Death penalty: executing the evidence?

D

decons

scrambled egg
Registered Senior Member
I was reading an Amnesty International article about future abolition of death penalty in Russia. Although I don't live in Russia or any other country with death penalty, it felt good.

It kind of makes sense as the next logical step in body politics of human justice system that has been evolving since the first questions raised against public executions and tortures which are still practiced but not widely preferred in our world. Even if it is only for "the inherent dangers of the wrongful use of the death penalty"(*).

Discussions that started more than 200 years ago, about the social effects of punishment, were also about what to do with the body of the criminal. In the old days it belonged to the sovereign king or queen, thus s/he could demonstrate the power over the body through public execution and torture. If the body now belongs to the society, they argued, it must serve the public. Michel Foucault quoting 18th century French lawyer Antoine-Gaspard Boucher d'Argis:

"Far more telling than death would be 'the example of a man who is ever before one's eyes, whom one has deprived of liberty and who is forced to spend the rest of his days repairing the loss that he has caused the society'"(**)​

Boucher d'Argis' point is even more relevant in our world where prevention of violence, at least in discourse, is more valued than vengeance of power. If a crime caused an injury on the society, then the criminal is the only clue towards finding the social basis of the crime. A dead criminal is a missing body of evidence that is detailed by a life lived in the society.

Is it possible to expect a society/world free from violent crimes, if the killing is practiced as a legitimate form of justice in the society/world?




(*) www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates...-step-closer-death-penalty-abolition-20091120
(**) Foucault, Michel (1975). Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. p.109 (Trans. Alan Sheridan)
 
Last edited:
Foucault, was quite a strange person and a strange branch of sociology (at least to my mind). He basically argues against freedom at all. He argues that we all belong to sociaty and that sociaty should dictate every aspect of our lives, including illness. His "Sick roll" basically says that if your sick you get exused from your duties if you take up other duties, ie obeying the doctors who tell you what you must do. Personally i dont like the implications of his arguments which work against the pts right to decide on treatment. Further more he argues that none of us can be trusted, his branch of sociology is responcable for medical certificates to PROVE your sick to an employer for instance
 
Asguard said:
Foucault, was quite a strange person and a strange branch of sociology (at least to my mind). He basically argues against freedom at all. He argues that we all belong to sociaty and that sociaty should dictate every aspect of our lives, including illness. His "Sick roll" basically says that if your sick you get exused from your duties if you take up other duties, ie obeying the doctors who tell you what you must do. Personally i dont like the implications of his arguments which work against the pts right to decide on treatment. Further more he argues that none of us can be trusted, his branch of sociology is responcable for medical certificates to PROVE your sick to an employer for instance
Click to expand...

He was a great historian. This book is a detailed account of how the concept of punishment evolved throughout centuries.
 
decons said:
Is it possible to expect a society/world free from violent crimes, if
Click to expand...

The obvious answer is NO, so I removed the conditional part of your sentence, because it was irrelevant...
 
Syzygys said:
The obvious answer is NO, so I removed the conditional part of your sentence, because it was irrelevant...
Click to expand...

Foucault quotes historian Pierre Chaunu:

"...Crime became less violent long before punishment became less severe. But this transformation cannot be separated from several underlying processes. The first of these, as P. Chaunu observes, was a change in the operation of economic pressures, a general rise in the standard of living, a large demographic expansion, an increase in wealth and property, and 'a consequent need in security'..." (p. 76, Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison)​
 
Last edited:
The severity of crimes has to do with economy, not with punishment.
 
Yes only Innocent people have been put to death just ask them they will tell you.
 
decons said:
I was reading an Amnesty International article about future abolition of death penalty in Russia. Although I don't live in Russia or any other country with death penalty, it felt good.

It kind of makes sense as the next logical step in body politics of human justice system that has been evolving since the first questions raised against public executions and tortures which are still practiced but not widely preferred in our world. Even if it is only for "the inherent dangers of the wrongful use of the death penalty"(*).

Discussions that started more than 200 years ago, about the social effects of punishment, were also about what to do with the body of the criminal. In the old days it belonged to the sovereign king or queen, thus s/he could demonstrate the power over the body through public execution and torture. If the body now belongs to the society, they argued, it must serve the public. Michel Foucault quoting 18th century French lawyer Antoine-Gaspard Boucher d'Argis:

"Far more telling than death would be 'the example of a man who is ever before one's eyes, whom one has deprived of liberty and who is forced to spend the rest of his days repairing the loss that he has caused the society'"(**)​

Boucher d'Argis' point is even more relevant in our world where prevention of violence, at least in discourse, is more valued than vengeance of power. If a crime caused an injury on the society, then the criminal is the only clue towards finding the social basis of the crime. A dead criminal is a missing body of evidence that is detailed by a life lived in the society.

Is it possible to expect a society/world free from violent crimes, if the killing is practiced as a legitimate form of justice in the society/world?




(*) www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates...-step-closer-death-penalty-abolition-20091120
(**) Foucault, Michel (1975). Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. p.109 (Trans. Alan Sheridan)
Click to expand...


i agree i think it should be removed for many reasons 1 in particular
 
It is not about how guilty they are. Is death penalty a solution to rehabilitate a society?
 
decons said:
"Far more telling than death would be 'the example of a man who is ever before one's eyes, whom one has deprived of liberty and who is forced to spend the rest of his days repairing the loss that he has caused the society'"(**)​
Click to expand...
So how is a guy sitting in prison being provided food, shelter, and healthcare repairing the loss he has caused society? Every penny spent to support a murderer simply inflicts further loss upon society.
 
madanthonywayne said:
So how is a guy sitting in prison being provided food, shelter, and healthcare repairing the loss he has caused society? Every penny spent to support a murderer simply inflicts further loss upon society.
Click to expand...

I guess Boucher d'Argis means something more constructive than sitting in a cell. They were not isolated individuals. They each represent a shortcoming of the society. Society would be served well if their personal experiences are used to pinpoint the conditions in which a particular kind of crime occur.
 
Syzygys said:
The severity of crimes has to do with economy, not with punishment.
Click to expand...
Poverty is no excuse to commit crimes . Millions if not billions of poor people are law abiding citizens and nice to meet and live in their neighborhood .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top