The Black Hand
Unclean
Azrael said:
No - Teejay view is a liberal perspective (obviously bollox like your far right one). GO fuk yourself - i've better things to do
The police state is nearly here - Guardian
- Thread starter The Black Hand
- Start date
No - Teejay view is a liberal perspective (obviously bollox like your far right one). GO fuk yourself - i've better things to do
The Black Hand
Unclean
On the road to industrial capitalism from feudalism and feudal law, re-definition of this autocratic aristocratic law was the first stage of bourgeois leadership (Linebaugh, 1993), including; summary jurisdiction by magistrates during the 18th century, rationalisation of the law by Sir Robert Peel, Home Secretary in the 1820’s. The new agency to enforce this law was the police (Emsley, 1997, in Maguire, Morgan and Reiner (eds) 1997, Ignatieff, 1978), and from 1828 the penitentiary was to be the new recipient of “the new volume of petty arrests by the police” (Ignatieff, 1978, 185), however;
Eighty Five percent of their arrests in the 1830s were for vagrancy, prostitution, drunkenness, disorderly behaviour, and common assault, while only 15 percent were for indictable offenses, most of these being petty larceny and pickpocketing… the new police were not... successful in detecting or deterring burlaries, robberies, and other major crimes” (Ignatieff, 1978, 185).
The law and the police were employed as an ad hoc modernising force, and aimed at the entire industrial working class instead of its’ periphery. A feature, that remains until far into the nineteenth century, prior to 1840 virtually all methods aimed at enforcing discipline over the working class were punitive and suppressive (Lea, 2002). As time progresses, the by now confident bourgeoisie pressed on with encouraging the new arbiters of official morality to rule working class areas, making labour accept the habits necessary to work for capital;
The imposition of the police brought the arm of municipal and state authority directly to bear upon key institutions of daily life in working class neighbourhoods, touching off a running battle with local custom and popular culture which lasted at least until the end of the century [Cohen, 1981, describes this process in the first decades of the 20th century]… the monitoring and control of the streets, pubs, racecourses, wakes, and popular fetes was a daily function of the ‘new police’… [this was] a direct complement to the attempts of urban middle class elites… to mould a labouring class amenable to new disciplines of both work and leisure (Storch, 1976, 481).
This is part of an overall strategy of governance and the building of a new social order including different disciplinary arenas e.g. asylums, police, factories, poor law, workhouses, welfare, prisons, and schools (Ignatieff, 1978, Knott, 1986, Porter, 1994, Longmate, 2003, Wilson, 2002, Kennedy, 2004), all linked in a myriad of ways to the regulation of the economy. It was Jeremy Bentham whose utilitarian ideas and designs influenced the police, prisons, and workhouses, and he “in fact as well as spirit may be seen as the father of Victorian real politik” (Wilson, 2002, 38). Industrial capitalism and its superstructure thus matures’, creating new contradictions that the bourgeoisie has to overcome with new forms of dominance. Part of this political environment was a general fear of the dangerous classes in the nineteenth century by the wealthy and powerful (Lea 1997, 2002, Storch, 1975 in Fitzgerald et al, 1981, Stedman Jones, 1971, in Fitzgerald et al, 1981). Who argued in cataclysmic terms, that unless a new force of social discipline was imposed upon the masses then chaos would be the result (Thompson, 1968, 617).
Eighty Five percent of their arrests in the 1830s were for vagrancy, prostitution, drunkenness, disorderly behaviour, and common assault, while only 15 percent were for indictable offenses, most of these being petty larceny and pickpocketing… the new police were not... successful in detecting or deterring burlaries, robberies, and other major crimes” (Ignatieff, 1978, 185).
The law and the police were employed as an ad hoc modernising force, and aimed at the entire industrial working class instead of its’ periphery. A feature, that remains until far into the nineteenth century, prior to 1840 virtually all methods aimed at enforcing discipline over the working class were punitive and suppressive (Lea, 2002). As time progresses, the by now confident bourgeoisie pressed on with encouraging the new arbiters of official morality to rule working class areas, making labour accept the habits necessary to work for capital;
The imposition of the police brought the arm of municipal and state authority directly to bear upon key institutions of daily life in working class neighbourhoods, touching off a running battle with local custom and popular culture which lasted at least until the end of the century [Cohen, 1981, describes this process in the first decades of the 20th century]… the monitoring and control of the streets, pubs, racecourses, wakes, and popular fetes was a daily function of the ‘new police’… [this was] a direct complement to the attempts of urban middle class elites… to mould a labouring class amenable to new disciplines of both work and leisure (Storch, 1976, 481).
This is part of an overall strategy of governance and the building of a new social order including different disciplinary arenas e.g. asylums, police, factories, poor law, workhouses, welfare, prisons, and schools (Ignatieff, 1978, Knott, 1986, Porter, 1994, Longmate, 2003, Wilson, 2002, Kennedy, 2004), all linked in a myriad of ways to the regulation of the economy. It was Jeremy Bentham whose utilitarian ideas and designs influenced the police, prisons, and workhouses, and he “in fact as well as spirit may be seen as the father of Victorian real politik” (Wilson, 2002, 38). Industrial capitalism and its superstructure thus matures’, creating new contradictions that the bourgeoisie has to overcome with new forms of dominance. Part of this political environment was a general fear of the dangerous classes in the nineteenth century by the wealthy and powerful (Lea 1997, 2002, Storch, 1975 in Fitzgerald et al, 1981, Stedman Jones, 1971, in Fitzgerald et al, 1981). Who argued in cataclysmic terms, that unless a new force of social discipline was imposed upon the masses then chaos would be the result (Thompson, 1968, 617).
Azrael
circling Airstrip One
You really don't get it do you Chinless? The more abuse you spit, the more incompetent you prove yourself to be.Attica said:No - Teejay view is a liberal perspective (obviously bollox like your far right one). GO fuk yourself - i've better things to do
Good God man, even pbman managed the odd coherent point. Stopped clock and all that.
You are ... worse. How very, very embarassing.
The Black Hand
Unclean
Azrael said:
I wrote it. I can't be bothered to play ball with you you wanker - bluster all you like you still look the prat
Azrael
circling Airstrip One
http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?f...n=A16962F8-BDED-4EEB-977C594497D3409015482275Attica said:I wrote it. I can't be bothered to play ball with you you wanker - bluster all you like you still look the prat
That your work is it "Trevor"?
Azrael
circling Airstrip One
Come on Trev, gone shy?
Whoever's work it is, it isn't very good; p.617 of The Making of the English Working Class is on about Luddites, magistrates, and the inadequacy of local law enforcement. There's sod all about evil aristos talking up a "new force of social discipline" for the "masses", cataclysmically or otherwise.
So, got anything beside C&Ps of dubious veracity Trev?
Whoever's work it is, it isn't very good; p.617 of The Making of the English Working Class is on about Luddites, magistrates, and the inadequacy of local law enforcement. There's sod all about evil aristos talking up a "new force of social discipline" for the "masses", cataclysmically or otherwise.
So, got anything beside C&Ps of dubious veracity Trev?
The Black Hand
Unclean
Azrael said:
That is what I said - do you have learning difficulties?
The Black Hand
Unclean
Azrael said:
Your post is rubbish Azshole.
Azrael
circling Airstrip One
Not the kind that make me back up a claim with a reference that says something entirely different, no.Attica said:
If you actually wrote it of course. The author's ability to write in complete sentences, structure an argument (or, indeed, present an argument of any kind), avoid grunt-talk and drag their knuckles off the ground makes me ... suspicious.
Azrael
circling Airstrip One
Perhaps you'll answer me this: what exactly does some Sahara-dry academic piece about the history of the police have to do with the topic? Why are you cutting and pasting something you (allegedly) wrote instead of, you know, actually bothering to compose original answers in the same style?
Bit like the Queen are you Chinless? Only communicate in prepared speeches?
And what is the strange virus that afflicts you when you come on U75? You know, the one that transforms your writing style from Open University lecturer to monosyllabic pisshead.
Do tell. It is, after all, the time of year for miracles.
Bit like the Queen are you Chinless? Only communicate in prepared speeches?
And what is the strange virus that afflicts you when you come on U75? You know, the one that transforms your writing style from Open University lecturer to monosyllabic pisshead.
Do tell. It is, after all, the time of year for miracles.
I think you miss the point that there is nothing inherently wrong with giving a person a very early opportunity to admit / accept guilt and, effectively, choose summary justice in the form of a fixed penalty. That does not, of itself, conflict with any right to a fair trial or breach any presumption of innocence. The procedural safeguards and opportunities to elect a "normal" court trial if guilt is contested ensure that the processes you describe are, as designed, entirely consistent with Article 6 (Right to a Fair Trial).gosub said:
Azrael said:
Where's the evidence retribution works as a deterrent? I don't think there is any.
Azrael said:
Well the point is that you are asserting that retribution should be a part of a normally functioning justice system, and I'm disputing that. I'm not unaware of the motivation towards it, I'm asking whether it is really a desirable part of the 'social contract' or whatever at all.
Azrael said:
Where's the evidence retribution works as a deterrent? I don't think there is any.
Azrael said:
Well the point is that you are asserting that retribution should be a part of a normally functioning justice system, and I'm disputing that. I'm not unaware of the motivation towards it, I'm asking whether it is really a desirable part of the 'social contract' or whatever at all.
Compared to a lot of other places I think the justice system or perhaps more the popular perception of it here is highly oriented towards retribution, and is the UK a magically more crime-free place because of it? What about stoning, limb-chopping Saudi? Paradise of crime-free innocence?
Azrael
circling Airstrip One
Eight pages of pisshead-talk followed by a C&P is "great stuff"? Interesting definition you have there. 
Truly retributive practices such as penal servitude, a ban on tobacco, slopping out and general Spartan conditions have been abolished.
There's some evidence that penal servitude worked as a deterrent. In 1900 the (male) prison population was 14,460. With the exception of the world wars (when malefactors went into the forces) it has steadily risen throughout the 20th century. This has gone hand in hand with a softening of penal conditions, which are the only constant factor. (Major changes in police patrolling did not occur until the 1960s and 70s, and the prison population was higher after the Great Depression than during it.)Fruitloop said:Where's the evidence retribution works as a deterrent? I don't think there is any.
The "popular perception" is wrong: our justice system is not retributive. The only vestige of retribution left is imprisonment itself, and the onus on prison governors (no further punishment of inmates) suggests this is a fig leaf. Judges were told in the 1990s to gaol more often, but that was an Emperors New Clothes policy: Labour and Conservative governments have increased "early release", electronic tagging and "community sentences", and have not toughened prison conditions one jot.
Truly retributive practices such as penal servitude, a ban on tobacco, slopping out and general Spartan conditions have been abolished.
This current New Labour administration (for example) has created a new offence for every day in office, in which time the prison population has more or less doubled, so I think there may well be variables you are failing to take into account.
Personally I think that loss of liberty is punitive - I would certainly feel it was myself. In addition to which, the screws and prison system in general ensure a pretty high level of unpleasant experience and humiliation, like intentionally pairing mismatched cell-mates, abuse of prisoners, rape in prison etc etc, although this is probably not meted out in a proportionate way. I suspect that when prisoners msibehave though, they still have plenty of means at their disposal.
Personally I think that loss of liberty is punitive - I would certainly feel it was myself. In addition to which, the screws and prison system in general ensure a pretty high level of unpleasant experience and humiliation, like intentionally pairing mismatched cell-mates, abuse of prisoners, rape in prison etc etc, although this is probably not meted out in a proportionate way. I suspect that when prisoners msibehave though, they still have plenty of means at their disposal.
Azrael
circling Airstrip One
The prison population in 1997 was 61,114. It is now just over 80,000. (The system's absolute limit.) So it has not doubled, or anything close to it.Fruitloop said:
As for new laws bumping it up, it was on the rise long before Labour got to power, and that rise has continued.
Figures from 2001, of convicted male prisoners (51,313) by offence: violence, 11,189; sexual offences 5,039; housebreaking, 8,361; robbery, 6,561; fraud and forgery, 839; Drugs, 7,936; other offences (arson, criminal damage, DUI, blackmail, affray, perjury, drunkenness) 6,308.
Those are old offences. Labour's legislative overdrive is not to blame.
This is precisely my point: the removal of punishment and purpose has turned goals into violent and disordered slums. Prisoners should be punished uniformly, not at the whim of a gaoler/violent cellmate.
Luther Blissett
Nomadologist
Look - more reliance on GADGETS!
Lie detectors for welfare benefit claimants: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6528425.stm and http://politics.guardian.co.uk/homeaffairs/story/0,,2050811,00.html
What are they doing conducting interviews over the phone anyway? Is this the beginning of call-centre welfare? Who sold the Govt. this gadget, how much did it cost and what proof is there that it will reduce fraud effectively?
Lie detectors for welfare benefit claimants: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6528425.stm and http://politics.guardian.co.uk/homeaffairs/story/0,,2050811,00.html
What are they doing conducting interviews over the phone anyway? Is this the beginning of call-centre welfare? Who sold the Govt. this gadget, how much did it cost and what proof is there that it will reduce fraud effectively?
Azrael said:
You what? If you go to sea on a bogey don't moan when your leaden prose gets you in trouble.
You're 444 years old -yes?
What do you mean by this glib nonsense happy-phrase please?
Is there a pall for a Telegarf leader writer here?
Quick, read old papers. This is how a conservative talks. I'm a conservative. I'll talk like them.
That's adaptive, not conservative.
That's adaptive, not conservative.
rhys gethin
New Member
Azrael said:
Azrael - Before you depart, it seems to me that the likelihood of being caught is probably one of the vital points to weigh up. In a very simple agricultural society it would be high; now it's not.
The effectiveness of 'punishment' depends on that, but also on the capacities of the prisoners/criminals I should think. Going back to the capitalism bit, effective criminals succeed within the system and are seldom caught, whereas those it fails to educate/sells drugs to are so dopey they can be picked up very easily. The former end up in the House of Lords if smart enough, whereas torturing the latter by solitary confinement seems little more effective than subjecting them to bullying, rape and murder by slightly less ignorant criminals.
It strikes me that some community - the county they live in, the town, or whatever - should be made to compensate their victims instead, the richest citizens being forced to pay. That might see to it that people weren't just dumped out of the human race to rot, perhaps.
Gmart
Well-Known Member
Unfortunately if you don't have a world governement, or at least cooperation between governments, then countries compete for the rich people to live in their countries, thus leading to lower taxes etc.
Even the suggestion of cooperation even at a European level is strangely met with huge shouts of protest saying that they aren't like us and that it's a conspiracy against the UK etc. Until we learn to cooperate on certain issues, none of the evident fixes we need will be applied.
Even the suggestion of cooperation even at a European level is strangely met with huge shouts of protest saying that they aren't like us and that it's a conspiracy against the UK etc. Until we learn to cooperate on certain issues, none of the evident fixes we need will be applied.
Azrael said:
being locked up hasn't up.
The Black Hand
Unclean
Fruitloop said:Great stuff from Attica. Debates about the police and law enforcement always seem to take place in this ahistorical vacuum where everything that is, was, and always shall be, like something out of 1984.
Nice little potted history - bookmarked.
Ta. Yes, it is good, that i do know, and claims to be nothing more than it is...
Similar threads
