Prison abolitionists basically fall into three camps:
1. All violence is downstream of base-superstructure interaction (i.e. humans lack free will).
2. The violent should be detained in not-prison until they're reprogrammed to be good by The Procedure (unspecified).
3. Lynchings.
@Cary_Bleasdale@cmonjussthetip Not quite what I said but okay.
The dad in your example is responding rationally to incentives. If they *actually* killed/tortured the murder/rapist/etc in question they'd be imprisoned for life. So they don't do it.
They aren't restrained by some whole chungus love of humanity
@Cary_Bleasdale@cmonjussthetip Why don't they?
Because, they realize if they did so they'd go to prison. And not being broke-brained asocial freaks, they are able to understand and respond appropriately to incentives.
Police and prison abolitionists insist that murder is not caused by murderers, it is caused by “systems” of which the murderers are the real victims. They believe the solution to murder is to reform the system, and the crime will disappear if we just give more stuff to the people who commit it.
What they don’t understand is that the criminal justice system does not exist to repress and punish the people who are involved with it; it exists to ensure they have access to a robust set of rights that would not exist in its absence. Prison is not a repressive structure imposed on the downtrodden, it is a humane alternative to what would happen to them in its absence.
Progressives have to be made to understand that abolishing the rule of law and getting rid of punishment and deterrence doesn’t protect their cherished bottom 3% of the most dysfunctional people. They imagine the larger populace is timid and weak and will submit to massive expropriation to pacify the criminals who will be unleashed by these policies.
The truth is, the people Darializa thinks she would help by abolishing police and prison would all be dead on day one of her abolition regime. The police are not protecting us from them, they’re protecting them from us. These idiot criminals are already acting on all their depraved impulses. It is the rest of us who are deterred and restrained by the prospect of punishment. Remove that, and see what happens.
Abolishing the police and prisons means that if there’s a homeless guy who hangs out on the stoop of an apartment building and harasses the residents, they can just beat him to death and toss his corpse in a dumpster. Abolishing the police means you can lay in wait with a shotgun to dispose of the person who keeps stealing your Amazon packages.
If you get rid of the police who take thieves to jail and lock up gangsters, what happens is that shop owners pay protection money to the gangsters and then the gangsters deal with the thieves by smashing their hands with sledgehammers. We have seen what happens when the state is weak and does not maintain a monopoly on violence to preserve public order in numerous cases; somebody else will use violence to preserve public order, and then they will become the de facto government. The DSA hasn’t thought any of this through.
Pew Research put a quiz on r/politics and revealed the subreddit is 97% left leaning, with nearly half being the farthest left the poll counted.
Reddit is an echochamber, discourse is dead on that site.
You’re not a real New Yorker unless you were born here, except immigrants, because this is a city of immigrants, except rich immigrants, because that’s gentrification, except Zohran Mamdani, because
For the sake of argument, let's say there's absolutely zero fraud or mistakes in this california election. lets say everything was above board.
So, here's the problem. The way the whole system is built invites conspiracy theories and doubts.
If *I* wanted to create a system that made it as easy as possible for me to cheat, with the least likelyhood of anyone being caught? It'd probably look a lot like California's system.
> Everyone gets a ballot in the mail
> Ballots accepted if they are postmarked election day, even if received late.
> Legal ballot harvesting
> No ID requrements
> Easily sidestepped signature verification
> Election returns that go on for weeks, not hours.
This system is retarded, and should absolutely be scrapped for something that at least pretends to value security. The current free-for-all is unfit for purpose.
@beautyinnis@danmorosani@kane@musepwt A simple, "blue collar" state district attorney.
Real salt of the earth fella.
Came home every day in dirty coveralls.
@danmorosani@kane@musepwt "class structure" was, again, not invented by Marx!
No idea where you're going with "class structure" - the debate we are having is wrt structure
https://t.co/yz9cuULvK2
@danmorosani@kane@musepwt Class existing is not a Marxist belief fyi.
No, the son of a Maine district attorney did not grow up in a "blue collar" lifestyle.
@danmorosani@kane@musepwt Why can a rich kid turn "working class" by enlisting, but a royal or oligarch son cannot?
Why does the difference matter for your stated belief?
Does the former lose access to rich kid resources and past experiences by enlisting, and the latter does not?
@danmorosani@kane@musepwt Rhetorically, what I'm doing here is pointing out the boundaries of your stated belief. To (hopefully) show you how ridiculous it is.
Instead of howling "nuh uh, they're different", you should explain *why* this difference matters.
@danmorosani@kane@musepwt Source? Hopefully this is verified outside of Platner merely saying so himself.
What is it - did he *become* working class by enlisting?
Or did the son of the Dartmouth alum who served as district attorney *grow up* working class?