IAP Political Forum

I think our system of punishment in the ‘liberal’ west is not founded on any one simple idea.  It is a complex of a number of different strands and aims.  I discussed this a few times with my Dad: here’s a few that we could think of:

Protection of the public: banging somebody up takes her out of circulation
Reparation:  fines, maybe enforced service, can restore/repair damage to the victim
Deterrence:  showing people that they have to pay if they do this sort of thing. i.e. 'adjusting' the mindset of potential criminals.
Revenge: just formalising our instinct to lash out when hurt or attacked. This probably is the individual instantiation of the protection/deterrence themes.
Rehabilitation: ‘adjusting’ the mindset of the actual criminal. Some countries actually (laughably) call their prisons ‘correctional facilities’!

I suspect that all but the last are the mainsprings of the system.   Given the current fashionable nature of blind revenge, what do you think? Are there any other considerations?  Should all be included?

I would like to see restorative justice implemented to a greater extent. Revenge is fine, and it makes you sound macho and righteous when you talk about, and victims feel an understandable need for it but it does little to make any difference in the world. The key I think to any approach to justice is what makes society safer and healthier. If reparations by the offender and inclusion of the community in the process to a greater extent accomplish those aims, then we should be doing more of that. The current system we have based on adversarial lawyers is so rooted in most Americans minds as the only true form of justice system, that it almost becomes unamerican to think of alternatives. But we should be practical in how we address crime and punishment. Use modalities that reduce recidivism and lower crime.

Criminal justice is another area where Eugenics can make a difference. Sterilization of the stupid, the ignorant, the criminal and the greedy will lead the way to a more humane and civilized world as will selective breeding of the intelligent, the civilized and the rational. Anyone convicted of a felony should be sterilized-nip crime in the bud.

OswaldTheOsprey

You are assuming crime has a genetic factor. I would say that the overwhelming factor causing crime is circumstance.

Circumstance? I tend toward both heredity and environment.

OswaldTheOsprey

Circumstance includes environment.

Then the best cure for both the environment and heredity is Eugenics. The South Bronx, South Central LA, Cabrini Green, Herman Gardens, Anacostia Flats are countless other crime-ridden hell holes cry out for Eugenics.

OswaldTheOsprey

That's dangerously close to saying: "Let's kill all the poor black kids!"

No. It is dangerously close to saying "Let's have a sane and rational policy instead of sentiment and white liberal guilt and cultural marxism.". Indeed the truth is dangerous.

OswaldTheOsprey

The main reason for the justice system is protection from the public.

I don't think deterrance plays as large a factor though, since the effectiveness is arguable (except on the extreme ends of prison or no prison).

Revenge is important, otherwise people lose confidence in the system to satisfy their desires.

What is interesting is that the three strikes you are out system actually is driving down the crime rates, it is, of course also driving up the prison population.

Maybe the Romans were right.  They had no prisons and instead consigned prisoners to slavery or death.


Reparations?  An eye for an eye?  The rich can pay for their proclivity to kill (Hammurabis Law).  We could potentially run the numbers on the liklihood of repeat offenders, but then most killers would go free, since they are the least likely to be repeat offenders, meanwhile child molesters would be put to death, including other lesser crimes that have a tendency to be repeated by prisoners (including petty theft).

Will such a thing make society safer?  Certainly, the repeat offenders are removed and the rest tend to be more "civil".  But then our society isn't built that way, now is it?

Eugenics would well serve as the modern equivalent.

OswaldTheOsprey

My fear of government eugenics is not the only reason I disagree. Slavery and death both prevent repeat offenders sterilization does not. I'm personally in favor of exile. Let Iran deal with our drug dealers.

I think of crime as being committed out of desperation, irresponsibility or craziness. Proper social systems of education and welfare should clear up the first two but I figure crazy people like serial killers and killing spree folk aren't going to disappear anytime soon and no amount of deterrent is going stop them.

It would be more than Eugenics. It would also encompass reform of social systems as you bring up.

OswaldTheOsprey

Oswald, I have blonde hair and blue eyes, so if you manage to get your eugenics legislation passed, I will be happy to assist you in getting your programme started. To help the environment of course  ;)

Now now! ;)

OswaldTheOswprey

Here we go with the old cultural marxism stuff again. No doubt I'm also a Trotskyite Neocon or whatever other names you're tossing around.

It is not sentimental to say that eugenics is morally disgusting. In a eugenically perfect world you or I would not be allowed to exist. Once we kill all the poor black kids in the Bronx us normal (well me anyway) people would be the dangerous ones so our kind would need to be wiped out too.

Some of us consider overbreeding (and the resultant crime and poverty) by the stupid, the ignorant, the criminal and the greedy to be morally disgusting. Eugenics is not about "killing black kids". It is about humane and rational planning for a better Motherland.

OswaldTheOsprey

Yes but eugenics is more than just stopping overpopulation (which I could just about agree with depending on how it is carried out) - it's deliberately selecting a certain class of people and declaring them unfit to breed. Who are you/we/anyone to decide what constitutes a valid life?

It's about giving up control of a quite personal part of my life to the public good. Who's good? The greatest good for the greatest number?

Decision have to be made and they are not always pleasant. What do you know of Eugenic history? Are you aware that Presidents Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson endorsed the concept as did Margaret Sanger, the great birth control pioneer, H.G. Wells, George Bernard Shaw and other great and notable intellects. One of the problems facing Eugenics today is two loud and ruthless opponents it faces-the politically correct left and the religious right. Hopefully, the days are numbered for both of these arrogant bullies. Hopefully, sane and rational thought will prevail.

OswaldTheOsprey

Your list doesn't impress me. You didn't answer my question.

The intelligent and the civilized have the right to make the decisions in re breeding. Uncontrolled breeding, especially by the stupid, the ignorabt, the criminal and the greedy can only worsen our situation.

OswaldTheOsprey