prisons, spicy take to some
Imprisonment is a form of torture, no matter how 'humane' it is on paper, and should be treated as such from an ethical perspective.
And when you argue for imprisoning people as a form of 'justice', you are arguing for torture as a form of 'justice', with all of the implications that that has.
It's just a form of torture that's easy to rationalize if you don't want to confront those implications.
re: Honestly curious philosophical musing that's not intended to be adversarial, feel free to ignore
@malcircuit I'd respond to that with a philosophical counterquestion: why would the primary qualifier for something being "justice" be "experiencing pain or discomfort", rather than "repairing harm and preventing reoccurrence"?
Because that to me sounds more like revenge than like justice. Is the intention of justice to make things right and make society better, or is the intention to "get the last word in", so to say?
re: Honestly curious philosophical musing that's not intended to be adversarial, feel free to ignore
@joepie91 How does one "repair harm and prevent reoccurrence" without some form of punitive measure?
re: Honestly curious philosophical musing that's not intended to be adversarial, feel free to ignore
@malcircuit That is going to depend on the exact circumstances, and is generally a process that requires the input of the victim. Whole books have been written about repairing harm, resolving conflicts, and (social) accountability.
A better question is, why *would* punitive measures repair harm and prevent reoccurrence? As basically all evidence is against this concept, and it often has the opposite outcome.
re: Honestly curious philosophical musing that's not intended to be adversarial, feel free to ignore
@joepie91 hmmmm I see your point 
I appreciate your patience and point of view. Thanks
prisons, spicy take to some
@joepie91
☝️
No lies detected
state violence & aesthetic, I got really rambly and passionate which is great | re: prisons, spicy take to some
@joepie91 Funky to think about how the state has already been at fash-violence for _ages_, and it's so normalized that you see so many inmates resigned to this system as a fact of life.
Imprisonment is such a _dull_ tool to use against a person, a machine waving its dumb stick around like that SpaceX catch tower.
It reminds me of this greater attitude we have with, laws in the name of protecting the populace getting twisted by Conway's law into an extension of the oppressive organization that imposed them.
Things that come down hard—like strict '18+' requirements that asses only your physical age and not mental faculties—seem to have this aesthetic of repression that's generally comforting to people who can't/won't look at the higher-level happenings of the oppressive structure and are only comforted by the fact that it happens to be aligned with them.
:: To be free isn't to be on the right side of violence, the 'good guys'.
To be free is to shed these systems of control, to acquire a level playing-ground, it's to prosper wise and calm so you can weather the wind and the storms.
Honestly curious philosophical musing that's not intended to be adversarial, feel free to ignore
@joepie91
I understand your point and agree, but it sparked a few questions in my mind:
What does "justice" even mean without the person receiving justice also experiencing some form of pain or discomfort? At what point does that pain intense enough qualify as "torture"? What would "justice" without pain even look like? Is such a thing even possible?