Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I spent 29 years in solitary confinement (2010)

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 265 posts

Re: I spent 29 years in solitary confinement (2010)

#21

Post by Banthum »

coldtea wrote: post #10
mnm1 wrote: post #2

If being imprisoned and enslaved isn't cruel and unusual punishment, I don't know what is. The constitution doesn't prohibit shit with its useless words in this case.

I always found the faith in the revered interpretations of some constitutional document written centuries ago, and the respect for the "Founding Fathers" not as historical figures, but as some kind of guiding lights for today, totally bizarro. Even the name "Founding Fathers" and the way it's thrown around seems quite bizarre for a democracy. It's the people, and the will of the people, that should be respected, not…

The reason we normalize everyone believing a corpus of core texts is not because we think those core texts are smarter than anything else that could be written or will be written.

It's because to organize a huge number of people, one must create commonalities among them. Any society must have core beliefs, myths, touchstones, and practices, to keep it unified and keep people cooperating and trusting each other.

The founding fathers, their writings and ideals, form the civil religion that makes a rich black Texan Catholic have some reason to trust a poor white Washingtonian atheist. Even though they may be different in so many ways, they at least have this one thing in common, which separates them together from the wider world of Others.

To cooperate properly, humans need this kind of tribal identity correspondence, and an Other to separate themselves from. It's in-built tribal psychology.

Even if those texts prescribe practices are sometimes sub-optimal in outcome, without them the whole society falls apart pretty quickly due to infighting and unsolvable differences in values and identities.

So the value in the texts is not just policy wisdom - it is simply that they are the thing everyone believes in.

This is what's happening now, in fact - a fetish for destroying normative beliefs means people more and more have nothing in common. People just didn't understand the purpose those beliefs had in the first place. They threw them away and now here we are.

(None of this is to say that the content of the texts is totally irrelevant - a society organized around the writings of the founding fathers is obviously going to be different than a society organized around the writings of Confucius, or the texts of Islam. It just means the content isn't the only reason we hold onto these texts).

Re: I spent 29 years in solitary confinement (2010)

#23

Post by srean »

robschia wrote: post #3

I don't even know how to start. The US present themselves as paragons of freedom, and then they blatantly violate every kind of basic human right.

Oh that is branding. I am sure you know enough history to take that cheerleading seriously. Then there is united states the noble protectors of the notion of the free market.

Brand making and propaganda comes and goes. Everyone of influence does what is most convenient and beneficial for them to do and leave the rest to the ad agencies. Every empire brands itself as a golden empire. Its nothing new.

Re: I spent 29 years in solitary confinement (2010)

#24

Post by hellcow »

arcticbull wrote: post #7

Honestly, I find the US prison system absolutely horrifying in all respects. As satisfying as it may be for victims to feel the person that did something to them is 'gone' they will eventually be let out, and when they do I want them to be ready to integrate with society. Recidivism rates in the US show it is objectively not working, with state prisons leaving inmates to re-offend 76% of the time. [1] In Norway, much…

You're absolutely right. Looking for a solution here, the central problem with the US prison system seems to be the incentive structure.

Private prisons are paid based on how many inmates they have. Prisons are therefore incentivized to keep people as long as possible, and ensure that if a convict is ever released, that person commits another crime quickly and winds up back in prison.

Instead, what if the state paid prisons a one-time fee for accepting convicts (the amount would vary depending on the type of crime committed), and then penalized the prisons heavily for any recidivism after release?

Prisons would be incentivized to rehabilitate and free the prisoner as quickly as possible (since every additional day in prison costs them money) while minimizing the chance of that prisoner committing another crime when released. You'd see prisons offer education opportunities, vocational training, valuable job programs, relocation to other areas, ongoing therapy, and living conditions befitting a human being to reduce recidivism.

Re: I spent 29 years in solitary confinement (2010)

#26

Post by pillowkusis »

arcticbull wrote: post #7

Honestly, I find the US prison system absolutely horrifying in all respects. As satisfying as it may be for victims to feel the person that did something to them is 'gone' they will eventually be let out, and when they do I want them to be ready to integrate with society. Recidivism rates in the US show it is objectively not working, with state prisons leaving inmates to re-offend 76% of the time. [1] In Norway, much…

the challenge is that literally nobody is incentivized to make changes to this system.

the situation is really bad for politicians. A politican voting to reform a clearly broken prison system faces tons of risks to their career.

Even one wrong vote for improving the prison system will get you labeled as "soft on crime," a dangerous liability for Democrats and nearly a death sentence for Republicans.

Every change you make will inevitably produce a litany of stories about criminal X who was given "too little" punishment. The media will pick these highly emotional narratives up and the blame will be laid at your feet.

You can gain great political capital by making prisions more harsh (who doesn't like seeing a guilty man get punished?) but expose yourself to a ton of downside risk for trying to go the other way.

Nothing about this situation changes until societal perspectives change or politicians don't have to face downside risk for trying reform.

Re: I spent 29 years in solitary confinement (2010)

#27

Post by brightball »

koenigdavidmj wrote: post #19
coldtea wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always found the faith in the revered interpretations of some constitutional document written centuries ago, and the respect for the "Founding Fathers" not as historical figures, but as some kind of guiding lights for today, totally bizarro. Even the name "Founding Fathers" and the way it's thrown around seems quite bizarre for a democracy. It's the people, and the will of the people, that should be respected, not…

The will of the people on 2001-09-12 would be to get rid of jury trials and allow arbitrary searches and seizures. People are emotional and dumb, and sometimes it is helpful to build an intentional slowness into the process. If it's truly the will of the people, you should have no problem getting 2/3 of Congress to agree on it, followed by 3/4 of state legislatures.

Exactly. The Constitution is the result of a negotiation of different states with variable sizes and concerns that did a pretty amazing job balancing everything...up until the point that the federal government started to grow significantly and centralize power post civil war leading to the size it is today.

Re: I spent 29 years in solitary confinement (2010)

#28

Post by mallaidh »

coldtea wrote: post #17
mallaidh wrote: post #11

A note: Herman Wallace was released on October 1, 2013 because of advanced liver cancer. The state reindicted him on October 3, but he died the next day a free man. Albert Woodfox was released in February 2016. The Angola 3 were held in solitary confinement for more than 100 years combined, with Woodfox's 43 years of solitary being the longest of any American prisoner.

Anything beyond a few weeks or a month in solitary confinement should be illegal and punishable by law the same as torture. And with no loopholes for joining many smaller stays to a long big stay.

Even a week is too long, the effects on the brain can be measured by EEG within a few days, specifically a state of stupor and delirium. The psychological effects are dangerous and permanent.

Re: I spent 29 years in solitary confinement (2010)

#29

Post by spiderfarmer »

arcticbull wrote: post #7

Honestly, I find the US prison system absolutely horrifying in all respects. As satisfying as it may be for victims to feel the person that did something to them is 'gone' they will eventually be let out, and when they do I want them to be ready to integrate with society. Recidivism rates in the US show it is objectively not working, with state prisons leaving inmates to re-offend 76% of the time. [1] In Norway, much…

Add that to the long list of things that needed an overhaul in the US. Education, healthcare, minimum wage, the war on drugs, gun control. All things with that contribute to the enormous prison population in the US that are in dire need of an overhaul. But it will probably never happen because of widespread corruption and anti-intellectualism.

Re: I spent 29 years in solitary confinement (2010)

#30

Post by DennisP »

coldtea wrote: post #10
mnm1 wrote: post #2

If being imprisoned and enslaved isn't cruel and unusual punishment, I don't know what is. The constitution doesn't prohibit shit with its useless words in this case.

I always found the faith in the revered interpretations of some constitutional document written centuries ago, and the respect for the "Founding Fathers" not as historical figures, but as some kind of guiding lights for today, totally bizarro. Even the name "Founding Fathers" and the way it's thrown around seems quite bizarre for a democracy. It's the people, and the will of the people, that should be respected, not…

The Constitution isn't just a historical document, it's the law. It's certainly open to change by the will of the people, and it defines a process for doing so, which has been used seventeen times.

It's not the only law we interpret this way, considering the intent of the people who created it; courts do the same with laws passed by Congress.

Post reply on HN