Reviews of two books on anarchism's approach to crime prevention and punishment
---- Review of Jacques Lesage de La Haye, The Abolition of Prison ---- Anthony J.Nocella II, Mark Seis, & Jeff Shantz (Eds.), Classic Writings in AnarchistCriminology; A Historical Dismantling of Punishment and Domination. ---- JamieDimon is the CEO and chairman of JPMorgan Chase & Company, and apparentlysomething of a philanthropist. In a recent column in the New York Times (8/8/21),he begins, "One in three American adults-more than 70 million people-have sometype of criminal record...about the same number of Americans[as]have collegedegrees....Nearly half of formerly incarcerated people are unemployed one yearafter leaving prison. That is a moral outrage."So it is, but what to do about the high rate of arrests, of imprisonment, and ofpost-prison unemployment? Chairman Dimont wants to find jobs for newly releasedconvicts, but what about all that incarceration in the first place?Many people think that anarchists and other prison abolitionists simply wantsociety more-or-less as it is, but with no police, no courts, no laws, and noprisons. "Common sense" tells them that such a society (if it could miraculouslycome into existence) would quickly devolve into chaos ("anarchy"). Criminalswould have a field day-except in the neighborhoods of the very rich, who wouldhire private security guards. Eventually, a new repressive state would be formedby either organized crime or the professional rent-a-cops (or both together).Oddly enough, there are people who advocate something like this:pseudo-"libertarian" right-wingers (some of whom call themselves"anarcho-capitalists," which is not a thing). Even the liberal program of "defundthe police" is often misinterpreted to mean "abolish the police"-now, in thissociety. However, it is pretty easy to argue that our current society, as it isorganized with its marketplace in goods and people, its inequality, its poverty,its white supremacy, its sexism, its dog-eat-dog morality, its constant wars, andits general lovelessness-could not exist without repressive laws, police, courts,and prisons. Certainly, things could be made more humane, rational, andflexible-but to altogether abolish prisons, etc., is beyond the scope ofcapitalism and the state."Only a true social revolution can bring the end of punishment byimprisonment.... ‘A society without prisons can only be a society that doesn'tneed prisons.' All the anarchists agree in saying that prison cannot disappearwithout a radical change of society taking place." (Lesage de La Haye; pp. 8 &18) And yet this is often used as a justification for law, police, and prisons.Let us imagine a different kind of society (call it anarchy, socialist democracy,small-c communism, or a realistic utopia). It would be a prosperous society witha comfortable life for everyone, decent work for all which is productive and evencreative, plenty of leisure and free time, equality in all areas includingeveryone's standard of living, democratic participation in decision making inindustry and community affairs, freedom and respect for women, equality for allracial and ethnic groups, sexual freedom among consenting adults, few limitationson "softer" drugs, and treating more dangerous drugs as issues of public health.Finally, it would have an ideology-taught from childhood-of cooperation, mutualrespect, and individual autonomy.Is it not also "common sense" that there would then be a great deal less crime ofany sort, a big decrease in violence, anti-social aggression, abuse of women andof children? I do not say that all anti-social behavior would vanish. But eventoday, Lesage de La Haye estimates, based on current research, only about fivepercent of those convicted are "clearly dangerous" having committed "rape,murder, hostage situations, assault with a deadly weapon, shootings." (p. 95)Especially in the period of the transition to a new society, a generation willstill show the effects of having been raised in the loveless world of capitalism.But it is not necessary to assume that humans will ever be perfect and withoutflaws. Kropotkin wrote that under anarchism, "There surely will remain a limitednumber of persons whose anti-social passions...may still be a danger for thecommunity." (Nocella et al.; p. 168)There is a widespread misconception that anarchists think that people are"naturally" good. Anarchists do think that people are capable of goodness,especially if in a society which encourages cooperation and mutual respect. Butanarchists also think that humans are capable of badness. This is a major reasonwhy people should not have power over other people; "power corrupts." Thereforeanarchists want to get rid of politicians, bureaucrats, businesspeople, police,wardens, and prison guards.If there is a lot less anti-social action in a good society, then that remainingbad behavior can be dealt with in a much less repressive, more rational, andcompassionate fashion. In their "Introduction," Nocella et al. write, "In ananarchist society, state definitions of crime would disappear, but conflictbetween humans would remain. The nonhierarchical and noncoercive strategiesdefining transformative justice will, to some degree, always be necessary." (p. 14)Two BooksThese two books deal with anarchist views of crime and punishment, especially inrelation to prisons. The little book by Jacques Lesage de La Haye covers his ownhistory as a delinquent, his self-education in prison, his efforts to formfamily-like communities to help young delinquents, and his general research onthe topic of abolition of prisons. Anthony Nocella II, Mark Seis, and Jeff Shantzhave edited a collection of writings by early anarchists on the subject of crimeand imprisonment. The "classic" authors included are William Godwin (a majorprecursor of anarchism), P.-J. Proudhon (the first to call himself an"anarchist"), Mikhail Bakunin (a founder of revolutionary anarchism), PeterKropotkin (a major theorist of anarchist-communism), the Haymarket martyrs AugustSpies and Michael Schwab, Errico Malatesta, Voltairine de Claire, Lucy Parsons,Alexander Berkman, and Emma Goldman. Much of their selected writings covergeneral anarchist themes of opposition to the state and capitalism as abackground to considering crime and punishment. I am not going to go over eachwriter's contribution, but rather review some overall themes of thesefoundational anarchists, together with Lesage de La Haye.The anarchist authors all agree that laws, legislatures, police, courts, andprisons (and executioners) exist to maintain the power and wealth of thecapitalist class and its state officials. These laws justify the greatest"crimes" of all, the robbery and murder of the people of this country and theworld by the bourgeoisie and its state forces These laws and the conditions theyuphold are the main creators of the crime, violence, and anti-social aggressionfrom below. This is the starting point of the anarchist analysis of crime andpunishment.Of the conditions of suffering and oppression, the classical anarchists reprintedhere focus on poverty and class exploitation. These socioeconomic factors areextremely important to relate to crime and punishment. However, there is only onediscussion of women's oppression (by Emma Goldman) and none of racial injustice(except for a brief passage by de Cleyre about the evil of lynching). This is nota limitation of the editors but of the revolutionary anarchists of the time.An anarchist-socialist society would still have rules of some sort. Kropotkindistinguishes between "two currents of custom," which lay the basis for twocurrents in the laws. These are, "the maxims which represent principles ofmorality and social union wrought out as a result of life in common, and themandates which are meant to ensure...inequality." (Nocella et al.; p. 141) Thisis the "double character of law." The first current is based on socialinteraction and mutual aid, while the second current props up the exploiter, thepriest, and the king. "It must be utterly destroyed on the day when the peopledesire to break their chains." (p. 142)All the writers look at the irrationality of the laws and the penalties forbreaking them, above all of incarceration. Punishment and retribution (reallyrevenge) are denounced as unworthy motives for dealing with harms caused byindividuals-especially in a society which has harmed these and other individualsat least as much. The only just motive for coercing anti-social actors would beto protect society from their aggression. Yet the current system is not veryeffective at that. The people arrested, tried, and sent to prison, mostly comeout of prison eventually. Few have been improved and many have been worsened.Many will again break the law and be sent back to prison.As an argument against the punishment of criminals, several of the authors arguethat individuals' actions are determined by previous conditions, Therefore theyshould not be blamed if they act harmfully towards others. (This is argued inpassages by Godwin, Bakunin, and de Cleyre.) Certainly everyone's behavior isformed by the interaction of heredity with their biological and socialenvironment. But people do make choices and decisions and may be held responsiblefor them. This is not a justification for prisons, anymore than it is forwhipping blocks, torture, or burning at the stake.It is not hard to show the evils of prisons. Causing great suffering, they do notpretend to "rehabilitate" their inmates. "Rehabilitation" implies that there is agood society in which some aberrant people have broken the rules, therefore theycan be re-adjusted to the good society. Yet actually, we have a bad society inwhich some people have followed the general competitive,get-over-on-the-other-guy, philosophy, but have done poorly at it. Of courserehabilitation does not work, although I hope Chairman Dimon can find some goodjobs for a number of former inmates. (My barber, a good-hearted man, told me thathe had offered to teach prisoners his art, until he learned that convicted felonswere not eligible for a barber's license.)What Then?The Nocella et al. editors summarize the view of Malatesta: "Anarchists, unlikeauthoritarians, do not claim to hold an infallible formula for ending crime asauthoritarians propose through laws and force." (p. 179) As he advocated in otherareas of social organization, Malatesta proposed experimentation with differentapproaches to maintaining public safety. He responded to a fellow anarchist whoadvocated the communal organization of public safety in a form similar toagencies for public health or transportation, under popular control. ButMalatesta was opposed to a specialized or permanent police force, fearing that itwould become a new oppressor. Anarchists and revolutionary Marxists have longadvocated some sort of popular militia (an organized, armed, people) to replacethe police and army.How would people in a free society deal with social conflicts and harms? "What isthe best method for settling problems and conflicts within a collective? We allknow it: dialogue, reconciliation, discussion-in short, mediation. It has alwaysexisted." (Lesage de La Haye p. 77)Lesage de La Haye tells the story of the Indigenous people of Guerrero, in theCosta Montana region of Mexico. (Pp. 67-70) 63 villages formed a federation withlocally elected "police captains," judges, and overall committees. Offenders aretreated with mediation, re-education, and reparations-no prisons (the Mexicanstate was not happy about that). Covering about a hundred thousand people, it haslasted for over ten years (at the time of this publication). He also refers toother examples of successful community management of public safety around the world.Movements against the police and prisons have burst out in the US and around theworld. They are part of broader rebellions against state repression and the stateitself, against exploitation and capitalism itself, against ecologicaldestruction and the whole capitalist-statist-nature-destroying system. These twobooks are valuable contributions to that struggle.ReferencesLesage de La Haye, Jacques (2021). The Abolition of Prison (trans. ScottBranson). Chico CA: AK Press.Nocella II, Anthony J.; Seis, Mark; & Shantz, Jeff (Eds.). (2020). ClassicWritings in Anarchist Criminology; A Historical Dismantling of Punishment andDomination. Chico CA: AK Press.* written for Anarcho-Syndicalist Reviewhttps://www.anarkismo.net/article/32481_________________________________________A - I N F O S N E W S S E R V I C EBy, For, and About AnarchistsSend news reports to A-infos-en mailing listA-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten