation is abysmal. I don't know what the prison system is like in Europe, but in the states, you're going to have to throw your lot in with a group of people who will protect you, in many cases. The prison population here is quite large and problematic. Especially in areas where the prisons are, quite literally, overflowing with inmates, such as California, where violence reaches endemic proportions, specifically between black and Hispanic inmates.

Prison here is a very, very bad place. It's not a boogeyman invented to "keep you in line"...hiding razor blades in the showers isn't unheard of, in fact it's a safe bet in a lot of major prisons. The last estimate I saw was that about 15 percent of inmates in American prisons are sexually assaulted.

[RebelDog]

There is something like 2.5 million people in prison in the USA. As Chomsky points out, in the US as in other capitalist countries, there always exists a large 'superfluous' population that is incarcerated, ghettoized, alienated, demonised. They need a percentage of the population unemployed to keep wages down and it keeps the wider population scared and under control. Prisons are generally awful places but it seems the US prison system (in western terms) is particularly brutal. 2.5 million people behind bars is a shameful abomination. There are many social measures that could be taken now to rapidly decrease this huge number and address the social and economic problems that give rise to such hell. But they dont want solutions, only more jails and more misery. They know the problems their policies create but any solutions requires that these polices be dismantled.

[Rascolnikova]

Why would we want to keep such individuals? Why should we?

This sounds suspiciously like "there will always be order givers and order takers".

No.

Well, depending on the crime, hanging/shooting, exile, seperation of the involved parties, being moved to the bottom of the list for any rationed/luxury goods, basically anything not involving locking people up and basically forgetting about them - out of sight, out of mind.

Take for instance murder or rape. For the first offence, I would recommend exile, with a region-wide announcement of why that person has been exiled. This gives them a chance to start anew elsewhere and/or clear their name if they feel they have been wrongly convicted. They should not, however, get a second chance.

I would far prefer to be imprisoned humanely--which I believe is possible--than killed.

[Jazzratt]

I would far prefer to be imprisoned humanely--which I believe is possible--than killed.

I would rather not be a serial killer, but there we go.

[Rascolnikova]

I would rather not be a serial killer, but there we go.

Or a rapist or sadist pedophile, I presume. I don't believe all the people who do these things really have a choice about it; I think it's possible for one's psychology to be so fucked up that one doesn't have the tools necessary for self restraint.

To shortcut the next bit of this discussion, mental hospitals are prisons.

[Dr Mindbender]

A reward is something which is provided to an individual for an action. How are the bourgeoisie rewarded in any fashion when the working class seizes the means of production?

Because you imply giving them the same as everyone else for doing fuck all work. I do not think the beourgiose have the gumption to work on their own volition, nor will they accept it lying down which i think partly is the reason prison and forced labour is the only operable recourse for them.




You speak for the working class rather than with them?
No i speak merely from the point of common sense.




The revolution has not occurred. It does not appear likely to occur in the near future. The working class with enact this revolution, hence they will decide what to do with the capitalist class - if you feel the need to demand that the capitalist class be 'punished' for X, or Y, you insinuate the the working class will not make such a decision, or that it is unlikely.
No i'm saying this because unless it is applied you will end up with a new class hegemony. If you take the beourgiose property and redistribute it according to the LTL, the old beourgiose end up with nothing because they've done no work to deserve it. They have to pay off their debt first.




What, exactly, are they receiving?

Oh for fucks sake.... *palms face*

...there is no emoticon to express my frustration right now..




I propose nothing other than allowing the working class the freedom to decide the fate of the capitalist class upon successfully enacting the revolution - until this point, I propose that we concentrate on raising class consciousness.


Okay, lets say hypothetically we're already at that bridge- what then?

[Junius]

If you take something, there must be an appropriate amount of labour on your part to deserve it. This is fundamental to the labour theory of value.

Care to quote where Marx stated this?


Originally posted by Ulster Socialist
If you take the beourgiose property and redistribute it according to the LVT, the old beourgiose end up with nothing because they've done no work to deserve it. They have to pay off their debt first.

Care to quote where Marx stated that property should be distributed according to the LTV?

[Dr Mindbender]

Care to quote where Marx stated this?
Marx also accredits nature as being productive to wealth, but no where does he offer credit to the beourgiose.




Care to quote where Marx stated that property should be distributed according to the LTV?

Marx uses the LTV as his basis for his entire critique on capitalism in general so that kinda sounds like a strong endorsement to me.

[Junius]

Marx also accredits nature as being productive to wealth, but no where does he offer credit to the beourgiose. You haven't answered my question.

Where did Marx say you need to put x amount of labor to be the rightful owner of a commodity or to 'deserve' it, as you say?


Marx uses the LTV as his basis for his entire critique on capitalism in general so that kinda sounds like a strong endorsement to me. Again, you are avoiding the issue.

Where did Marx say that wealth should be divided according to the LTV?

[Dr Mindbender]

You haven't answered my question.

Where did Marx say you need to put x amount of labor to be the rightful owner of a commodity or to 'deserve' it, as you say?

Again, you are avoiding the issue.

Where did Marx say that wealth should be divided according to the LTV?

It might shock you to know, but Marx isnt the only person accredited with originating the LTV. All he did was expand on it when he wrote his works.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value

[Junius]

Ulster Socialist, fortunately I've actually read Ricardo and some of the earlier economists who put forth a labor theory of value so your comment is not news to me. But once again you are deliberately avoiding the issue, so I will repeat for the third time:

Where did Marx say you need to put x amount of labor to be the rightful owner of a commodity or to 'deserve' it, as you say?

Where did Marx say that wealth should be divided according to the LTV?

Incidentally, you should also read the links you post, particularly the section of the 'LTV in a socialist society' and the 'inapplicability of the LTV' as well as Marx's Critique of the Gotha Programme. (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/gotha/ch01.htm)

[Dr Mindbender]

Ulster Socialist, fortunately I've actually read Ricardo and some of the earlier economists who put forth a labor theory of value so your comment is not news to me. But once again you are deliberately avoiding the issue, so I will repeat for the third time:

Where did Marx say you need to put x amount of labor to be the rightful owner of a commodity or to 'deserve' it, as you say?

I never said Marx said that directly, however he certainly implied that sentiment IMO.



Where did Marx say that wealth should be divided according to the LTV?



Again, he never said that it should be per se but i don't follow communism as per the holy gospel of Marx. The idea that commodities and wealth should be divided according to the LTV is my opinion.




[I]Incidentally, you should also read the links you post, particularly the section of the 'LTV in a socialist society' and the 'inapplicability of the LTV' as well as Marx's Critique of the Gotha Programme. (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/gotha/ch01.htm)


I posted that link purely for showing that Marx was not the only one to speculate the LTV around that time.

I'll check it out when i can be arsed.

[synthesis]

Why would we want to keep such individuals? Why should we?Perhaps because of the possibility that they're innocent?

Or the fact that our system for determining guilt will never be immune to human error, even in a hypothetical society that is totally fair and just?


This sounds suspiciously like "there will always be order givers and order takers".

No.So you would prefer that alleged serial killers and child molesters be killed rather than (gasp!) have to potentially take orders?

Your solution to inequality is simply to murder those who would be on the receiving end of it? Nice.

That moves us to...


Well, depending on the crime, hanging/shooting, exile, seperation of the involved parties, being moved to the bottom of the list for any rationed/luxury goods, basically anything not involving locking people up and basically forgetting about them - out of sight, out of mind.

Take for instance murder or rape. For the first offence, I would recommend exile, with a region-wide announcement of why that person has been exiled. This gives them a chance to start anew elsewhere and/or clear their name if they feel they have been wrongly convicted. They should not, however, get a second chance.I genuinely don't mean this as a personal attack, but if I understood your meaning correctly, that has to be one of the dumbest things I've ever read on this forum.

In your system, everyone alive would basically get one free murder or rape in their lifetime as long as they didn't mind packing up their shit and "starting anew."

Then, if they are so inclined psychologically, they can proceed to commit as many more murders or rapes as they can before they get caught.

In your society, the people "taking orders" would now include, for example, the ones being kept as sex slaves in some pervert's basement in London, the same one that was proven to have raped a 6-year-old in Los Angeles a year beforehand.

Yeah, those are some great ideas right there.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Perhaps because of the possibility that they're innocent?

Or the fact that our system for determining guilt will never be immune to human error, even in a hypothetical society that is totally fair and just?

That's why I suggested exile for a first offence. If it turns out they're innocent, then the slate is wiped clean and they can return to the community they were expelled from.

Of course, in cases involving overwhelming evidence, some communities might want to skip the exile part and go straight to execution.


So you would prefer that alleged serial killers and child molesters be killed rather than (gasp!) have to potentially take orders?"Alleged" serial killers? Are you high? False convictions of murder are already pretty rare - the idea that one can be falsely convicted of serial killing is laughable.

And yes, execution for serial murderers and rapists is preferable to having a system where murder and rape is accepted as part of it.


Your solution to inequality is simply to murder those who would be on the receiving end of it? Nice.No, murder would be the unlawful and deliberate killing of one individual by another. Execution is the term you're looking for, where one is convicted after a trial of a crime worthy of it, in this case murder or rape.


I genuinely don't mean this as a personal attack, but if I understood your meaning correctly, that has to be one of the dumbest things I've ever read on this forum.

In your system, everyone alive would basically get one free murder or rape in their lifetime as long as they didn't mind packing up their shit and "starting anew."What packing? They'll simply be put on the road and told to start walking, in a very public manner.


Then, if they are so inclined psychologically, they can proceed to commit as many more murders or rapes as they can before they get caught.Don't be fucking stupid. Did you miss the part where I said there would be an announcement as to why said person was exiled, an announcement that extends beyond the initial community they were banished from? There'll be a website with a photo and everything, all very public and transparent.


In your society, the people "taking orders" would now include, for example, the ones being kept as sex slaves in some pervert's basement in London, the same one that was proven to have raped a 6-year-old in Los Angeles a year beforehand.What the fuck are you talking about?


Yeah, those are some great ideas right there. Not as great as your idea of keeping a system that turns men into either monsters or gaunt hollow shells of their former selves.

[synthesis]

"Alleged" serial killers? Are you high? False convictions of murder are already pretty rare - the idea that one can be falsely convicted of serial killing is laughable.

I am constantly amazed by the number of statements that are made on this forum claiming some sort of unchanging, universal principle, yet are easily proven wrong with a cursory Google search.

Seriously, this took me about ten seconds to find; both CrimeLibrary and JSTOR have a lot of information relating to this topic if you're interested.

Read this article in its entirety then get back to me.

http://select.nytimes.com/2007/07/23/us/23bar.html?_r=1



Only 14 of those exonerated had been sentenced to death, 13 in rape-murders. There is a widespread misconception that DNA evidence has freed many inmates from death row, but it is actually a rare murder not involving rape in which biological evidence can provide categorical proof of innocence.
“DNA testing is available in fewer than 10 percent of violent crimes,” said Peter Neufeld, a founder of the Innocence Project at Cardozo Law School, which was instrumental in securing many exonerations. “But the same causes of wrongful convictions exist in cases with DNA evidence as in those cases that don’t.”

So basically, your categorical statement is wrong. Sorry. Moving on...




And yes, execution for serial murderers and rapists is preferable to having a system where murder and rape is accepted as part of it.

That sentence is meaningless in the context of our debate; what you meant to say is that execution for murderers and rapists is preferable to those criminals having to "take orders."

And again, I'm interested in hearing a clear explanation of why you think this should be the case - just substitute a logical explanation for vulgarity and a rhetorical thirst for blood, and we'll have a rational discussion.


No, murder would be the unlawful and deliberate killing of one individual by another. Execution is the term you're looking for, where one is convicted after a trial of a crime worthy of it, in this case murder or rape.

OK, so now we have executioners instead of prison guards. How progressive.

Whether you call it execution or murder, killing another human being is far more of an act of authoritarianism than humane containment. Have you abandoned anarchism or are you just inconsistent?


What packing? They'll simply be put on the road and told to start walking, in a very public manner.

So your approach to such problems is to put them out of sight, never actually address them, and hope they never come back to bite you in the ass somehow?

In that case, I would strongly advise you to never start borrowing money from any unscrupulous sources :D


Don't be fucking stupid.

Touche.


Did you miss the part where I said there would be an announcement as to why said person was exiled, an announcement that extends beyond the initial community they were banished from? There'll be a website with a photo and everything, all very public and transparent.

I actually laughed out loud at this. This paragraph looks like something I would write to satirize your position.


What the fuck are you talking about? (regarding my hypothetical scenario)

You were aghast at the possibility that some sort of containment for criminals would produce a situation of "giving and taking orders".

So, in your system, say a man rapes an 8-year-old in Los Angeles; it's pretty clear that he did it, but not beyond a reasonable doubt - not up to the high standards needed to execute people, kind of like the O.J. case. So he gets kicked out of Los Angeles.

He relocates to London and continues to commit atrocious crimes against small children, because in your system, the responsibility for awareness and self-defense against sociopaths is now on the individual citizen, like the sex offender registries we have now.

And since a sizable percentage of this kind of criminal deviance is predicated on the need to express dominance, now it's the criminal's victims who would be "taking orders" rather than the criminal.

Perhaps instead of just "making it someone else's problem," we could all put our powerful brains together to figure out a system that allows for the possibility of human error on the part of prosecution and investigation, while at the same time containing individuals who have been accused of heinous crimes so that if they are in fact guilty, they won't be able to perpetrate it on more people, even those halfway around the world.


Not as great as your idea of keeping a system that turns men into either monsters or gaunt hollow shells of their former selves.

Honestly, at this point this discussion is more entertainment for me than anything else. I'm not really expecting any substantive response from you, and honestly this discussion is pointless since your system will never, ever be enshrined into law or social consensus, but if you'd like to try to justify yourself further, by all means, I want to hear it - even if only for the entertainment value.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Honestly, at this point this discussion is more entertainment for me than anything else. I'm not really expecting any substantive response from you, and honestly this discussion is pointless since your system will never, ever be enshrined into law or social consensus, but if you'd like to try to justify yourself further, by all means, I want to hear it - even if only for the entertainment value.

You know, I was going to write up a big complicated post, but if this is your attitude I'm not going to bother. I prefer not to waste my time with condescending, fatuous pricks like you. :thumbdown:

[synthesis]

You know, I was going to write up a big complicated post, but if this is your attitude I'm not going to bother. I prefer not to waste my time with condescending, fatuous pricks like you.Good call. Don't be fucking stupid. :thumbup:

Okay, you set me up for that one. I couldn't resist.

Seriously, though, if you're trying to convince me or anyone else that accused murderers and rapists should be either summarily murdered due to the infallibility of human error, or basically given one free murder or rape before the problem is fixed, you're going to have to work a lot harder than simply embellishing anarchist dogma with vulgarities and obvious absurdities.

Also, try not to make arguments that can be easily proven wrong by a Google search that takes all of five seconds. Not only does it waste everyone's time, but it makes you look stupid and hurts your arguments.

Again, if you want to try and get on my level, I would welcome that. Some actual substance would be nice. For example: What is the historical precedent for your idea, if any, and why does that justify your opinion? What real evidence do you have that makes you think this would work? You have to give me something to work with besides baseless hypotheses and curse words.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Seriously, though, if you're trying to convince me or anyone else that accused murderers and rapists should be either summarily murdered...

[emphasis mine]

You're a dishonest piece of shit. I made no such statements, in fact they wouldn't make sense unless a trial was involved in the process.


Also, try not to make arguments that can be easily proven wrong by a Google search that takes all of five seconds. Not only does it waste everyone's time, but it makes you look stupid and hurts your arguments.Good thing what you posted had nothing to do with what I actually said.


Again, if you want to try and get on my level, I would welcome that. Some actual substance would be nice. For example: What is the historical precedent for your idea, if any, and why does that justify your opinion? What real evidence do you have that makes you think this would work? You have to give me something to work with besides baseless hypotheses and curse words.You've proven yourself unable to display basic reading comprehension (see your complete misunderstanding of the whole "order takers and givers" business), so my getting on your level would actually be a step down for me.

[Dean]

Sickening. I've heard people gleefully cackling about this sort of thing happening, but the full horror of what goes on in US prisons was unknown to me until I'd read this report.

It confirms what I've suspected all along - that if you cage humans like wild animals, then they'll start acting like them, the prison guards as well. Homophobia, racism, all the ugliest aspects of humanity are in revoltingly strong force in US prisons.

The screws are complicit in this ongoing atrocity. But worse than that, this rot feeds into the greater part of society - and do we really want that?

I think not!

Prison rape is indeed a pervasive phenomenon. It happens in female tiers as well, but (maybe since the guards treat women more "softly"? the patronising is shameful, my fiance works at a jail) it tends to be less physically violent. More sex seems to be apparently voluntary, but that domination could just be more internalized.

I remember when I was in middle school a friend of mine was moralizing it. Their argument was that if you commit a crime, you can expect whatever punishment or whatever. I was so furious. The mentality that carries this shti along is revolting. When I was incarcerated, the guards made a point to ***** about "their tax dollars" Excuse me? "Your tax dollars" are goign to your pacycheck and a brutal, unnecessary detainment of the larget per-capita prison population in the world. I should be *****ing about misappropriation of funds since they're being used to further my tragedy.

[Dean]

I would rather not be a serial killer, but there we go.

JazzRatt, you and I both know that violent crime is not some extremist characteristic, but rather a human deficiency which exists in a lot of otherwise good people. Violent criminals must be defended from, but this certainly shouldn't mean summary execution!

Furthermore, NoXion, your notion of "exile" is probably the worst possible solution. I am not 100% on your context, but if that is for a first offence, you should consider what effect the total alienation from your community will have on a criminal. On top of that, we must consider where the person is being exiled to - if you expect to have a big gated community with the "criminals" outside, you will basically be condemning others to the tragedy this criminal exhibited.

The only solution is a productive, inclusory psychiatric program for dangerous criminals. This will not only measure changes in psychological orientation which might herald progress, but allow us to keep dangerous criminals from re-entering society if they are still distinct threats. I don't accept the notion that criminals are some incurable enemy or outsider to society (let alone that they should be made one!), and I don't see how any leftist could.

[synthesis]

You're a dishonest piece of shit. I made no such statements, in fact they wouldn't make sense unless a trial was involved in the process.

Don't we all love semantics? They're great for distracting people from the real discussion when you have nothing left to offer.

The fact is that emphasizing that particular word is not warranted by its context; more specifically, if I thought you were actually in favor of summary executions, I would have expanded on that and asked you to elaborate.

I assumed you were at least intelligent enough to understand that the use of the word "summarily" was not literal but a reference to my earlier argument that you have an unwarranted degree of faith in the infallibility of court systems.


Good thing what you posted had nothing to do with what I actually said.

Care to elaborate?


You've proven yourself unable to display basic reading comprehension (see your complete misunderstanding of the whole "order takers and givers" business),

How so?

Again, I'm always open to being proven wrong, but I had every reason to assume that your behavior here would be no different from that of almost all other discussions in which I've seen you participate; therefore, I've had to keep my expectations low, at least my expectations of substance. My expectations of the usage of personal abuse to compensate for a lack of substance were quite high.


so my getting on your level would actually be a step down for me.

Keep telling yourself that. :laugh: