Look. I am very supportive of the goals of the prison abolition movement, and am not worried about what a post-prison society will look like.
But "let's name our project a very deceptive name that sounds extreme and simple, and then condescend to people when they ask what is up with that" is the very definition of a political own goal.
Like no, there is no praxis that benefits from "refuse to explain what your movement is about and patronize people who even ask." It's just emotional self-indulgence and in-group politics.
A non-cartoon version of this happened recently, which may be of interest to some people curious about the long-form non-answer.
The New York Editorial Board: Darializa Avila Chevalier on Housing, Immigration, & Her Run for Congress in New York's 13th District (Substack)
Nicole Gelinas Just speaking of human rights and human dignity, youâve been a prison abolitionist, a decarceralist. What should happen to somebody who has killed somebody else? I mean, I went to a sentencing last week, a man killed another man, didnât know the person, just sitting on a stoop, got a 18-year prison sentence. Should that person not go to prison? And what should happen instead?
Darializa Avila Chevalier So, you know, for prison abolitionists, I think a lot of folks misunderstand what that vision of the world actually is. And it is one that actually centers this question of harm. At the heart of what weâre asking is: What, why is it that there is so much harm in our society?
She dodges the question at length. One of the journalists presses "But what do you do to the murderer though?" and Chevalier dodges it again, and a third time, and a fourth time, and her closing remark on murder is "I have always focused my attention on how do we create systems where thatâs not even the possibility."
âOh, I think they should be executed on the spot.â
âWell that was a bit more based than I was expecting.â
In my experience most self-proclaimed prison abolitionists really just want to reform the prison system to be more humane and focused on rehabilitation(goals I can generally get behind btw)Those who actually DO want to abolish prisons fall into one of two categories:
-The incredibly naive who think people will just stop committing crimes if we just implement their preferred social policies
-Sociopaths who want to be able to curb stomp people they dont like 'nazis' without repercussions.
People in the first(and largest) group have developed a complex set of mental gymnastics to gaslight themselves into believing that 'abolish prisons' doesnt actually mean 'abolish prisons' and so anybody acting like it does just causes them to blue-screen out.
People in the second category think questions like 'what about murderers?' are self-evidently stupid because 'there wont be murderers in my perfect prison-free utopia'(They are, as I said, incredibly naive)
People in the third group know that nobody would support them if they gave an honest answer, so they just dont.
One of the problems with the second category is the problem common to all Utopians: when reality fails to live up to their expectations, what will they do? Will they attempt to adjust their ideas to match reality? Or will they punish people for not being able to achieve The Impossible? Unfortunately, historical patterns suggest that the second is more likely.
Considering the 2nd group really idolizes the Reign of Terror, I have a feeling you are correct.
I think I can get behind prison abolition, if punishment was mapped from what the standard sentence was to a number of lashes or execution for sentences above 5 years.
And we would need to ensure that the right to a speedy trial meant 1 day court cases. Murder on Monday, trial on Tuesday, firing squad on Wednesday.
Such edge. Much emo.
Ace Attorney is supposed to be satire. Not a game plan.
