Example: I believe that IP is a direct contradiction of nature, sacrificing the advancement of humanity and the world for selfish gain, and therefore is sinful.
Edit: pls do not downvote the comments this is a constructive discussion
Edit2: IP= intellectal property
Edit3: sort by controversal
It’s gatekeeping. As far as I can tell, the stated goals are never the actual point in practice. Which sucks, because there’s a lot of important issues.
I don’t know the word “gatekeeping” well but maybe that’s it. I was specifically thinking about a situation I had to witness. Two men, one of them being my friend, celebrating about a political action that went well. Except one of the group, a woman, got caught and was facing prison charges. The two men started to rejoice about how the trial would be a great place for her to claim their ideas in front of the judges and the press, make it a political trial. All this time, the woman was literally trembling for a very good reason : she was afraid of going to jail, she didn’t want that.
This scene made me realize if there’s some kind of collective emancipation to be find somewhere it’s not in this kind of act of purety. People should do what they want and can at a certain point in their lives. Not me forced into becoming the martyrs they don’t want to be because it’s a good thing to do “for the cause”.
Found a libertarian.
Wait what does libertarian mean in English. Because with use two words, “libertaire” and “” libertarian" in French and although I’d gladly identify as the first, I have nothing but contempt for the second.
How would you deal with violent crimes (murder, rape, abuse, things that are considered morally reprehensible by most people, regardless of religion and affiliation) without a penal system? Mob punishment?
I would suggest this article as an introduction to penal abolition.
But, to sum some common abolitionist answers, I would say :
Here’s a more easily readable version that doesn’t require a download:
https://sci-hub.st/https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00728496
Restorative justice programs have been implemented in Indigenous Canadian communities with higher success than the existing contemporary justice system. With high recursion and incarceration rates for indigenous people, those programs address the root of crime without punishment while still holding perpetrators accountable. Most importantly, it’s done in a way that seeks to support rather than re-victimize those affected by crime.
I absolutely agree with the abolishionist movement but hadn’t known till now that it was large scale and worldwide. I agree with the changes being made locally without understanding the whole philosophy, basically. Thanks for giving me a good reason to learn more about it.
My pleasure, really! Ruth Morris and Kaba are, for me, the two insisting the most on the link between first nations practices of restauration and possible ways to start an abolitionniste strain from there, if you’re interested in these…
As for the movement in general, it started to grow in the 60’s. Mainly driven by professors of law and critical criminology, on the one side, prisoners movements and unions on the other side. A great deal of anarchists, a lot of religious people, a few moral radicalists. Many had a common experience of nazi camps. That may be too simple of an explanation, but some of them explicitly state that to account for their interest in prison and hatred for the penal system.
I appreciate that. I’m going to see if there’s anything published on/by them at my local library. (not sarcastic I love the library)
deleted by creator
Among penal abolitionist, there are minimalists and maximalists. To better understand how some abolitionists can think that in some residual cases, a segregative solution may be used, one needs to keep in mind that penal abolitionism wants the abolition of the penal system, i.e. a special form of cooperation between police, courts and prison.
Some others would disagree, though. I would personally disagree, but with fellow abolitionist, I try to keep an open mind and understand we basically strive for the same thing.
One important thing : it is commonly accepted among abolitionists that one is stuck with what tools are at their disposition to seek justice. As such, no abolitionist will ever tell a victim what he or she should do. Even one of the most radical contemporary one, like Mariam Kaba, seeks to set up transformative justice devices for people who don’t want to engage with the penal system for various reasons (for example, secondary victimization)