Krimpedia – das Kriminologie-Wiki

Abolitionism-s: Unterschied zwischen den Versionen

Abolitionism-s (Quelltext anzeigen)

Version vom 20. Juli 2014, 16:09 Uhr

3.404 Bytes entfernt ,  16:09, 20. Jul. 2014
→‎Abolitionism
 
(16 dazwischenliegende Versionen desselben Benutzers werden nicht angezeigt)
Zeile 21: Zeile 21:
Finally, it may astonish to find out that abolitionism of whatever kind, which is always char-acterized by the effort to reduce the suffering in the world, does not enjoy the same positive public attitudes given to other benefactors of humanity, e.g. doctors and nurses. The reason for this is, of course, that the latter reduce suffering within the given social order, while the former strive for structural changes by attacking it. That creates fear, anger, and aggression. A case in point is the story of Elijah P. Lovejoy and his death in 1837. If you engage in aboli-tionist activities, and if you do it really well, you will have enemies, and sooner or later you will find yourself in the firing line. Once you have a convincing moral claim, it is hard to stop in the middle. The word “to abolish” means “to do away with wholly, completely”. That im-plies “total” abolition, be it of the death penalty, be it of slavery, be it of the prison. If you think that an institution (like slavery) is utterly unjust, then it would also lack any logic to argue for only a partial reform. Can one limit the fight against slavery to the aim of liberating only children or women, and not men? Can one limit the fight to ending slavery in Europe, but not in Asia or the Americas? The same holds true for all abolitionist movements, including that against prisons. In that sense abolitionists cannot be pragmatists, and that is why they get in trouble. That was true then, it is true now, and it will be true in the future. In that sense, it is simply not true that abolitionism is a thing of the past. There are still many important lessons to be learned.
Finally, it may astonish to find out that abolitionism of whatever kind, which is always char-acterized by the effort to reduce the suffering in the world, does not enjoy the same positive public attitudes given to other benefactors of humanity, e.g. doctors and nurses. The reason for this is, of course, that the latter reduce suffering within the given social order, while the former strive for structural changes by attacking it. That creates fear, anger, and aggression. A case in point is the story of Elijah P. Lovejoy and his death in 1837. If you engage in aboli-tionist activities, and if you do it really well, you will have enemies, and sooner or later you will find yourself in the firing line. Once you have a convincing moral claim, it is hard to stop in the middle. The word “to abolish” means “to do away with wholly, completely”. That im-plies “total” abolition, be it of the death penalty, be it of slavery, be it of the prison. If you think that an institution (like slavery) is utterly unjust, then it would also lack any logic to argue for only a partial reform. Can one limit the fight against slavery to the aim of liberating only children or women, and not men? Can one limit the fight to ending slavery in Europe, but not in Asia or the Americas? The same holds true for all abolitionist movements, including that against prisons. In that sense abolitionists cannot be pragmatists, and that is why they get in trouble. That was true then, it is true now, and it will be true in the future. In that sense, it is simply not true that abolitionism is a thing of the past. There are still many important lessons to be learned.


1 Back to the Roots: Liberation as domination
== Back to the Roots: Liberation as domination ==
Semantic and conceptual sources of abolitionism can be found in the institution of abolitio (from abolire, aboleō abolēs, abolet) in Roman Law. The abolitio freed accused people before the verdict, it simply stopped the prosecution. In this sense, it was a liberating institution.
Semantic and conceptual sources of abolitionism can be found in the institution of abolitio (from abolire, aboleō abolēs, abolet) in Roman Law. The abolitio freed accused people before the verdict, it simply stopped the prosecution. In this sense, it was a liberating institution.
There were three three types of abolitions: ex lege, privata, publica. They were rather im-portant legal institutions, especially the abolitio publica. They had the function of reducing the burden of unresolved cases in the overstrained criminal justice system of Ancient Rome, and the second function of making people thankful to the magnanimity of the Emperor, i.e. the abolitiones publicae were quite an effective means of legitimizing the respective rulers. This double function continued after the fall of the Roman Empire.  
There were three three types of abolitions: ex lege, privata, publica. They were rather im-portant legal institutions, especially the abolitio publica. They had the function of reducing the burden of unresolved cases in the overstrained criminal justice system of Ancient Rome, and the second function of making people thankful to the magnanimity of the Emperor, i.e. the abolitiones publicae were quite an effective means of legitimizing the respective rulers. This double function continued after the fall of the Roman Empire.  
Zeile 31: Zeile 31:
Ordonnance criminelle 1670 (title 16, Des lettres d'abolition, rémission, pardon, pour ester à droit, rappel de ban ou de galères, commutation de peine, réhabilitation et ré-vision de procès).: Lettres d'abolition sont celles que le roi remet à l'auteur d'un crime non rémissible et par lesquelles le roi abolit la peine dont l'auteur du crime est passible. L'article 4 du titre 16 dispose qu'il ne sera pas accordé de lettre d'abolition en cas de duel, d'assassinat, de rapt avec violence ou encore d'excès contre les magistrats ou auxiliaires de justice, ni aux principaux coupables, ni à ceux qui les auraient aidés.
Ordonnance criminelle 1670 (title 16, Des lettres d'abolition, rémission, pardon, pour ester à droit, rappel de ban ou de galères, commutation de peine, réhabilitation et ré-vision de procès).: Lettres d'abolition sont celles que le roi remet à l'auteur d'un crime non rémissible et par lesquelles le roi abolit la peine dont l'auteur du crime est passible. L'article 4 du titre 16 dispose qu'il ne sera pas accordé de lettre d'abolition en cas de duel, d'assassinat, de rapt avec violence ou encore d'excès contre les magistrats ou auxiliaires de justice, ni aux principaux coupables, ni à ceux qui les auraient aidés.


2 The Greatest Revolution Ever?
==The Greatest Revolution Ever?==
Until 1789, abolition was a powerful symbol of monarchical arbitrariness – of despotism. The king just claimed the privilege of doing whatever he pleased to do, and nobody could contra-dict or control such manifesteations of the sovereign will.  
Until 1789, abolition was a powerful symbol of monarchical arbitrariness – of despotism. The king just claimed the privilege of doing whatever he pleased to do, and nobody could contra-dict or control such manifesteations of the sovereign will.  
In 1789, all this was to change. When, on the 17th of June, 1789, the French States-General declared themselves the National Assembly, they claimed sovereignty for them as incorpora-tion of the nation. Sovereignty passed from being royal of the type The State am I to national of the type We Are the Nation. Liberation from the repressive powers of the State passed from being individual luck and royal capriciousness to a right of the people to be freed of unnecessary infringements of their liberties. One of the first actions of the new National Assembly was the abolition of the lettres de cachet and the lettres d abolition. Notabene, Napoleon reactivated them in 1801 under the name of prison d’état.  
In 1789, all this was to change. When, on the 17th of June, 1789, the French States-General declared themselves the National Assembly, they claimed sovereignty for them as incorpora-tion of the nation. Sovereignty passed from being royal of the type The State am I to national of the type We Are the Nation. Liberation from the repressive powers of the State passed from being individual luck and royal capriciousness to a right of the people to be freed of unnecessary infringements of their liberties. One of the first actions of the new National Assembly was the abolition of the lettres de cachet and the lettres d abolition. Notabene, Napoleon reactivated them in 1801 under the name of prison d’état.  
Zeile 37: Zeile 37:
From the 18th century onwards, there have been two concurrent ideologies that must be under-stood if we want to understand abolitionisms of any kind, one humanist, the other religiously motivated (Quaker).
From the 18th century onwards, there have been two concurrent ideologies that must be under-stood if we want to understand abolitionisms of any kind, one humanist, the other religiously motivated (Quaker).


2.1 Abolishing the Slave Trade  
===Abolishing the Slave Trade===
The abolition of slavery can be seen as the greates revolution ever in the course of history. It broke with concepts as old as mankind itself by manifesting the will to stress equality of all humans, regardless of race, colour, and later sex and sexual orientations.  
The abolition of slavery can be seen as the greates revolution ever in the course of history. It broke with concepts as old as mankind itself by manifesting the will to stress equality of all humans, regardless of race, colour, and later sex and sexual orientations.  
It is worth asking some questions concerning how and why it came about, who were the pro-tagonists, the antagonists, and in how far an outside observer would have attributed the suc-cess of anti slavery activities to economic necessity.  
It is worth asking some questions concerning how and why it came about, who were the pro-tagonists, the antagonists, and in how far an outside observer would have attributed the suc-cess of anti slavery activities to economic necessity.  


Table 1: Abolishing the transatlantic slave trade
*1765 After the tragic Sally slave ship voyage, Moses Brown, one of four funding Rhode Island brothers, turns abolitionist and converts to Quakerism
1787 Society for Effecting the Aboli-tion of Slavery Th Clarkson, Gr Sharp et al. Small group, forceful ideology
*1787 Society for Effecting the Abolition of Slavery Th Clarkson, Gr Sharp et al. Small group, forceful ideology
1807 Slave Trade Act Abolition of slave trade in British Empire
*1807 Slave Trade Act Abolition of slave trade in British Empire Pressing others to abolish their slave trades
Pressing others to abolish their slave trades
*Slavery remains legal in B Empire until Slavery Abolition Act 1833. As part of the deal, parliament agreed to pay £20m in compensation, not to slaves but to the slave owners. - US, DK, S, NL consent, F follows 1848, BR 1852 after robust threats; ES, P high compensations make them end the trade, too.
Slavery remains legal in B Empire until Slavery Abo-lition Act 1833. At the expense of third parties
US, DK, S, NL consent
F follows 1848
BR 1852 after robust threats
ES, P compensations 1853
1853 Spain and Portugal agree to end the trade


 
===The End of Slavery===
2.2 The End of Slavery
In spite of the end of the transatlantic slave trade, people who advocated the abolition o slav-ery proper remained at the margins of society until the U.S. Civil War (1861-65). In 1831, the biggest ever slave revolt in the history oft he United States was led by Nat Turner. He and a few dozen activists started killing white people following what they thought were divine or-ders. The revolt was crushed, Turner hanged and skinned, and his fellows also executed. Anti-slave legislation was toughened, and the living conditions of slaves worsened. Moral time, on the other hand, was going into the other direction. In Britain, the Slavery Abolition Act went into force in 1834 and transmitted the sense that keeping slavery alive would soon be consid-ered anachronistic. The reactionary policy in the South of the U.S. did not make much sense anymore anywhere else. The killing of Elijah P. Lovejoy in 1837 and the passing of the Fugi-tive Slave Act in 1850 infuriated liberals and made Harriet Beecher-Stowe write Uncle Tom’s Cabin in 1852. Radical Abolitionist John Brown tried to start a civil war to free the slaves with his raid on an armory at Harper’s Ferry – and while, of course, he was defeated, tried and  executed in 1859, his memory served to motivate Northerners ever more to end slavery as soon as possible.
In spite of the end of the transatlantic slave trade, people who advocated the abolition o slav-ery proper remained at the margins of society until the U.S. Civil War (1861-65). In 1831, the biggest ever slave revolt in the history oft he United States was led by Nat Turner. He and a few dozen activists started killing white people following what they thought were divine or-ders. The revolt was crushed, Turner hanged and skinned, and his fellows also executed. Anti-slave legislation was toughened, and the living conditions of slaves worsened. Moral time, on the other hand, was going into the other direction. In Britain, the Slavery Abolition Act went into force in 1834 and transmitted the sense that keeping slavery alive would soon be consid-ered anachronistic. The reactionary policy in the South of the U.S. did not make much sense anymore anywhere else. The killing of Elijah P. Lovejoy in 1837 and the passing of the Fugi-tive Slave Act in 1850 infuriated liberals and made Harriet Beecher-Stowe write Uncle Tom’s Cabin in 1852. Radical Abolitionist John Brown tried to start a civil war to free the slaves with his raid on an armory at Harper’s Ferry – and while, of course, he was defeated, tried and  executed in 1859, his memory served to motivate Northerners ever more to end slavery as soon as possible.
With the election of Abraham Lincoln to the U.S. presidency (1860), the civil war (1861), the emancipation declaration (1862), the Dutch turn away from slavery in 1863, and the passing of the 13th amendment in 1865, things changed. After Spain abolished slavery on Cuba (1880) and Brazil proclaimed abolition in 1888, the page was turned.  
With the election of Abraham Lincoln to the U.S. presidency (1860), the civil war (1861), the emancipation declaration (1862), the Dutch turn away from slavery in 1863, and the passing of the 13th amendment in 1865, things changed. After Spain abolished slavery on Cuba (1880) and Brazil proclaimed abolition in 1888, the page was turned.  
Zeile 65: Zeile 58:
1862 Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation Preliminary and tactical
1862 Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation Preliminary and tactical
1865 13th Amendment of US Constitution Ending slavery in the USA End justifies means
1865 13th Amendment of US Constitution Ending slavery in the USA End justifies means
1888 Lei Aurea/Golden Law Brazil Last slavery country formally abolishes it
1888 Lei Aurea/Golden Law Brazil Last slavery country formally abolishes it


===Discussion===
*The utilitarian question: did the Turner Revolt retard or hasten abolition?
:"..there are 'rebellions' which are not rebellions, but  great revolutions, and thre are 'rebels' who, however absolutely their immediate purpose may have failed, and however unjustly contemporary historey may have recoreded their actions, shall yet be known to posterity as patriots pure and lofty, whose motives and deeds shall evokte the admiration of all succeeding times" (Nelson Page, cited by Aptheker 1966: 110).
#The moral vs. the economic view of how and why abolition came about
#The ideological conflict: equality vs. diversity (separate, but equal)
#Diversity and verticality (John C. Calhoun, 1782-1850): slavery as „a good – a great good“; the destructive potential of liberty and equality ideals; liberty was not a universal right but should be 'reserved for the intelligent, the patriotic, the virtuous and deserving.' Signs of this today? Explaining political rhetoric as bridging the gap.
#The greates revolution in human history?
#Gradualism vs. Abolitionism: relative merits (Donald Black; moral time; were they right after all? Less human suffering with gradualism than with abolitionism? Another contradiction: abolitionist compression of moral time is needed to provide the motivational force for estab-lishing the visible illegitimacy of slavery, but the same fervor produces strife and bloodshed and wounds that do not heal). If gradualism is distinct from abolitionism, what does that say about the right of today’s critics of the prison system to call themselves (or be called) abolitionists?
#The role of morality. Slavery was considered cruel and inhuman. The arguments were moral in nature, not consequentialist or utilitarian, even though such considera-tions did play a supportive role. The same holds true for the abolitionist campaigns against the death penalty. This type of punishment is considered the ultimate cruel, inhuman and degrad-ing punishment by organizations such as Amnesty International. Abolitionism is inextricably linked to thinking the Absolute. Therefore, the term abolition is found most frequently togeth-er with adjectives such as radical, total, unconditional, complete, instant, immediate, and the like.


2.3 Discussion
===Reading===
The moral vs. the economic view of how and why abolition came about
*Hochschild, Adam (2005) Bury the Chains: Prophets and Rebels in the Fight to Free an Empire's Slaves. Hough-ton-Mifflin
The ideological conflict: equality vs. diversity (separate, but equal)
Diversity and verticality (John C. Calhoun, 1782-1850): slavery as „a good – a great good“; the destructive potential of liberty and equality ideals; liberty was not a universal right but should be 'reserved for the intelligent, the patriotic, the virtuous and deserving.' Signs of this today? Explaining political rhetoric as bridging the gap.
The greates revolution in human history?
Gradualism vs. Abolitionism: relative merits (Donald Black; moral time; were they right after all? Less human suffering with gradualism than with abolitionism? Another contradiction: abolitionist compression of moral time is needed to provide the motivational force for estab-lishing the visible illegitimacy of slavery, but the same fervor produces strife and bloodshed and wounds that do not heal). If gradualism is distinct from abolitionism, what does that say about the right of today’s critics of the prison system to call themselves (or be called) aboli-tionists?
Let us consider the role of morality. Slavery was considered cruel and inhuman. The argu-ments were moral in nature, not consequentialist or utilitarian, even though such considera-tions did play a supportive role. The same holds true for the abolitionist campaigns against the death penalty. This type of punishment is considered the ultimate cruel, inhuman and degrad-ing punishment by organizations such as Amnesty International. Abolitionism is inextricably linked to thinking the Absolute. Therefore, the term abolition is found most frequently togeth-er with adjectives such as radical, total, unconditional, complete, instant, immediate, and the like.
2.4 Reading
Hochschild, Adam (2005) Bury the Chains: Prophets and Rebels in the Fight to Free an Empire's Slaves. Hough-ton-Mifflin
About this book (Robin White in The Guardian):
In just a few years at the end of the 18th century, a small group of men (and one woman) took on the vested interests of state, church and big business - and won. .. There was Granville Sharp, a royal musi-cian who rescued a slave, Jonathan Strong, who had been brought to London by his master and so badly beaten up that he nearly died. Sharp went to court and had the slave freed. There was James Steven, a philanderer whose law studies had been financed by an uncle who bought sick slaves, cheaply, and oiled and fattened them up for resale. There was Olaudah Equiano, an eloquent, freed Igbo slave, who gatecrashed London society and wrote bestselling books about his own experiences. .. But above all there was the abolitionist's most tireless worker, Thomas Clarkson. He was a giant of a man, more than 6ft tall, with striking red hair. Clarkson sprang into prominence when he entered, and won, England's top Latin essay competition. His chosen subject was the slave trade and his tract became famous. For the rest of his life he rode and walked the length of Britain (and quite a lot of France, too) addressing meetings, writing pamphlets, collecting signatures on petitions, and compiling a wealth of evidence on the horrors of the slave trade. . With the help of the Quakers (the only religious group to campaign wholeheartedly against the trade) Clarkson founded the all-white anti-slavery committee in 1787 at 18 Old Jewry, in the heart of the City of London. Initially they had spectacular successes. Slavery became the cause of the day. Newspapers took it up. It was the most discussed subject in London's popular debating societies. Just about every town and city in the country organised petitions on scrolls. One hundred and three were sent to parliament with 60,000 signatures. One scroll stretched the entire length of the debating chamber.
But when it came to votes in parliament, even the tiny but eloquent Wilberforce couldn't win the day. The 18th century may have been the age of enlightenment but there was a limited franchise and MPs did not need to respond to the wishes of the masses. Those who benefited from the slave trade fought back, employing lobby groups, bribing politicians and journalists. Wilberforce lost the debate by 163 votes to 88. It was a humbling experience, because it was not even a vote to abolish slavery as a whole, just the trade in slaves. (The argument was that if the human traffic could be stopped, then slavery itself would eventually wither and die.) Clarkson and his friends were not discouraged. There was a nationwide sugar boycott - sugar sales dropped by a third. William Pitt, the prime minister, was enlisted on their side, and he spoke on the abolitionists' behalf in the second parliamentary debate a year later. But vested interests and those who argued that if Britain banned the trade then France would cash in again triumphed. (Then big politics distracted public attention and the conditions of slaves got worse instead of better. Later on, though) electoral reform was in the air, and women's voices were beginning to be heard. The loudest was that of Elizabeth Heyrick, a former teacher and convert to the Quakers. In 1824 she published a pamhlet entitled "Immediate Not Gradual Abolition". Not for her the banning of the slave trade - she wanted all slavery ended for ever. Meanwhile, British soldiers, sent to the Caribbean to suppress slave revolts, returned home with a true picture of the evils of slavery. Their voices added to the clamour. The tide was finally turned and the emancipation bill was passed in 1833. But the victory was a tarnished one: as part of the deal, parliament agreed to pay £20m in compensation, not to slaves but to the slave owners.


3 Prostitution
==Prostitution==
3.1 History
===History===
The abolition of slavery was still a topic of the day, when Josephine Butler (1828-1906) helped create the very same moral outrage and collective action to abolish a different kind of legal oppression. As an upper-class progressive Christian feminist she was especially con-cerned with the welfare of prostitutes, leading a long campaign for the repeal of the Conta-gious Diseases Acts from 1869 to 1886.
The abolition of slavery was still a topic of the day, when Josephine Butler (1828-1906) helped create the very same moral outrage and collective action to abolish a different kind of legal oppression. As an upper-class progressive Christian feminist she was especially con-cerned with the welfare of prostitutes, leading a long campaign for the repeal of the Conta-gious Diseases Acts from 1869 to 1886.
These acts had been introduced (1864, 1866, 1869) to control the spread of venereal diseases among the military personnel, giving magistrates the power to order genital examinations of prostitutes for symptoms of VD, and to detain infected women in a closed institution (lock hospital) for up to three months; to refuse the examination meant imprisonment. Police had the power over women: it was sufficient for a police officer to accuse a woman of prostitution to make magistrates order an examination. An accusation was enough to make women lose their livelihoods.
These acts had been introduced (1864, 1866, 1869) to control the spread of venereal diseases among the military personnel, giving magistrates the power to order genital examinations of prostitutes for symptoms of VD, and to detain infected women in a closed institution (lock hospital) for up to three months; to refuse the examination meant imprisonment. Police had the power over women: it was sufficient for a police officer to accuse a woman of prostitution to make magistrates order an examination. An accusation was enough to make women lose their livelihoods.
Escalation: In 1869, the "Association for the Extension of the Contagious Diseases Acts" was formed to campaign to extend their operation beyond specified ports and garrison towns, leading to vehement opposition from Christians, feminists and supporters of civil liberty and to the setting up of the Ladies National Association for the Repeal of the Contagious Diseases Acts. Later, male supporters were also allowed, and despite vilification and occasional physical assaults on Mrs. Butler, and the Acts were repealed in 1886.
Escalation: In 1869, the "Association for the Extension of the Contagious Diseases Acts" was formed to campaign to extend their operation beyond specified ports and garrison towns, leading to vehement opposition from Christians, feminists and supporters of civil liberty and to the setting up of the Ladies National Association for the Repeal of the Contagious Diseases Acts. Later, male supporters were also allowed, and despite vilification and occasional physical assaults on Mrs. Butler, and the Acts were repealed in 1886.


3.2 Discussion
===Discussion===
What is the real abolition: that of repressive laws against prostitutes or that of prostitution as such?  
What is the real abolition: that of repressive laws against prostitutes or that of prostitution as such?  
Those who advocate the abolition of prostitution speak of “white slavery”. They find it mis-guided to speak of abolitionism and to attack laws regulating prostitution. Rather, they want to reserve the term to efforts against prostitution proper.  
Those who advocate the abolition of prostitution speak of “white slavery”. They find it mis-guided to speak of abolitionism and to attack laws regulating prostitution. Rather, they want to reserve the term to efforts against prostitution proper.  
Who is right? And why?
Who is right? And why?


3.3 Reading
===Reading===
Miriam, Kathy (2005) Stopping the Traffic in Women: Power, Agency and Abolition in Feminist Debates over Sex-Trafficking. Journal of Social Philosophy. Volume 36, 1, 1–17
*Miriam, Kathy (2005) Stopping the Traffic in Women: Power, Agency and Abolition in Feminist Debates over Sex-Trafficking. Journal of Social Philosophy. Volume 36, 1, 1–17
Moore, Roderick (1993) Josephine Butler (1828-1906). Feminist, Christian, and Libertarian. London: Libertarian Alliance
*Moore, Roderick (1993) Josephine Butler (1828-1906). Feminist, Christian, and Libertarian. London: Libertarian Alliance


4 Death Penalty
==Death Penalty==
4.1 History
===History===
Until the mid-18th century a very wide range of offenses, including even common theft, were punishable by death (Black Act, 1723). Evidently, for political reasons, the punishment was not always enforced. Later in the 18th century, though, a marked shift transformed European values; humanitarianism and the ideal of moral progress of the human race began a movement to limit the scope of capital punishment.  
Until the mid-18th century a very wide range of offenses, including even common theft, were punishable by death (Black Act, 1723). Evidently, for political reasons, the punishment was not always enforced. Later in the 18th century, though, a marked shift transformed European values; humanitarianism and the ideal of moral progress of the human race began a movement to limit the scope of capital punishment.  
1721 Montesquieu
1721 Montesquieu
Zeile 110: Zeile 103:
2014 Two thirds of all countries have abolished the death penalty. Two thirds of mankind live in countries with death penalty. 140 countries do not apply the death penalty. 58 countries are retentionist.  
2014 Two thirds of all countries have abolished the death penalty. Two thirds of mankind live in countries with death penalty. 140 countries do not apply the death penalty. 58 countries are retentionist.  


4.2 Protagonists, Milestones, and Setbacks
===Protagonists, Milestones, and Setbacks===
U.S.A.: National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty (NCADP). Founded in 1976. More than 100 affiliate organizations. Today, 18 States of the USA are death penalty-free.
U.S.A.: National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty (NCADP). Founded in 1976. More than 100 affiliate organizations. Today, 18 States of the USA are death penalty-free.
Amnesty International (2014): 98 countries have abolished the death penalty completely. 7 retain it for exceptional cases (war); 35 have abolished it in praxi, but not de lege.
Amnesty International (2014): 98 countries have abolished the death penalty completely. 7 retain it for exceptional cases (war); 35 have abolished it in praxi, but not de lege.
Zeile 126: Zeile 119:
In the advertisement, Mr. Trump says that Mayor Edward I. Koch ''has stated that hate and rancor should be removed from our hearts.'' ''I want to hate these muggers and murderers,'' Mr. Trump wrote. ''They should be forced to suffer and, when they kill, they should be executed for their crimes.''
In the advertisement, Mr. Trump says that Mayor Edward I. Koch ''has stated that hate and rancor should be removed from our hearts.'' ''I want to hate these muggers and murderers,'' Mr. Trump wrote. ''They should be forced to suffer and, when they kill, they should be executed for their crimes.''


4.3 Reading
===Reading===
Evans, Richard (1996) Rituals of Retribution: Capital Punishment in Germany, 1600-1987. Oxford University Press
*Evans, Richard (1996) Rituals of Retribution: Capital Punishment in Germany, 1600-1987. Oxford University Press
Garland, David (2010) Peculiar Institution. America's Death Penalty in an Age of Abolition. OUP/Harvard Uni-versity Press
*Garland, David (2010) Peculiar Institution. America's Death Penalty in an Age of Abolition. OUP/Harvard Uni-versity Press
 
==Prisons==
===Quakers===
 
The Religious Society of Friends (Quakers, 1981):
 
:Friends, partly through their own experiences in the prisons of the seventeenth century, became concerned about the treatment of the accused or convicted. Friends witnessed to their concern for the Divine Spirit in humans by seeing prisons as an alternative to corporal or capital punishment. Subsequently, they worked for reform of these prisons.
 
:Today, Friends are becoming aware that prisons are a destructive and expensive failure as a response to crime. We are, therefore, turning our efforts to reform prisons to efforts to replace them with non-punitive, life-affirming and reconciling responses.
 
:The prison system is both a cause and a result of violence and social injustice. Throughout history, the majority of prisoners have been the powerless and the oppressed. We are increasingly clear that the imprisonment of human beings, like their enslavement, is inherently immoral and is as destructive to the cagers as the caged.
 
:The challenge before us is to use alternatives based on economic and social justice and on the fulfillment of human needs. Some alternatives to prisons have already been developed and more are needed to bring about reconciliation and healing within the community. Friends need to seek out, develop and support such programs.
 
:At the same time, we need to foster awareness in ourselves and others of the roots of crime and violence in society to ensure that our lives do not unintentionally reinforce these evils. Prison abolition is both a process and a long-term goal. In the interim, there is a great need for friends to reach out to and to support all those affected: guards, prisoners, victims and families.
 
:We recognize a need for restraint of those few who are exhibiting dangerous behaviour. The kind of restraint used and the help offered during this time must reflect our concern for that of God in every person.”
 
=== Gradualism ===
No criminal policy should counteract materially or ideologically the goal of reducing and finally abolishing the prison system.
 
Gradualists favour a slow and steady reduction of the prison system. They advocate
#ending overcriminalization by limiting prison sentences to serious crime
#correcting the sentencing system by substituting, for incarceration, supervised release, probation, restitution to victims, and/or community work; decreasing terms of imprisonment by abolishing mandatory minimum sentencing; decreasing ethnic disparity in prison populations; fighting wrongful convictions; fighting class, race, gender bias in the judicial system
#community-controlled courts, councils, or assemblies to control the problem of social crime (there would be fewer prisoners if society treated people more fairly)
 
Organizations: GIP (Michel Foucault); ICOPA, KROM, KRIM, KRAK and Thomas Mathiesen (negative reforms; unfinished; an alternative to prisons is any contradiction to the prison system's means and ends. Shifting the focus from the offender to the victim, e.g.).
 
Most arguments against prisons are not based on moral principle, but could be understood as arguments in favor of reforming the prison and making it more just. Thomas Mathiesen: 8 arguments for a prison building moratorium (UN congress Milano, 1985):
 
#special prevention does not work and violates human rights
#General prevention does not work
#Overcrowding should be prevented by other means than building more prisons
#New construction is irreversible
#Prisons have an expansionist, self-maintaining and self-expanding character
#Prisons are humiliating
#Prisons reveal how a society thinks about human beings and conflict resolution
#Prisons are a waste of money.
 
The injustice of the prison system:
#Lack of proper legal representation: Eighty percent of people accused of crimes [in the United States] are unable to afford a lawyer to defend them." The US Supreme Court held in 1963 that a poor person facing felony charges "cannot be assured a fair trial unless counsel is provided for him."
#War on drugs conceals racial tension. Appr. one quarter of people in U.S. prisons or jails have been convicted of a drug offense. On any given day, 30 percent of African-American males aged 20- 29 are under correctional supervision. They constitute 13 percent of all drug users, but 35 percent of those arrested for drug possession, 55 percent of persons convicted, and 74 percent of people sent to prison.


5 Prisons
=== Abolitionism ===
5.1 Protagonists, Milestones, Setbacks
*The Massachusetts Statewide Harm Reduction Coalition says: the prison system is in violation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948, which is prescribing life, liberty, equality and justice to all people without discrimination of any sort as an inalienable right. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights has also abolished all forms of slavery and genocide, including torture, repression and oppression that prisons thrive upon.
(1) GIP and Michel Foucault; ICOPA, KROM, KRIM, KRAK and Thomas Mathiesen
*Imprisonment is seen by some as violent behaviour producing a "boomerang effect of dehumanisation" on the society. Furthermore, prisons are used as a "default asylum" for many individuals with mental illness: "why do governmental units choose to spend billions of dollars a year to concentrate people with serious illnesses in a system designed to punish intentional lawbreaking, when doing so matches neither the putative purposes of that system nor most effectively addresses the issues posed by that population?" (Amanda Pustlinik)  
No concrete alternatives. Deus absconditus. Negative reform. Unfinished. What is an alterna-tive to prisons? Any contradiction in means and/or ends. Focus on victim instead of offender?
(2) The Religious Society of Friends (Quakers, 1981)
Friends, partly through their own experiences in the prisons of the seventeenth century, became concerned about the treatment of the accused or convicted. Friends witnessed to their concern for the Divine Spirit in humans by seeing prisons as an alternative to corporal or capital punishment. Subsequently, they worked for reform of these prisons. Today, Friends are becoming aware that prisons are a destructive and expensive failure as a response to crime. We are, therefore, turning our efforts to reform prisons to efforts to replace them with non-punitive, life-affirming and reconciling responses. - The prison system is both a cause and a result of violence and social injustice. Throughout history, the majority of prisoners have been the powerless and the oppressed. We are increasingly clear that the imprisonment of human beings, like their enslave-ment, is inherently immoral and is as destructive to the cagers as the caged. The challenge before us is to use alternatives based on economic and social justice and on the fulfillment of human needs. Some alter-natives to prisons have already been developed and more are needed to bring about reconciliation and healing within the community. Friends need to seek out, develop and support such programs. At the same time, we need to foster awareness in ourselves and others of the roots of crime and violence in society to ensure that our lives do not unintentionally reinforce these evils. Prison abolition is both a process and a long-term goal. In the interim, there is a great need for friends to reach out to and to support all those affected: guards, prisoners, victims and families. We recognize a need for restraint of those few who are exhibiting dangerous behaviour. The kind of restraint used and the help offered during this time must reflect our concern for that of God in every person.”
Proposals for prison reform and proposed alternatives to prisons differ significantly depending on the political beliefs behind them. Proposals and tactics often include:
Penal system reforms (substituting, for incarceration, supervised release, probation, restitu-tion to victims, and/or community work; decreasing terms of imprisonment by abolishing mandatory minimum sentencing; decreasing ethnic disparity in prison populations), Prison condition reforms; Abolition of specific laws that increase prison populations (drug laws, sex work laws, alcohol restrictions); fighting wrongful convictions. The Innocence Project.
Abolitionist views according to Wikipedia:
In place of prisons, some abolitionists propose community-controlled courts, councils, or assemblies to control the problem of social crime. They argue that with the destruction of capitalism, and the self-management of production by workers and communities, property crimes would largely vanish. A large part of the problem, according to some, is the way the judicial system deals with prisoners, people and capital. They argue that there would be fewer prisoners if society treated people more fairly, regardless of gender, color, ethnic background, sexual orientation, education, etc.
Arguments made for prison abolition can also be made for making prisons more just:
(1) Lack of proper legal representation: Eighty percent of people accused of crimes [in the United States] are unable to afford a lawyer to defend them." The US Supreme Court held in 1963 that a poor person facing felony charges "cannot be assured a fair trial unless counsel is provided for him."


(2) War on drugs conceals racial tension
*Dutch criminologist Herman Thomas Bianchi is no friend of prisons, either:
Appr. one quarter of people in U.S. prisons or jails have been convicted of a drug offense. On any given day, 30 percent of African-American males aged 20- 29 are under correctional supervision. They constitute 13 percent of all drug users, but 35 percent of those arrested for drug possession, 55 percent of persons convicted, and 74 percent of people sent to prison.
The Massachusetts Statewide Harm Reduction Coalition says: the prison system is in violation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948, which is prescribing life, liberty, equality and justice to all people without discrimination of any sort as an inalienable right. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights has also abolished all forms of slavery and genocide, including torture, repression and oppression that prisons thrive upon.
Imprisonment is seen by some as violent behaviour producing a "boomerang effect of dehumanisation" on the society. Furthermore, prisons are used as a "default asylum" for many individuals with mental illness: "why do governmental units choose to spend billions of dollars a year to concentrate people with serious illnesses in a system designed to punish intentional lawbreaking, when doing so matches neither the putative purposes of that system nor most effectively addresses the issues posed by that population?" (Amanda Pustlinik)
Mathiesen gave 8 arguments for a prison building moratorium (UN congress Milano, 1985):
1. Special prevention does not work and violates human rights
2. General prevention does not work
3. Overcrowding should be prevented by other means than building more prisons
4. New construction is irreversible
5. Prisons have an expansionist, self-maintaining and self-expanding character
6. Prisons are humiliating
7. Prisons reveal how a society thinks about human beings and conflict resolution
8. Prisons are a waste of money
Dutch criminologist Herman Thomas Bianchi is no friend of prisons, either:
They remind him of concentration camps. And he is prepared to sketch his ideas. Holland contains ten thousand incarcerated persons. Six hundred of them present an acute danger. They would fit in one pris-on. He lived among Mohawks in an American reservation a couple of times. They are unfamiliar with criminal law. Jesus said a wrongdoer should be invited seventy times seven times to make up. According to Indian practise, you should ask ten times. But our criminal law does not ask once. Bianchi believes so-ciety should try to induce each criminal to show remorse and to make up. Prison could serve as a last re-sort for those who are absolutely unwilling or unable to show remorse. This principle of reconciliation, restorative justice, is gaining more proponents worldwide.
They remind him of concentration camps. And he is prepared to sketch his ideas. Holland contains ten thousand incarcerated persons. Six hundred of them present an acute danger. They would fit in one pris-on. He lived among Mohawks in an American reservation a couple of times. They are unfamiliar with criminal law. Jesus said a wrongdoer should be invited seventy times seven times to make up. According to Indian practise, you should ask ten times. But our criminal law does not ask once. Bianchi believes so-ciety should try to induce each criminal to show remorse and to make up. Prison could serve as a last re-sort for those who are absolutely unwilling or unable to show remorse. This principle of reconciliation, restorative justice, is gaining more proponents worldwide.
Nor has Heinz Steinert been friend of prisons (in: Feest & Paul 2008):  
Nor has Heinz Steinert been friend of prisons (in: Feest & Paul 2008):  
Abolitionism needs to be expanded to questions of „pain infliction“, discrimination, in general: damage done by the state. Can imprisonment be reconciled with human rights? Since in Europe imprisonment and punishment is concentrated on „foreigners“, what is it that makes the status of „foreigner“ so open to infringement of rights and fair treatment? Abolitionisms needs to be expanded to questions of citizenship and human rights in war and peace. Has one of the technocratic arguments against imprisonment been refuted? If not, how come we can – in a time of quality management and evaluation – afford such a monstrous error? Is it because the fantasy is we can get rid of certain people for good (by prison or by transportation)? Do societies and states foster eliminatory fantasies again? If so, do we understand why there are no other ideas for possible solutions of the problems brought about by the present mode of production? Can we provide some? Abolitionism needs to be expanded to questions of how this mode of production works.
Abolitionism needs to be expanded to questions of „pain infliction“, discrimination, in general: damage done by the state. Can imprisonment be reconciled with human rights? Since in Europe imprisonment and punishment is concentrated on „foreigners“, what is it that makes the status of „foreigner“ so open to infringement of rights and fair treatment? Abolitionisms needs to be expanded to questions of citizenship and human rights in war and peace. Has one of the technocratic arguments against imprisonment been refuted? If not, how come we can – in a time of quality management and evaluation – afford such a monstrous error? Is it because the fantasy is we can get rid of certain people for good (by prison or by transportation)? Do societies and states foster eliminatory fantasies again? If so, do we understand why there are no other ideas for possible solutions of the problems brought about by the present mode of production? Can we provide some? Abolitionism needs to be expanded to questions of how this mode of production works.


5.2 Discussion
===Discussion===
How successful has prison abolition been?  Does the prison fit the abolitionist moral catego-ries?  What is the future of prisons: expansion or oblivion?  Utilitarianism vs. Rigorism  What about this wikepdia definition of the prison abolition movement?:
How successful has prison abolition been?  Does the prison fit the abolitionist moral catego-ries?  What is the future of prisons: expansion or oblivion?  Utilitarianism vs. Rigorism  What about this wikepdia definition of the prison abolition movement?:
The prison abolition movement is a movement that seeks to reduce or eliminate prisons and the prison system, and replace them with more humane and effective systems. It is distinct from prison reform, which is the attempt to improve conditions inside prisons; however, relying on prisons less can signifi-cantly improve their conditions by eliminating overcrowding.- Some organizations such as the Anarchist Black Cross seek total abolishment of the prison system, not intending to replace it with other govern-ment controlled systems. Anarchist organizations believe that the best form of justice arises naturally out of social contracts. However, many supporters for prison abolition intend to replace it with other systems, reducing prisons to a smaller role in society.
The prison abolition movement is a movement that seeks to reduce or eliminate prisons and the prison system, and replace them with more humane and effective systems. It is distinct from prison reform, which is the attempt to improve conditions inside prisons; however, relying on prisons less can signifi-cantly improve their conditions by eliminating overcrowding.- Some organizations such as the Anarchist Black Cross seek total abolishment of the prison system, not intending to replace it with other govern-ment controlled systems. Anarchist organizations believe that the best form of justice arises naturally out of social contracts. However, many supporters for prison abolition intend to replace it with other systems, reducing prisons to a smaller role in society.
Zeile 167: Zeile 180:
Sweden has closed 4 prisons lately. What does that mean?
Sweden has closed 4 prisons lately. What does that mean?


5.3 Reading
===Reading===
Christie, Nils (1994/2013) Crime control as industry. London: Routledge
*Christie, Nils (1994/2013) Crime control as industry. London: Routledge
Davis, Angela (1999) The Prison Industrial Complex, CD-ROM (Audiobook), AK Press
*Davis, Angela (1999) The Prison Industrial Complex, CD-ROM (Audiobook), AK Press
Mathiesen, Thomas (2000) Prison on trial, 2nd ed., Winchester
*Mathiesen, Thomas (2000) Prison on trial, 2nd ed., Winchester
Morris, Mark (1976). Instead of Prisons: A Handbook for Abolitionists. Syracuse, NY: Prison Research Education Action Project.  
*Morris, Mark (1976). Instead of Prisons: A Handbook for Abolitionists. Syracuse, NY: Prison Research Education Action Project.  
Religious Society of Friends. Minute on Prison Abolition Approved by the Canadian Yearly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends in 1981 (Minute 93)  
*Religious Society of Friends. Minute on Prison Abolition Approved by the Canadian Yearly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends in 1981 (Minute 93)


6 Penal Law, Criminal Justice, Punishment
==Penal Law, Criminal Justice, Punishment==
6.1 History
===History===
Penal law, criminal justice, and punishment by state organs seem to be a necessary evil to most people, let alone politicians. They seem natural and therefore eternal.  
Penal law, criminal justice, and punishment by state organs seem to be a necessary evil to most people, let alone politicians. They seem natural and therefore eternal.  
It is intriguing to see how even the most peaceful visions of a perfect society seem unable to exclude crime and punishment from their sketches of utopia.  
It is intriguing to see how even the most peaceful visions of a perfect society seem unable to exclude crime and punishment from their sketches of utopia.  
Zeile 191: Zeile 204:
To him, so-called crimes should not be analyzed within the framework of the crime discourse, but the discourse itself should be subjected to analysis. So, for him, “crimes” were just one kind of problematic situations among others, and he questioned the reasons for separating them from other problematic situations. This lent itself to jokes about him, but this was his revolutionary contribution, a contribution still to be spelled out, and to taken to action.
To him, so-called crimes should not be analyzed within the framework of the crime discourse, but the discourse itself should be subjected to analysis. So, for him, “crimes” were just one kind of problematic situations among others, and he questioned the reasons for separating them from other problematic situations. This lent itself to jokes about him, but this was his revolutionary contribution, a contribution still to be spelled out, and to taken to action.


6.2 Discussion
===Discussion===
Is René van Swaaningen right when he states:  
Is René van Swaaningen right when he states:  
First, I like to stress that abolitionism’s positive, reconstructive message has been taken up by various other perspectives. I see very clear traces of abolitionist thought in ‘restorative justice’ (Braithwaite, etc.), peacemaking criminology (Pepinsky, etc.), the ‘social harm’ approach (Hillyard, etc.), constitutive criminology (Henry & Milovanov-ic).
:First, I like to stress that abolitionism’s positive, reconstructive message has been taken up by various other perspectives. I see very clear traces of abolitionist thought in ‘restorative justice’ (Braithwaite, etc.), peacemaking criminology (Pepinsky, etc.), the ‘social harm’ approach (Hillyard, etc.), constitutive criminology (Henry & Milovanov-ic). The ‘penal core’ of abolitionism has got under serious pressure in the ‘punitive turn’ in many Western countries, notably in the Netherlands; the country with the largest in-crease in imprisonment in the whole world – albeit we started at a very low level. In a climate where a punitive populism rules traditional penal abolitionism is easily dis-carded as loony idealism. So, many (previous) abolitionists have changed their focus a bit, by first arguing against punitiveness as such. The literature on ‘the new punitive-ness’ can be seen as a reformulation of abolitionism’s negative critique. As an academic perspective abolitionism was in a way ‘not good enough’: it was often theoretically sloppy, there was little sound empirical research done in the tradition and the moralistic undertone was often too dominant. At least my students are no longer used to normative, prescriptive discourse and even get irritated when ‘science’ is mixed up with moralism; particularly Left wing moralism. We can still get the aboli-tionist message across amongst the present generation students, I think, but we have to use another tone than 25 years ago: less ‘standpoint criminology’, more practical, em-pirical arguments, more connection with concrete policy debates and with different criminological debates (in: Feest & Paul 2008).
The ‘penal core’ of abolitionism has got under serious pressure in the ‘punitive turn’ in many Western countries, notably in the Netherlands; the country with the largest in-crease in imprisonment in the whole world – albeit we started at a very low level. In a climate where a punitive populism rules traditional penal abolitionism is easily dis-carded as loony idealism. So, many (previous) abolitionists have changed their focus a bit, by first arguing against punitiveness as such. The literature on ‘the new punitive-ness’ can be seen as a reformulation of abolitionism’s negative critique.
 
As an academic perspective abolitionism was in a way ‘not good enough’: it was often theoretically sloppy, there was little sound empirical research done in the tradition and the moralistic undertone was often too dominant. At least my students are no longer used to normative, prescriptive discourse and even get irritated when ‘science’ is mixed up with moralism; particularly Left wing moralism. We can still get the aboli-tionist message across amongst the present generation students, I think, but we have to use another tone than 25 years ago: less ‘standpoint criminology’, more practical, em-pirical arguments, more connection with concrete policy debates and with different criminological debates (in: Feest & Paul 2008).
*Does the criminal law protect? What is the relevance of the dark figures?
Does the criminal law protect? What is the relevance of the dark figures?
What is the moral ground for and against criminal justice?
What is the moral ground for and against criminal justice?
What makes it difficult to argue for the abolition of the criminal justice system?
What makes it difficult to argue for the abolition of the criminal justice system?
Hegel and the negation of the negation of law
Hegel and the negation of the negation of law


6.3 Reading
===Reading===
De Folter, Rolf S. (1986) On the methodological foundation of the abolitionist approach to the criminal justice system. A comparison of the ideas of Hulsman, Mathiesen and Foucault. Contemporary Crises 10: 39-62.
De Folter, Rolf S. (1986) On the methodological foundation of the abolitionist approach to the criminal justice system. A comparison of the ideas of Hulsman, Mathiesen and Foucault. Contemporary Crises 10: 39-62.
Deleuze, Gilles (1990 and 1993) Postskriptum über die Kontrollgesellschaften. In: Deleuze, Gilles: Unterhand-lungen. 1972-1990, Frankfurt am Main 1993
Deleuze, Gilles (1990 and 1993) Postskriptum über die Kontrollgesellschaften. In: Deleuze, Gilles: Unterhand-lungen. 1972-1990, Frankfurt am Main 1993
Zeile 209: Zeile 221:
Von Trotha, Trutz (1983) Limits to Pain. Diskussionsbeitrag zu einer Abhandlung von Nils Christie. In: Krimi-nologisches Journal, Heft 1/1983, S. 34- 53
Von Trotha, Trutz (1983) Limits to Pain. Diskussionsbeitrag zu einer Abhandlung von Nils Christie. In: Krimi-nologisches Journal, Heft 1/1983, S. 34- 53


7 Further Reading
==Further Reading==
Bianchi, Herman Th. (1994) Justice As Sanctuary: Toward a New System of Crime Control. Bloomington:  Indiana University Press
Bianchi, Herman Th. (1994) Justice As Sanctuary: Toward a New System of Crime Control. Bloomington:  Indiana University Press
Christie, Nils (2009) Restorative Justice: Five Dangers Ahead. In: Paul Knepper, Jonathan Doak, and Joanna Shapland, eds., Urban Crime Prevention, Surveillance, and Restorative Justice. Effects of Social Technologies. CRC Press: 195-203
Christie, Nils (2009) Restorative Justice: Five Dangers Ahead. In: Paul Knepper, Jonathan Doak, and Joanna Shapland, eds., Urban Crime Prevention, Surveillance, and Restorative Justice. Effects of Social Technologies. CRC Press: 195-203
Tiao
Bürokraten, Administratoren
31.738

Bearbeitungen

Abgerufen von „https://www.krimpedia.de/Spezial:Mobiler_Unterschied/62227...62245“