Benutzer:Woozle/Against Penitentiaries: Unterschied zwischen den Versionen

keine Bearbeitungszusammenfassung
Zeile 244: Zeile 244:
The abolition of prisons also means to condemn the penitentiary type of prison buildings with their rows of solitary cells as their basic element to oblivion. The classical cell prison as it had been invented in the United States and exported to Europe (Pentonville), from where the colonial administrations spread it to the remotest corners of the world, has never fulfilled the high moral expectations of its founders and philanthropic friends. As of today, it is safe to say that it is both obsolete and a shameful disgrace. Wherever they stand, prisons make good museums, but they must not be abused by still holding living people in captivity.
The abolition of prisons also means to condemn the penitentiary type of prison buildings with their rows of solitary cells as their basic element to oblivion. The classical cell prison as it had been invented in the United States and exported to Europe (Pentonville), from where the colonial administrations spread it to the remotest corners of the world, has never fulfilled the high moral expectations of its founders and philanthropic friends. As of today, it is safe to say that it is both obsolete and a shameful disgrace. Wherever they stand, prisons make good museums, but they must not be abused by still holding living people in captivity.


== How do we get rid of prisons-as-punishment ==
== Strategies for Abolition ==
=== Cessationist strategies ===
=== Cessationist strategies ===
These strategies call for an immediate and unconditional end of imprisonment. The major exponent of a cessationst strategy with respect to prisons is Thomas Mathiesen. Mathiesen believes that to look for ready-made alternatives before changing an existing institution is the wrong way. He argues that "the alternative lies in the unfinished, in the sketch, in what is not yet fully existing" (Mathiesen 2015, 47 ff). He refrains from specific suggestions of how to get rid of prisons. For him, the most important thing is to nurture an abolitionist stance, a stance of saying "no!", which makes a difference in the long run. This may contribute to what he calls turning points: "The turning points of the past, the abolition of slavery, the abolition of the death penalty at least in some places, te abolition of youth prisons in Massachussetts, the abolition of forced labour or what what have you - should be scrutinized as examples for the future. What fostered them, what caused some of them to return under a different mantle?Turning points probably surface for structural, economic and political reasons. They become 'ripe fruit' to use a Norwegian expression. But people act and channel them as they surface. An abolitionist stance of saying 'no!' was certainly part of past abolitions. It may be so again" (Mathiesen 2009, 62).
These strategies call for an immediate and unconditional end of imprisonment. The major exponent of a cessationst strategy with respect to prisons is Thomas Mathiesen. Mathiesen believes that to look for ready-made alternatives before changing an existing institution is the wrong way. He argues that "the alternative lies in the unfinished, in the sketch, in what is not yet fully existing" (Mathiesen 2015, 47 ff). He refrains from specific suggestions of how to get rid of prisons. For him, the most important thing is to nurture an abolitionist stance, a stance of saying "no!", which makes a difference in the long run. This may contribute to what he calls turning points: "The turning points of the past, the abolition of slavery, the abolition of the death penalty at least in some places, te abolition of youth prisons in Massachussetts, the abolition of forced labour or what what have you - should be scrutinized as examples for the future. What fostered them, what caused some of them to return under a different mantle?Turning points probably surface for structural, economic and political reasons. They become 'ripe fruit' to use a Norwegian expression. But people act and channel them as they surface. An abolitionist stance of saying 'no!' was certainly part of past abolitions. It may be so again" (Mathiesen 2009, 62).
1.005

Bearbeitungen