20090917

Killing the man will not kill his crimes.

The United States of America, supposedly built by the poeple and for the people, practises a most foul, unfair, barbaric and abominable tradition of murdering its poor and undesirable. I am talking of course about death penalty, capital punishment for those of who are unwilling to face the facts of the more proper term. Death penalty. State sanctioned sterilized killing, in the name of justice.

It's despicable, and it's a complete failure in every way but the meat processesing.

As crime prevention it is not just a failure statistically, but because it extende the very crime it purports to hinder: the murder of human beings. There are no statistics that can show that death penalty reduces the prevalence of violent crime - or any other crime for that matter. Absolutely none.

Morally it is a bankrupt practice based on misguided interpretations of ancient religious texts demanding an eye for an eye. Not only does this form of moral logic end up demanding the death of the executioner as well, but it reduces the sanctity of life to mere math. The Bible, that these reactionary retards hold so dear also teaches forgiveness. They would do well to focus a bit more on the "let he who is without sin..." part of this archaic text and less on the killing and maiming. Though the killing and maiming is the more entertaining part of the Bible, it is also the less productive.

Judicially death penalty is also problematic in the sense that it makes reform entirely impossible. Both socially and individually. It is revenge, and has nothing to do with fairness, rationality or societal needs. Rather it is cruel and arbitrary. As supreme court justice Thurgood Marshall so eloquently put it in 1990: "When in Gregg v. Georgia the Supreme Court gave its seal of approval to capital punishment, this endorsement was premised on the promise that capital punishment would be administered with fairness and justice. Instead, the promise has become a cruel and empty mockery. If not remedied, the scandalous state of our present system of capital punishment will cast a pall of shame over our society for years to come. We cannot let it continue."

Killing is killing. Calling it punishment makes it no different from the act of murder. The result is the same: a life is cut short, and will never reach its full potential.

Thinking the convicted Romell Broom in his cell on death row, allready having suffered the anguish of the executioner's intent to murder him once, I can only find solace in the fact that his maltreatment serves the higher purpose of shedding light on this disgusting affair. I am personally very powerless to do anything but talk, or write, but we know that things can change when people write, and maybe one day Ohio will take its rightfull place among civilized parts of the world. I am also reminded of the story of another man who was murdered by the state, for the crime of murder. His name lives on with us still, and monuments have been built and songs been written in his name. His ashes have been spread around the world, and his name will forever mean "framed and murdered by the government". I am talking of course about Joe Hill. Take a few minutes to read the lyrics to the song Pete Seeger and Paul Robeson wrote about him, or better yet, listen to it. Murdering Hill did not kill him, and murdering Broom will not kill violent crimes. Only reform can do that.

(Lyrics below the video.)


I dreamed I saw Joe Hill last night,
alive as you and me.
Says I "But Joe, you're ten years dead"
"I never died" said he,
"I never died" said he.

"The Copper Bosses killed you Joe,
they shot you Joe" says I.
"Takes more than guns to kill a man"
Says Joe "I didn't die"
Says Joe "I didn't die"

"In Salt Lake City, Joe," says I,
Him standing by my bed,
"They framed you on a murder charge,"
Says Joe, "But I ain't dead,"
Says Joe, "But I ain't dead."

And standing there as big as life
and smiling with his eyes.
Says Joe "What they can never kill
went on to organize,
went on to organize"

From San Diego up to Maine,
in every mine and mill,
Where working men defend their rights,
it's there you'll find Joe Hill,
it's there you'll find Joe Hill!

I dreamed I saw Joe Hill last night,
alive as you and me.
Says I "But Joe, you're ten years dead"
"I never died" said he,
"I never died" said he.

4 comments:

Chris Shaeffer said...

The death penalty serves two purposes: One is to deter those that can be deterred. The other is to eliminate those that cannot be deterred. Either way its a win-win for social order.

Thule said...

Statistically it does neither. The only gain is eliminating a mouth from the food chain.

Anonymous said...

עין תחת עין, ayin tahat ayin

Do you ever go back and read your posts... anyways..

You struck on something that I feel quite passionate about. I am always surprised by the number of Christians who believe in the death penalty. While I am no biblical scholoar it does not take to much research to find that it is simply FORBIDDEN.

Frankly the phrase "an eye for an eye..." is a perversion of Christianity. It is originally taken from the old testament or the old law... The old testament is a book of Justice.

Most Christians "believe" they are under the new law as laid down by Jesus. This "new law" is based on love... Jesus is quite explicit on the matter when he said in Matthew 4:38-48
"You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.' But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you."

While the idea of killing a killer may bring about a temporary sense of justice, it does not - under any circumstance - close the crime. Sadly, it builds a monument to the hideous nature of man. A painful reminder of our own depravity.

Thule said...

I couldn't agree more, and I find it rather ironic, considering the fundamentalist nature of the founding fathers - way back when. Jesus does say, rather explicitly in the canonical text that he has been sent to replace the old laws with a new law. And then he goes on to say Love thy neighbor and do unto others and so forth.

However, he is actually a bit inconsistent on this stuff. While he is often remembered for saving prostitutes from stoning few like to remember the part about executing paediphiles by drowning. (Mark 9:38-50)

I am not christian. I fail to believe in a supreme being, and if I did I find the Bible to inconsistent, but I certainly believe that modern day christians really should go back and actually study their scriptures. They might get some surprises. And perhaps even stop these nonsensical exectutions.