How should a just society deal with abusers?

[Jeff Robinson]

Let's imagine we have whatever you take to be a just society (anarchist, socialist, communist, social democratic, whatever), how ought that society deal with abusers? By abusers I mean people who use their power to inflict significant harm on individuals who have less power than them. I am thinking of e.g. domestic abusers, child abusers, animal abusers, people who engaging in stalking, harrasment and sexual violence, people smugglers, gangmasters, fraudsters who target the elderly and the like.

The standard lefty answer is to change the social conditions so these people have less power (or are less inclined to engage in abusive behaviours because they have more positive life experiences and better opportunities) and that their victims or potential victims have more power. I agree of course, but it seems to me that it is niave in the extreme to think that any society - no matter how just - could entirely eradicate abusive behaviours. Human psychology is just too variable and some power imbalances just too intractable to redress entirely (e.g. between infants and adults). It seems there will always be some portion of the human population who will be inclined towards abusive behaviours. How could these elements be dealt with in ways that don't replicate the harms and abuses of our present criminal justice systems?

Thoughts and reading recommendations welcomed!

 

[Silas Loom]

It’s often said by people with experience of prisons that most of the inmates should never have been inside but that most of the rest should never be let out. Nothing wrong with locking people up for the right reasons.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

That's a very broad definition. Of course power imbalances and abuses will always exist in any society. I'm not sure you need to have a hypothetical just society to see how current criminal justice systems could and should be changed, though. My first question is always 'what do you want prison to be for?' To protect others from people who are dangerous. That for me is the one reason that it is hard to challenge. But currently, prison is used for far more than that. It harms both the individual and wider society to lock so many people up when they don't actually represent a threat to the rest of us.

 

[A380]

Let's imagine we have whatever you take to be a just society (anarchist, socialist, communist, social democratic, whatever), how ought that society deal with abusers? By abusers I mean people who use their power to inflict significant harm on individuals who have less power than them. I am thinking of e.g. domestic abusers, child abusers, animal abusers, people who engaging in stalking, harrasment and sexual violence, people smugglers, gangmasters, fraudsters who target the elderly and the like.

The standard lefty answer is to change the social conditions so these people have less power (or are less inclined to engage in abusive behaviours because they have more positive life experiences and better opportunities) and that their victims or potential victims have more power. I agree of course, but it seems to me that it is niave in the extreme to think that any society - no matter how just - could entirely eradicate abusive behaviours. Human psychology is just too variable and some power imbalances just too intractable to redress entirely (e.g. between infants and adults). It seems there will always be some portion of the human population who will be inclined towards abusive behaviours. How could these elements be dealt with in ways that don't replicate the harms and abuses of our present criminal justice systems?

Thoughts and reading recommendations welcomed!

How about making sure everyone knows it is their duty to their fellow citizens to never turn a blind eye to abuse, to challenge abusers and make them modify their behaviour.

But you'd probably need a group of people who could devote more time to this both to identify abuse and to stop it happening but also to devote time to learning how to identify abusers and stop them abusing. Then, whilst everyone should have a duty to help the survivors of abusers, mostly to help them recover but also to prevent them going on to become abusers themselves, you would also need a cadre of people who could devote more time to individual cases and to learning how to do this effectively. These two groups would have a vested interest on being on the side of the survivors, so you'd probably need advocates for people accused of being abusers, both to help them if they have been wrongly identified or speak for them in mitigation of they are abusers. You couldn't let any of these people decide if a person identified as an abuser was, or if the identification was made in error or maliciously so you'd need a method to decide on that. Finally you would need people who could both offer abusers opportunity to move on from their abusive behaviour but also keep possible future targets of abuse safe.

Oh fuck we appear to have reinvented police, social workers, lawyers, courts and probation/prisons.

Alterntivly you could just let the senior cardes do what they want as unlike every other society that has existed they could be trusted not to abuse (did you see what I did there) their position.

 

[existentialist]

I think the first thing we need to do is recognise that the motives for abusers can vary wildly, and thus the approach to be taken to their abuse should also be different in different cases.

Additionally, I think we need to take a long hard look at our narratives around abuse, which seem to range from not even acknowledging it as abuse (typical around abuse-of-power situations, for example), holding the victim responsible, through to creating such a hysterical atmosphere around abuse (eg child sexual abuse) that it becomes impossible to actually look at specific situations without invoking all the usual tropes and folk devils.

 

[A380]

On the current prison front probably 80% shouldn't be there. 5% are probably in the right place for the right time, 5% should be there longer and 5% should never be let out.


Trouble is often communities and individuals just need a break from people who have been locked up, and whilst our current prison system only offeres this human warehousing for probably 75/80% of people it is also important to remember the rights of others to be protected from harm . And we have almost completely cut adrift many people living with mental ill health and the criminal 'justice' system is the only place left for them.

Hardly anyone cares though.

 

[Spymaster]

Let's imagine we have whatever you take to be a just society (anarchist, socialist, communist, social democratic, whatever), how ought that society deal with abusers? By abusers I mean people who use their power to inflict significant harm on individuals who have less power than them. I am thinking of e.g. domestic abusers, child abusers, animal abusers, people who engaging in stalking, harrasment and sexual violence, people smugglers, gangmasters, fraudsters who target the elderly and the like.

Shoot them.

 

[Mr.Bishie]

Thread closed.

 

[Dystopiary]

Let's imagine we have whatever you take to be a just society (anarchist, socialist, communist, social democratic, whatever), how ought that society deal with abusers? By abusers I mean people who use their power to inflict significant harm on individuals who have less power than them. I am thinking of e.g. domestic abusers, child abusers, animal abusers, people who engaging in stalking, harrasment and sexual violence, people smugglers, gangmasters, fraudsters who target the elderly and the like.

The standard lefty answer is to change the social conditions so these people have less power (or are less inclined to engage in abusive behaviours because they have more positive life experiences and better opportunities) and that their victims or potential victims have more power. I agree of course, but it seems to me that it is niave in the extreme to think that any society - no matter how just - could entirely eradicate abusive behaviours. Human psychology is just too variable and some power imbalances just too intractable to redress entirely (e.g. between infants and adults). It seems there will always be some portion of the human population who will be inclined towards abusive behaviours. How could these elements be dealt with in ways that don't replicate the harms and abuses of our present criminal justice systems?

Thoughts and reading recommendations welcomed!

Been meaning to get round to reading this:

what about the rapists? Anarchist approaches to crime & justice : Dysophia 5 : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

I'd be interested to hear thoughts on it from anyone who has.

 

[A380]

Been meaning to get round to reading this:

what about the rapists? Anarchist approaches to crime & justice : Dysophia 5 : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

I'd be interested to hear thoughts on it from anyone who has.

Thanks for posting this. Some interesting questions raised by the authors; although it seems more about how (anarchist and other progresive ) groups operating in our current society can deal with abusers who are part of that group. However their proposed solution seems to be rather similar to how church groups and congregations over the years have dealt with these issues. i.e kick the abusers out but don't do anything to warn other groups. To be fair the authors don't say that they have a full solution and pose many of the issues as questions, especially the risks to future victims of expulsion.

I also felt they had given quite a lot of thought to false accusations. An interesting and assessable read. But doesn't really answer the OP's points.

 

[WouldBe]

Shoot them.

Torture chamber first, give them a taste of their own medicine.

 

[MickiQ]

Shoot them.

Hanging is more cost-effective and environmentally friendly you can re-use rope, you can't re-use a bullet.

 

[Dystopiary]

Thanks for posting this. Some interesting questions raised by the authors; although it seems more about how (anarchist and other progresive ) groups operating in our current society can deal with abusers who are part of that group. However their proposed solution seems to be rather similar to how church groups and congregations over the years have dealt with these issues. i.e kick the abusers out but don't do anything to warn other groups. To be fair the authors don't say that they have a full solution and pose many of the issues as questions, especially the risks to future victims of expulsion.

I also felt they had given quite a lot of thought to false accusations. An interesting and assessable read. But doesn't really answer the OP's points.

OK, thanks. Finding it hard to read much more than a couple of paragraphs atm, so cheers for that. I'll read it fully when I'm up to it.

 

[Silas Loom]

Hanging is more cost-effective and environmentally friendly you can re-use rope, you can't re-use a bullet.

I still think that nitrogen hypoxia is kindest as long as it is done in a sensible way. So, not by Americans.

Pretty sure fresh rope is used each time to ensure the drop tables work.

And the arguments against the death penalty are incontrovertible, although assisted suicide is a reasonable option to offer lifers.

 

[Mr.Bishie]

Hanging is more cost-effective and environmentally friendly you can re-use rope, you can't re-use a bullet.

You think spy gives a fuck about the environment when it comes to state sanctioned executions?

 

[planetgeli]

There is no quick fix. There is no one simple solution. But out there, some people are trying innovative stuff. Like Terbeschikkingstelling (TBS) in the Netherlands.

At its core it recognizes the proliferation in prisons of people with mental health conditions. That's what needs addressing. A psychological rehabilitation programme that works with people with long term prison sentences. It is not wanky liberal do-gooding. They still confine some people indefinite#ly. But it does do good and Netherlands has produced an unparalleled reduction in the prison population and recidivism. It is care in the community. Proper care in the community. Something we abandoned about 40 years ago.

Read this.

Why are there so few prisoners in the Netherlands?

The Dutch justice system is cutting jail populations by offering specialist rehabilitation to people with mental illnesses

www.theguardian.com

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Thanks for posting this. Some interesting questions raised by the authors; although it seems more about how (anarchist and other progresive ) groups operating in our current society can deal with abusers who are part of that group. However their proposed solution seems to be rather similar to how church groups and congregations over the years have dealt with these issues. i.e kick the abusers out but don't do anything to warn other groups. To be fair the authors don't say that they have a full solution and pose many of the issues as questions, especially the risks to future victims of expulsion.

When people associate in small groups, exclusion from the group is an obvious and effective solution. But if there is a big world out there outside the group, you're just landing the problem at someone else's door. And if you look to some form of 'primitive communism' for answers, the ultimate way of dealing with serious transgression in hunter-gatherer groups was to kill the person.

tbh I think more sophisticated ways of dealing with abusers and anti-social behaviour in general do depend on the existence of larger-scale institutions such as nation-states.

 

[phildwyer]

Hanging is more cost-effective and environmentally friendly you can re-use rope, you can't re-use a bullet.

Send their mother the bill for the bullet, obv.

Vindictiveness isn't attractive imho. Nor moral neither.

 

[seventh bullet]

When people associate in small groups, exclusion from the group is an obvious and effective solution. But if there is a big world out there outside the group, you're just landing the problem at someone else's door. And if you look to some form of 'primitive communism' for answers, the ultimate way of dealing with serious transgression in hunter-gatherer groups was to kill the person.

tbh I think more sophisticated ways of dealing with abusers and anti-social behaviour in general do depend on the existence of larger-scale institutions such as nation-states.

Some of the transformative and restorative justice stuff iin the US is nicked off Native American practice and revival among activists over the decades with regard to eventual abolition. It's less about whether or not there is a level that needs to be reached wrt 'sophistication,' as vast, complex states already do kill their transgressing citizens. Incarceration was once upon a time the progressive thing to do rather than temporary holding before transportation to an execution site. In the fullest of fully communist societies you can envisage there are still gong to be people who have to be kept away from other people because of what they've done. Death may still be the only effective way to deal with some of them.

 

[tim]

There would be no need for people smugglers in a just society, or gangmasters, both are a symptoms of the abusive nature of a society where as workers we are exploited by our bosses. Would there be a role for rapacious capitalists in your just society?

 

[zedr]

Been meaning to get round to reading this:

what about the rapists? Anarchist approaches to crime & justice : Dysophia 5 : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

I'd be interested to hear thoughts on it from anyone who has.

I read this as part of a book/discussion group a few years ago. from what i remember its mainly to do with small groups but is a useful primer most abolitionist groups I know use.

in terms of not just using exclusion as a tool, d. hunter and cradle community (afraid this is just a link to their book, cant find the old articles atm) have both done writing about how they engage both with abusers and the affected communities to work through the harm caused.

I'd agree that we will never not have people who cause harm, and some who cause significant harm in our communities. I think one of the big questions, and one ive been talking about a lot with ppl, is whether ppl are born predisposed to cause serious harm, or whether its part of socialization. this I think really informs whether you think there is a possibility for someone to change/reform or whether you think theres no hope for them. I tend to veer into the nurture camp, but not absolutely.

when she was writing about a future abolitionist society marge piercey included a sort of two strike rule where very serious abusers/abuses had one chance to change before the community could kill them.

here's the link to the reading/discussion group. the curriculum we used has lits of interesting articles and links on this subject, tho its very much focused on male violence (usually against women) as we were looking at it in terms of music scenes.

 

[The39thStep]

On the current prison front probably 80% shouldn't be there. 5% are probably in the right place for the right time, 5% should be there longer and 5% should never be let out.


Trouble is often communities and individuals just need a break from people who have been locked up, and whilst our current prison system only offeres this human warehousing for probably 75/80% of people it is also important to remember the rights of others to be protected from harm . And we have almost completely cut adrift many people living with mental ill health and the criminal 'justice' system is the only place left for them.

Hardly anyone cares though.

I don't want to come over all alarmist but according to your post 5% of prisoners are missing

 

[A380]

I don't want to come over all alarmist but according to your post 5% of prisoners are missing

That’s why vaulting horses shouldn’t be allowed.

 

[The39thStep]

That’s why vaulting horses shouldn’t be allowed.

I think they are mainly the ones who agreed with you that they shouldn’t be there .

 

[BigMoaner]

Let's imagine we have whatever you take to be a just society (anarchist, socialist, communist, social democratic, whatever), how ought that society deal with abusers? By abusers I mean people who use their power to inflict significant harm on individuals who have less power than them. I am thinking of e.g. domestic abusers, child abusers, animal abusers, people who engaging in stalking, harrasment and sexual violence, people smugglers, gangmasters, fraudsters who target the elderly and the like.

The standard lefty answer is to change the social conditions so these people have less power (or are less inclined to engage in abusive behaviours because they have more positive life experiences and better opportunities) and that their victims or potential victims have more power. I agree of course, but it seems to me that it is niave in the extreme to think that any society - no matter how just - could entirely eradicate abusive behaviours. Human psychology is just too variable and some power imbalances just too intractable to redress entirely (e.g. between infants and adults). It seems there will always be some portion of the human population who will be inclined towards abusive behaviours. How could these elements be dealt with in ways that don't replicate the harms and abuses of our present criminal justice systems?

Thoughts and reading recommendations welcomed!

Change the social conditions as the number one factor and also have a decent criminal justice system. I might be an outlier here but I think there should be more police on the streets, not less. Abusers need to be caught and in many circumstances punished for, if anything, to give the victims a sense of justice which is natural and normal human desire. That is why many victims break down when they here a guilty verdict, a sense of justice is probably innate. Hate to say it but Blair had it right with his “tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime” which of course amounted to nothing.

 

[existentialist]

Change the social conditions as the number one factor and also have a decent criminal justice system. I might be an outlier here but I think there should be more police on the streets, not less. Abusers need to be caught and in many circumstances punished for, if anything, to give the victims a sense of justice which is natural and normal human desire. That is why many victims break down when they here a guilty verdict, a sense of justice is probably innate. Hate to say it but Blair had it right with his “tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime” which of course amounted to nothing.

TBH, I'd prefer "Serious about crime..." - this "tough" bullshit never leads anywhere good.

 

[likesfish]

Having briefly been a prison officer cat b majority need help to function in society which basic literacy and a painting and decorating won’t cover.

They have poor impulse control and that gets them into shit.
The Albanians were professional crime and took it on the chin as part of the process. The elderally vicars were going to die in jail they were now harmless but it’s state sanctioned revenge.

Prison doesn’t really work,it can if people use it to take a good long look at themselves but most prisoners don’t have the tools to do that and HMPS doesn’t have the resources to do it mostly delivers the secure and safe humane trying meaningful activity depends. Some can go from you shouldn’t be let out to a functioning member of society.

 

[Orang Utan]

Torture chamber first, give them a taste of their own medicine.

Justify this unless it’s you trying to be funny

 

[phildwyer]

Change the social conditions as the number one factor and also have a decent criminal justice system. I might be an outlier here but I think there should be more police on the streets, not less. Abusers need to be caught and in many circumstances punished for, if anything, to give the victims a sense of justice which is natural and normal human desire. That is why many victims break down when they here a guilty verdict, a sense of justice is probably innate. Hate to say it but Blair had it right with his “tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime” which of course amounted to nothing.

Retributive justice is a thoroughly stupid idea. We've seen where it leads in the USA. It causes crime, it does not prevent crime. Indeed it is generally advocated by politicians with a vested interest in increasing petty crime, the better to capture the votes of the sadists and racists who slaver over the thought of punishment.

 

[Mumbles274]

Rebalanced the criminal justice system in favour of the harm it causes the people.. Not financial harm would be a good start.

How can we exixts in a world where robbers get longer sentences than rapists?