On Fri, 21 Jan 2000 09:45:54 EST "Carl Remick" <carlremick at hotmail.com>
writes:
>>What was the point of this "aren't they barbaric!" story?
>>
>>At least the Afghani people in Marc Manson's story have the guts to
>be
>>honest with themselves about their justice system.
>>
>>What's worse: cutting off someone's hand for a petty theft, or
>locking
>>someone up for decades for a crime they did not commit, or for
>something
>>that no rational person would consider a crime?
>
>As Dr. Johnson said, "There is no settling the point of precedency
>between a
>louse and a flea" -- both are awful. My point was simply to
>demonstrate how
>screwy *all* people tend to get when they start presuming to do God's
>work.
>
>There is no question that the U.S. has an evil criminal justice system
>and
>that there is no more evil part of it than capital punishment. And,
>of
>course, good ol' God figures prominently in our eagerness to send
>criminals
>into eternity. For instance, consider this excerpt from Russell
>Baker's
>review of William S. McFeely's book on capital punishment, _Proximity
>to
>Death_, in the current NY Review of Books:
>
>“… [A]ggressive use of the death penalty … [shows] a degree of
>brutality in
>the public spirit that seems inconsistent with the present increase in
>
>America’s Christian churchgoing population. Puzzling about this
>contradiction, McFeely wanders into the theological bogs, borrowing
>from a
>theory about lynchings which was formulated by Donald D. Matthews, a
>historian of American religion. Why, Matthews wondered, had religion
>and
>lynching ‘waxed’ simultaneously in the South of the 1890s? Perhaps it
>was
>because the Christianity then popular in the South devalued a
>compassionate
>New Testament God in favor of the ‘stern and inscrutable God of
>Israel.’
>Christ had to suffer death on the cross to provide atonement for the
>original sin of which all humanity was guilty. And so, ‘at the heart
>of
>salvation,’ Matthews writes, ‘were the metaphors of retributive
>justice: at
>the center was a symbol of torture and death.’
Concerning public discourse on capital punishment, it seems to me that back in the '60s and '70s defenders of capital punishment relied much more on the deterrence argument whereas nowadays they seem to rely much more upon retributivist arguments. While the deterrence argument has by no means disappeared (even some defenders of capital punishment will concede that the evidence for deterrence is inconclusive), the notion of retribution seems to play a much bigger role in the thinking of most people who support the death penalty. The biblical notion of an "eye for an eye" clearly plays a major role in the thinking of many if not most supporters of capital punishment.
Also, underlying support of capital punishment and of harsh punishments by the criminal justice system generally is bourgeois individualist ideology. According to this idea we are each masters of our own fates. Each of us bears ultimate responsibility for the choices that we make, for what we make of ourselves whether good or bad. Those who make good or wise choices are thus entitled to rewards commensurate with the wisdom or goodness of those choices and those who make bad or foolish choices are likewise deserving of punishments commensurate with such choices. People are endowed with free will and thus responsibility for their choices lies with the individuals that make them not with society or social structures etc. To the extent that it might be admitted that some people's choices might not be freely made, then the factors that are held responsible are still said to be internal to the individual - perhaps in the form of bad genes, or mental illness conceived of in strictly individualist terms.
Jim F.
>
>“Then, McFeely: ‘So imbued with this belief system were some adherents
>of
>lynching—and now executions—that for them, only with a killing can we
>atone
>for the sins of the society or one of its worst miscreants.’ This may
>be a
>theory that only a theologian can love, but at least it offers a pious
>
>rationale for what many now consider an unholy policy.”
>
>Carl
>
>
>______________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>
________________________________________________________________ YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.