[lbo-talk] A Note on the Middle 75%

[Chris Sturr]

I agree with what Joanna is saying here (and with Carrol too).  But about
Joanna's earlier post, to the effect that people aren't outraged about mass
imprisonment and don't know about it--I think that's right, but I have
found that it's pretty easy to get people outraged by giving them the
facts.  And giving people the facts also helps them understand the demand
for abolition.  Among the points I find it helpful to make, besides the
shocking numbers (2.4 million in prison or jail;  6 or 7 million under
supervision, i.e. in prison or jail or on parole or probation;  comparing
that to other countries) are these: (1) that the number of prisoners in the
U.S. has increased ten-fold since the early 70s, and the rate of
incarceration has increased six-fold;  (2) that the crime rate has remained
basically steady;  and (3) (this seems crucial) that in the early 70s, when
there were 1/10th the number of prisoners there are now, there was a
radical prison abolitionist movement that thought that some 9/10ths of the
prisoners there were *then* didn't belong in prison or jail (so, no need to
talk about pre-modern society without prisons).  So you can move people
toward abolitionism by talking about the goal of reducing to a bare minimum
the number of people that "we" put in cages. I have found that people start
to get it then.

Two great documents from the 70s prison abolitionist movement are an
obscure but really sophisticated document by a working group of the
American Friends Service Committee called "The Struggle for Justice" (in
the 70s, retributivist rhetoric was preferable to the rhetoric of
rehabilitation; of course retributivism got taken over by the right),  and
Jessica Mitford's incredible book Kind and Usual Punishment.  Mitford's
book is powerful on many points, including the one Joanna makes, that there
are plenty of murderers and rapists and thieves who never get caught and
society doesn't collapse because of it (a related point: the more serious
the crime, the lower the recidivism rate, so incapacitation of people who
commit really serious crimes is less important; for the less serious
crimes, it's less important because the crimes aren't so serious.
Shoplifting, e.g., should be decriminalized--spending public money
incarcerating shoplifters is a huge subsidy to WalMart). There are also
shocking sections on drug experimentation on prisoners. But another reason
Mitford's book is a great and sometimes hilarious read is how her patrician
writing style combines with her hard-hitting radicalism.  At one point
she's talking about her experience staying overnight in a prison with a
study group she was in.  When she describes the induction process they were
led through (being strip searched, etc.), she says something like: "They
called this 'reception,' but this was unlike any reception I'd ever been
to!"  I can't read that line without thinking of cucumber sandwiches and
sherry.

One last thing about "abolition" vs. "reform" (and don't get me started on
"rehabilitation"):  I find it useful to talk about prison as "caging human
beings," and to draw parallels with slavery.  Leftists shouldn't speak of
"prison reform" any more than it would make sense to speak of the reform of
slavery or the reform of cruelty to animals--caging human beings is
something we want to eliminate, not do more effectively or efficiently.
(I'm talking about rhetoric here--there are obvious further questions to
ask about how a future society would deal with Charles Manson or rapists.
For starters, can we work toward something like the Finnish system, with
their tiny incarceration rate, and try to get as close to no caging of
human beings as we can?) And abolition is a really good entree to talking
about capitalism: if our economic system wouldn't work if we didn't cage so
many people, isn't it time to question that economic system?

----- Original Message -----
>
> This is what I don't get. Mass imprisonment is one of the horrors of U.S.
> life. But elimination? Really? In this world, before the afterlife?
>
> Doug
> ______________________________
> _____
>
> But Doug, prisons are a relatively recent thing. Humanity got along just
> fine without them before. I mean there are plenty of robbers, and
> murderers, and rapists who never spend a day in prison...and things keep
> chugging along.
>
> Joanna
>

-- 
-- 
Chris Sturr
Co-editor, Dollars & Sense
29 Winter St.
Boston, Mass. 02108
phone:  617-447-2177, ext. 205
fax:    617-447-2179
email:  sturr at dollarsandsense.org