Would the police force exist in a Socialist world?
- This topic has 129 replies, 11 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 11 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
My personal opinion is that, for extreme criminals such as murderers, rapists and paedophiles, they should be put in prison for life, and when I say life, I mean LIFE!I must say it sickens me how the most extreme criminals who are guilty of crimes only get twenty one years. If they are a murderer, rapist or paedophile they should be in prison until the day they die and lose all access from the outside world.
Hi JonThanks for the reply. I am aware of the facts of what you say regarding the death penalty in todays society.Regarding the repeating of acts of extreme violence etc, within a socialist society being only to ensure non repeat of the offence. I imagine if the first act of violence someone performed was sufficiently extreme enough to warrant thoughts of execution, that person would probably find themselves incarcerated, probably for life, or until it was absolutely certain they were not a further danger. A socialist society would not be restricted, regarding resources to ensure that person was safe to rejoin society. We all know that resources for ill prisoners are severely limited within capitalism.The point behind my post, was to ascertain what motivates socialists to object to the killing of other humans in this context.I myself do not think the issue is as simple as some may think.But before anyone wishes to continue this particular line of discussion, it might be a good idea to ascertain if we are straying into off topic territory. Anyone know?
SocialistPunk, I think we are going slightly off topic, though in my opinion this doesn't matter too much because part of talking about the police service and law and order also talks about crime, penalties for crimes and crime prevention.
Hi AlexGood point. It is a bit off topic, but does have some relevance to the subject.Good to hear someone else who sees a bit of off topic as perfectly fine.What is your view regarding my question?
SocialistPunk, if you mean the question regarding having the death penalty in extreme cases, I think you brought up a very valid question here and this, in a socialist society, should be up for the people to decide. Personally I am completely neutral that, when it comes to extreme cases such as murders, rapes etc to whether we should give the death penalty to the criminals. So anyway, this matter, like all others in a socialist society, will be up for the people to democratically decide. All Power To The People!
The pre-WW1 Social Democratic movement (from which we emerged) was opposed to the death penalty on principle. Here's the leftwing Russian Social Democrat Julius Martov's passionate denunciation of the Bolsheviks for abandoning the abolition of the death penalty which they had once called for:
Quote:That Bolshevik party told you that socialists reject the death penalty, they reject the cold-blooded killing of unarmed criminals no longer capable of harm, they reject turning civilians into executioners, carrying out on court orders the foul business of depriving human beings, albeit criminal ones, of that greatest gift – life.That Bolshevik party told you then: so the Christian church, professing a religion of love for thy neighbour, hypocritically justifies the murder of a person by the state authorities and the state courts when it suits it. Socialism will never stoop to such hypocrisy, and will never use its religion, the religion of fraternity of working people, to sanctify the cannibalistic principle of the death penalty.ISTR Bernard Shaw thought there could be a socialist death penalty, but to avoid cruelty he felt the criminal should be secretly tried and then put to death in their sleep with no warning. Not remotely terrifying then (he felt that a life sentence was a form of cruel punishment so heinous you might as well kill them).The death penalty has many problems, from a political angle, do we want to have any machinery in our society that can have us killed? It's a pretty effective way for a minority who can control that machinery to come to dominance.Of the philosophies behind punishment, ISTR watching an old Open University programme that discussed retributivism and utilitarianism. Retributivist philosophy is that the punishment should be scaled to the crime (which is plain nonsnse, the death penalty for killing one person is the same as for killing ten, there is no metric to make a punishment actually match the harm, and any action comes with the added fact of the deliberateness of the public body inflicting the harm).Utilitarian punishment would be a deterrent: however, logically, that means the death penalty for parking offences but not for terrorist offences (killing a terrorist wouldn't deter them, so it would be inhuman to do that).The basic problem with the death penalty is it inflicts the self same harm that it purports to punish.And, while we're quoting:
Uncle Charlie wrote:Plainly speaking, and dispensing with all paraphrases, punishment is nothing but a means of society to defend itself against the infraction of its vital conditions, whatever may be their character. Now, what a state of society is that, which knows of no better Instrument for its own defense than the hangman, and which proclaims through the “leading journal of the world” its own brutality as eternal law?(http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1853/02/18.htm)Also worth reading is: http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1861/economic/ch33.htmI suspect he may be taking the piss…
Here's Kropotkin's take on all this in his article "Organised Vengeance Called 'Justice'":
Quote:So-called Justice is a survival from a past serfdom based, for the interest of the privileged classes, on the Roman law and on the ideas of divine Vengeance.In the history of society, organisation of Vengeance under the name of Justice is coterminous with the State; they imply one another; they were born together, flourished together and are doomed to perish together.Coming from an age of serfdom it helps to maintain serfdom in present society; through its police, prisons and the like, it is an open sore, throwing out a constant stream of purulence into society, a far greater evil than the one it is supposed to fight against.Any society founded on better economics than ours will certainly come also to the conclusion that it is unwise to keep any punitive institution.The way of doing without it will be found in voluntary arbitration, in greater effectual solidarity, in the powerful educative means which a society will have that does not leave to the policeman the care of its public morality.It is interesting to see a lot of quoting going on, but little answering.We don't have to look too far for examples of how a socialist society might deal with people who break rules. I need not spell it out. But it is an interesting example of how socialist values can be put to the test.
Are you conforming to the rules of behaviour because of peer pressure or because of a fear of a formal punishment?
I can envisage a situation in a socialist society where my personal interests don't appear to coincide with the interests of a handful of other motherfuckers. Actually, now I come to think of it, I can think of several situations…shit…there go the floodgates! That's what happens when you open your mind… Who's gonna police who? And what do we mean by 'policing'? "Call 911! There's a mad motherfucker climbing up the outside of the building next door with a manic grin on his face!" "What seems to be the problem, madam?" "Well, he might fall, and he's got no ropes. Who's going to clean up the mess?" See? We can police ourselves far better than anyone in a stupid uniform. More of which after I've had a big row with the crazy woman that I live with, who, I might mention, likes to throw bulky objects at my head! Where's the polis when you need them?
ALB- peer pressure certainly not, at 14 I refused to be confirmed inspite of the sticks and carrots. A situation which lead to a stand off with me and my mother for the rest of her natural. Formal punishment? Well given that capitalism is a system which runs on legalised robbery and legalised murder it is not too hard for the 5% who own almost everything to indulge in behaviour which would see members of the 95% who own nothing imprisoned or worse. Whether it is a crime or not seems to depend which class you belong to, its not a case of one law for the rich and one for the poor so much as no law for the rich. Were I to drunkenly drive my car and kill or maim people then I would expect to be punished, whether I am capable of such logical thinking after the tenth pint is another matter. Maybe without the pressures of this evil system I wouldnt need the first pint let alone the tenth. In the present system the landlord is acting in his own interests to sell me more alcohol. Were it to occur in socialism I rather hope he would take my keys and call me a taxi or recommend a brisk walk to sober up.
SocialistPunk wrote:Sorry Jon, I would find myself in trouble.ALB wrote:Are you conforming to the rules of behaviour because of peer pressure or because of a fear of a formal punishment?In this instance it has more to do with a form of punishment. I would not be allowed to discuss a form of behaviour modification/punishment being used by socialists, despite the very relevant nature of the topic of punishment being discussed here. If that is not ironic then…..I expect this post will be flagged as well.My point being, that any form of punishment or behaviour modification via socialisation that a socialist society may find necessary should, in my opinion, reflect socialist values. Values that put people at the top of the agenda. I am talking about, understanding, tolerance, patience, co operation, openness, even empathy and compassion. Some of those things are rarely ever mentioned by socialists.So to get back to the idea of a death penalty. I am against it simply because the calculated taking of another persons life contradicts the values I have just outlined.Ooops! I think I have just strayed into morality territory.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.