Live data from Hacker News

Raise the Crime Rate (2012)

nplusonemag.com

41–50 of 79 posts

Re: Raise the Crime Rate (2012)

#41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't attribute the gentleness of European customs to Marxism. Explicitly Marxist countries had the highest incarceration rates in history, because incarceration was used for class warfare with no pretense of "punishing" people for "crimes". I grew up in one of those countries, and I want to weep every time I see a Westerner advising someone to read Marx and Trotsky.

Marxism had a broad impact beyond "explicitly Marxist countries", and all of the latter were actually explicitly Leninist , which, despite claiming continuity with Marx, rejected core elements of Marx's theory of the necessary conditions for socialism and substituted them with top-down paternalistic vanguardism. (This was a general theme, even before Lenin, in Russian "Marxism" -- and certainly includes Trotsky, thou…

Let's not overcomplicate things. Marx believed in class struggle and had a favored side in that struggle. That's quite enough. If a government believes in class struggle and has a favored side, it's obvious that atrocities will follow. Same as with a government that believes in a master race.

Re: Raise the Crime Rate (2012)

#42
Our approach to crime here in the US strikes me as the dark underbelly of the myth of meritocratic rugged individualism. If success is individual in nature, failure must be as well, and it's much easier to dehumanize an entire class of "failures" when you believe that the blame lies entirely with them.

Re: Raise the Crime Rate (2012)

#43
post #28

Wow, very powerful article. I agree that our prison system is America's biggest moral wrong, and I hope that history books in 50 years write about how sad and unjust it is in our time. That said, does anyone know what proposed solutions are? When the author talks of abolishing the prison system in exchange for higher crime rates (and potentially even more deaths by the state), does he literally mean we should close a…

The max-security ones need to be kept. Some people are just bastards and can't be helped. Punishment has no effect on them - what we need is to lock them up for life. But that's maybe 5% or less of the prison population. Legalize drugs, and have a social security system that means no one has to steal and suddenly almost everyone else is out. The remainder need rehabilitation, which probably needs to happen in a priso…

> Some people are just bastards and can't be helped.

I'd say that's a difficult assertion to prove in a system that provides every incentive for recidivism. In addition, how would you (or anyone else) fairly evaluate who falls into this category?

Re: Raise the Crime Rate (2012)

#44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Marxism had a broad impact beyond "explicitly Marxist countries", and all of the latter were actually explicitly Leninist , which, despite claiming continuity with Marx, rejected core elements of Marx's theory of the necessary conditions for socialism and substituted them with top-down paternalistic vanguardism. (This was a general theme, even before Lenin, in Russian "Marxism" -- and certainly includes Trotsky, thou…

Let's not overcomplicate things. Marx believed in class struggle and had a favored side in that struggle. That's quite enough. If a government believes in class struggle and has a favored side, it's obvious that atrocities will follow. Same as with a government that believes in a master race.

Every government picks a side in the class struggle. Saudi America and the USA pick the rich to various degrees. Denmark chooses the lower middle class. Comparing the two it seems like choosing the rich causes far more atrocities their just less visible.

Unemployed to long, well sorry we no longer count you. Had your stuff stolen at a homeless shelter well sorry we don't count you. Got picked up for being in the wrong place at the wrong time, well feel free to tell that to the jury. Spending a year in prison awaiting trial, sorry your right to a speedy trial ends well before your actual trial. Prison rape? Sorry just another deterrent. Great you got out after a mere 10 years, best of luck finding a job!

PS: Atrocity's are on an absolute scale. Just because country your not as evil as the Khmer Rouge does not make everything ok.

Re: Raise the Crime Rate (2012)

#45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Marxism had a broad impact beyond "explicitly Marxist countries", and all of the latter were actually explicitly Leninist , which, despite claiming continuity with Marx, rejected core elements of Marx's theory of the necessary conditions for socialism and substituted them with top-down paternalistic vanguardism. (This was a general theme, even before Lenin, in Russian "Marxism" -- and certainly includes Trotsky, thou…

Let's not overcomplicate things. Marx believed in class struggle and had a favored side in that struggle. That's quite enough. If a government believes in class struggle and has a favored side, it's obvious that atrocities will follow. Same as with a government that believes in a master race.

> Yeah, that sounds exactly like the hedging that I've heard, "no true Marxism".

There are lots of things that draw on some parts of Marxism, but, in fact, there's no pure Marxism that's been implemented (not that I think there should be such a thing, either, but there hasn't, in fact.) The main Marxist-influenced things that have been influenced are:

1) Systems deriving, through Leninism, from the both Marxism and what's often called "Russian Marxism" (which, while influenced by actual Marxism, didn't so much follow it as arise roughly contemporaneously and interact with Marxism), which reject Marx's preconditions in favor of vanguardism and are implemented in societies which don't meet Marx's preconditions -- that is, Soviet Communism and its Maoist, etc., descendants

2) Systems which build from Marx's preconditions in societies which meet them, and apply large portions of the program Marx and Engels lay out in the Communist Manifesto (but omit other key portions of it), which -- because they are implemented in democratic societies where there is no absolute conformity among the decision-making parties -- are full of compromises, lack a strong coherent ideological commitment either in terms of goals or mechanisms (even if part of the society is explicitly Marxist), and which retain the broad outline of the capitalism (though the resulting system is very different from the thing 19th Century socialists branded "capitalism" because of the elements of socialism, including elements specifically drawn from Marxism, implemented) -- that is, the mixed economies of the modern West.

Neither of these is purely Marxist. The former pays more lip service to Marxism. The latter likes to call the former "Marxism" and distinguish itself as the opposition to Marxism, but actually more closely follows Marx's model than the former.

> Marx believed in class struggle and had a favored side in that struggle. That's quite enough.

That's a rather cartoonish description which has no utility beyond "rah! rah!" cheerleading for the not-Marxist team in a dualistic worldview that, like the more extreme interpretations of Marxism (as seen in "Marxist criticism", and very much akin to extreme "feminist criticism") sees all the world divided between two warring camps but, instead of social class, views them as polar Marxist and not-Marxist ideologies.

Re: Raise the Crime Rate (2012)

#46
post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's not overcomplicate things. Marx believed in class struggle and had a favored side in that struggle. That's quite enough. If a government believes in class struggle and has a favored side, it's obvious that atrocities will follow. Same as with a government that believes in a master race.

Every government picks a side in the class struggle. Saudi America and the USA pick the rich to various degrees. Denmark chooses the lower middle class. Comparing the two it seems like choosing the rich causes far more atrocities their just less visible. Unemployed to long, well sorry we no longer count you. Had your stuff stolen at a homeless shelter well sorry we don't count you. Got picked up for being in the wron…

>Spending a year in prison awaiting trial, sorry your right to a speedy trial ends well before your actual trial.

...Can you point me in the direction of these abuses? I was under the impression that most defendants usually declined the speedy trial option. I'd be interested to learn more.

Re: Raise the Crime Rate (2012)

#47
post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's not overcomplicate things. Marx believed in class struggle and had a favored side in that struggle. That's quite enough. If a government believes in class struggle and has a favored side, it's obvious that atrocities will follow. Same as with a government that believes in a master race.

Every government picks a side in the class struggle. Saudi America and the USA pick the rich to various degrees. Denmark chooses the lower middle class. Comparing the two it seems like choosing the rich causes far more atrocities their just less visible. Unemployed to long, well sorry we no longer count you. Had your stuff stolen at a homeless shelter well sorry we don't count you. Got picked up for being in the wron…

> Comparing the two it seems like choosing the rich causes far more atrocities their just less visible.

> US examples: Unemployed to long, well sorry we no longer count you. Had your stuff stolen at a homeless shelter well sorry we don't count you. Spending a year in prison awaiting trial, sorry your right to a speedy trial ends well before your actual trial.

These are your examples of atrocities which are supposed to be comparable to those in communist countries? Seriously?

Re: Raise the Crime Rate (2012)

#48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Marxism had a broad impact beyond "explicitly Marxist countries", and all of the latter were actually explicitly Leninist , which, despite claiming continuity with Marx, rejected core elements of Marx's theory of the necessary conditions for socialism and substituted them with top-down paternalistic vanguardism. (This was a general theme, even before Lenin, in Russian "Marxism" -- and certainly includes Trotsky, thou…

Let's not overcomplicate things. Marx believed in class struggle and had a favored side in that struggle. That's quite enough. If a government believes in class struggle and has a favored side, it's obvious that atrocities will follow. Same as with a government that believes in a master race.

Lets not simplify things to exactly the level of our own personal prejudices either.

>Marx believed in class struggle and had a favored side in that struggle. That's quite enough.

Enough for what?

>If a government believes in class struggle and has a favored side, it's obvious that atrocities will follow.

Because you said so?

Re: Raise the Crime Rate (2012)

#49
post #47
post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every government picks a side in the class struggle. Saudi America and the USA pick the rich to various degrees. Denmark chooses the lower middle class. Comparing the two it seems like choosing the rich causes far more atrocities their just less visible. Unemployed to long, well sorry we no longer count you. Had your stuff stolen at a homeless shelter well sorry we don't count you. Got picked up for being in the wron…

> Comparing the two it seems like choosing the rich causes far more atrocities their just less visible. > US examples: Unemployed to long, well sorry we no longer count you. Had your stuff stolen at a homeless shelter well sorry we don't count you. Spending a year in prison awaiting trial, sorry your right to a speedy trial ends well before your actual trial. These are your examples of atrocities which are supposed t…

"Seriously?" is not an argument. Neither is 'oh, please' or 'you must be really stupid to believe that' (for future reference.)

edit: If you feel the need to downvote this comment, pretend that it was "Whatever - communism wasn't so bad." and upvote it instead.

Re: Raise the Crime Rate (2012)

#50
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the problem is that the damage caused by imprisoning them is so much larger than the improvement experienced by everyone else. Is it? Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the US prison population just 0.00730843528654% of our country's total population? 0.99269156471346% of the US population experiencing lower violent crime is a larger improvement than the crimes suffered in prison. Wouldn't it be more effective if w…

> Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the US prison population just 0.00730843528654% of our country's total population? Citation needed. In fact, the figure is 0.94% in jail, and 2.9% in one or more of jail/probation/parole: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarceration_in_the_United_Sta... Quote: "According to the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), 2,266,800 adults were incarcerated in U.S. federal and state pris…

Oh I only counted the people actually inside a prison. I didn't think probation or parole counted in this argument since they're not locked up.

2,266,800 / 319,000,000 = 0.710595611% Forgot to move some decimals in my previous post

Post reply on HN