Several days ago a report on the use of torture on prisoners interrogated by the C.I.A was released into mainstream media. Torture is something that everyone subversively understood happened in interrogations but the extent to which people’s rights are violated is incredible.
This is the report
I found this pretty disturbing cartoon explaining some of the torture methods, that we know about.
I think this raises some interesting questions. To what extent does the United States get away with breaking human rights treaties? I feel that in a lot of occurrences the United States breaks the rules, but I also don’t believe the United States is the only place that tortures. How can we conceive of human rights law to be abstained by any means of practices like this are tolerated?
This also kind of speaks to what we spoke about in class and the creation of a common enemy in order to uphold the dehumanization process. In this case the CIA is very defensive of its methods and deems that post 911, because of their lack of knowledge of predicting the tragedy they believe that these methods are useful and important for counterterrorism.
Do you think that allowing such trends in the torture of terrorist suspects, could eventually bring the same violation of rights on American soil and not just Guantanamo Bay?
Agathangelou, “Intimate Investments: Homonormativity, Global Lockdown, and the Seductions of Empire”
In this paper we see Agathangelou connect a wide variety of forces and struggles that play a part in the organization of the current day world and in the neoliberal handling of surplus labor in our society. She speaks to specific strategies such as the development of homo – normativity in our society its relation in the greater scheme of a global lockdown in society and how people become embedded in it.
The “seduction to participate” describes the process that takes place in convincing members of society to participate in the global lockdown, hetero and homo – normativity. Such is the example of the Lawrence Garner v. State of Texas ruling, which “rendered sodomy laws unconstitutional”(122). Even though this decision seemed to have contributed to a civil rights victory to the LGBTQ community, it generally left the majority of the community that is straddled by race, socio-economical factors unaffected by it as they are still persecuted on a daily basis and specifically the targets of prison industrial incarceration. However the establishment of such a bill portrays a certain indication that something has been done for human rights when it in fact only covers a small percentage of the overall population.
A big part of creating rights for a white middle class hetero – normative group to Agathangelou takes a necessary amount of criminalizing of the other non normative groups (122). A widespread movement of homo – normativization seems to only protect white, middle class gays and tucks under the rug the immense abuses that happen in the gender non conforming communities. Homo-normative politics does not contrast with “the dominant hetero-normative assumptions”(124). For example the criminalization of non-homo-normative behaviors is actually incredulously incarcerating people from the marginalized poor, communities of people of color. This according to Agathangelou is part of the process of creation of enemies in order to instill anti – nationalistic tendencies(126). Nationalistic tendencies create an environment of securing and solidifying the prison industrial complex. Essentially through different means the manufacture of an outside enemy creates the rationalization of of military intervention. The prison industrial context is the exemplification of the next colonialist venture. Because it’s reach is based on a moral ground where some peoples second class citizenry is considered an acceptable double standard that becomes rationalized through the process.
The production of “good, queer subject” discussed leads to the creation of the ideology that there is an assimilation within the order. The neo – liberalization of homo – normativity provides for the created ideologies about the attainment of “liberty, peace and security” (124). However this attainment of freedom comes at the cost of gate keeping and the incarceration of the majority of the members of the group that are considered non homo-normative or hetero normative. The ability of the white middle class gays to move up in society is highly determined by the “bargain brokered in exchange for closing eyes and tolerating violence” in order to earn a semi middle class existence (126). For example some of the processes that have assimilated white, gay middle class citizens have been the processes destructive to their lower class counterparts. In NYC, specifically the process of gentrification is one of the greatest forces displacing queer communities of color that seemingly fall within the same interest bracket as far as civil rights. According to the article this creates an incredible juxtaposition of a divide to a new elite class of gays, opposed poor queer communities of color.
The author also contends the issue of NGO – ization of civil rights issues, which produces organizations that promise the fight for human and civil rights. However these same organizations very much affected by the neoliberal organism are concerned with funding which strips them of the ability to fight for a more radical political debate to smash the systemic violent neoliberal paradigm. These become established as promises by the author (125). Agathangelou calls this to be the creation of a neoliberal gay culture of domesticity and consumption. When the more radical movements become eliminated “stonewall becomes relocated to the suburbs” (125). The rerouting of the radical movement to a fitting mold acceptable in neoliberal society comes with the promises of safety and liberty however depends on the continual global lockdown of marginalized groups in order to be able to deliver on its promises.
The global lockdown is very profitable and become a common sense resolution to our insecurities. However this lockdown is in credibly unnatural and creating more and more casualties of institutional violence. It’s profitability is guaranteed, at the expense of the backs of a group that is experience similar problems to those that it is helping. According to Agathangelou the new systems of incarceration aren’t just in terms of prisons, but are an increasingly complex intersection of a variety of landscapes that involve similar tactics of incarceration and limitation of opportunities (134). Prison and the imprisonment outside of the idea of prison continue to reproduce, naturalize and intensify the use of violence in criminalized communities. This violence is often sexual, one of enslavement and servitude. In this way the global lockdown recreates the power relations and foundations of the neoliberal economy.
Questions:
There is a continual mention of a new world order ideology within this article what does this mean in an academic environment? What is the new world order?
If all of these cycles of oppression are interconnected what can we assume is the beginning of untangling this system of oppression?
Does assimilation ism generally do more good or bad in the studies of marginalized people?
It seems that the government is taking note of the massive demonstrations happening because Mayor Deblasio came out with a statement announcing that the police force will undergo a 3 day retraining that will retrain them to use their firearms, and teach them de-escalation tactics. As well as implementing a body camera pilot program in NYPD officers about 60 officers will be wearing body cameras starting this week.
Personally I can’t help but to feel like that is not doing enough! I don’t feel like it matters wether or not theres camera footage when officers will murder on camera. I think these are concessions to resolving the real root issue. I don’t know if you can train someone who’s willing to abuse their power and murder, not to murder. The symptoms depicted by the police force are a sign of a much greater problem. I think it’s very important that people do not settle for reforms that do little to help the problem. There needs to be a serious reconsideration of the police force and their role in our society. People need a real change.
What do you guys think? Do you think that a retraining of the police force is effective? What do you think the root issue of the abuse of power by the police force is?
Hey guys! Last night I had the pleasure to attend a panel held at NYU where former black panther now UCLA professor Angela Davis spoke, as well as her colleague Gina Dent, on the topic of Abolition Feminism. It was a very interesting conversation tying together the ideas of feminism within prison abolition ideology. She compared several ongoing feminist struggles around the world. Gina Dent and Angela Davis remarked on the return of their global trip in places like Isreallian, Palestinian, Brazilian in a comparative fashion to our own U.S. struggle.
Unfortunately the taping of the panel is not available online yet, but I suspect will be soon. However below you will find a a lecture Angela Davis did on the topic of Abolition Feminism. Its a really great analysis. She remarks on the status of political prisoners on American soil. Then considers the categorical nature of the repression in our system, the slogan of women’s rights and human rights. This is related to the intersectional factors that we have read about throughout our semester that lead to the targeting of certain groups over others. Angela expands her discussion by commenting on the nature of the Radical Black Women’s movement. She speaks to the fact that feminism must involve a consciousness of capitalism, colonialism, race, gender, and etc. She argues that it needs to also be applied to prison abolition work, especially from an analysis of gender non conforming people and women incarceration rates. She creates a thoughtful discussion on the ideas of the personal is the political. Further she discusses domestic violence and how that struggle is related to the prison abolition struggle.
What do you guys think about prison abolition? Do you think it is a viable choice? Do you feel like a lens on gender should be widely used as a universal analysis?
I found a very interesting interview featuring an author we’ve read recently, Dean Spade, and Reina Gossett from the Silvia Riviera Law Project. This is a four part video that centers around the concept of prison abolition, the idea that the current punitive system does not work and should be replaced with a more humane and effective plan. Prison Abolition seeks to dismantle structures of violence, and replace our inherently violent prison system with a method which is based on accountability and the chance to redeem themselves within their communities, instead of abandoning & shaming them.
The discussion spans to include an explanation of the conflict between prison abolition and reform, and specifically how it relates to trans people in jail. Arguing that investment in jails in any way to improve conditions, only creates more spaces to be filled up. Beyond that they examine violence along race, sex, and class divides. Contending that since the days of slavery black people, and poor people have been seen as dangerous by the government, and prison was a solution to this. I think its important to point out that entire economies are also created around the incarceration of targeted groups, making the prison industrial complex seem as a permanent fixture. It was quite fascinating to hear that the guns actually killing the most people are in the hands of registered gun wielding holders. Reina Gosset remarks that the number one predators of communities are police. Theres a fascinating discussion of of gun control and how that immediately relates to the violence of the prison and police.
I thought some really amazing points are made about the actual state of the reality of our punitive system! Hope you guys enjoy it! Let me know what you think.
Do you believe that prison abolition could work? How do you feel about the conflict between reform and prison abolition? Why do you think it’s so difficult to imagine a world without prisons?
This is a video of an interview of the children’s point of view during the police violence that took place in Anaheim in 2012, where the police shot at the community including their children and newborns, and released police dogs to attack.
Do you guys feel police were justified in using rubber bullets? Do you think that rubber bullets are an acceptable means? I would love to hear your opinions on this case or any of the examples that we brought up during the presentation including the Michael Brown case and subsequent protests and etc.
Also, one of the charts that for some reason disappeared from the slides.
Police Misconduct by Type. 2010
An interesting resource documenting police misconduct is policemisconduct.net. It provides resources to records and statistics, as well as a weekly report of the filed reports of police misconduct.
Taub and Schneider’s argument focuses on the idea that lawmaking and existent law has created divisions that segregate the male public sphere and the female private sphere. They argue that because this division occurred law making and regulation was made in the public sphere, and withheld from overreaching within the private sphere. Excluding the female from the social realm and legislature led to numerous set backs for women’s rights. Men generally dominated the private sphere also because there was little regulation to women’s rights in the home.
Women were excluded from the public social sphere by being prevented from voting, excluded from jury duty, and excluded from armed combat duty. When married females were reduced to legal nonentities unable to sell, sue or sign contracts without their husband’s permission. This disproportionally affected the integration of women in the new industrial economy of the early 20th century, when the manufacture of goods left the home. Women became a surplus of cheap labor in the economy because of limited work opportunities, limited earning power, denial of equal pay, denial of Social Security benefits as well as denial of educational opportunities. Women were often treated as not important enough to merit the regulatory attention of the law (Taub & Schneider, 152). In this way women humanity was denied as well as the value of their work was taken for granted, indicating two main ideologies that have subordinated female existence throughout history. Throughout much of our history women have been demoted to only being valuable for household and sexual services. We see this denial in the restrictions on reproductive planning, the past law exceptions for marital rape, the rationalization that women are biologically different and physically incompatible with the outside world. While religious and morally driven ideas of the function of women continued to be used in court of law to rationalize the differential and segregationist treatment between the sexes, glorifying the woman’s role in society, didn’t do much but establish a pretext to exclude her, and deny her basic rights. The women that weren’t married or following the path established for women, were seen as social deviants and unfit for society in the first place.
Taub and Schneider call for more regulation within the private sphere while suggesting that much of the problem is systematic. I disagree with their solution due to the fact that they themselves state how institutionalized sexism has delayed women’s progress, therefore I do not understand why the solution would be handing the decision of power back into the hands of the institution composed majority of old, white men could resolve the problem. This approach is problematic because constructs such as sexism and racism exist in society and are more pronounced in certain parts of history because they are functional to the structural system. For example racism during times of slavery, served the system because it provided an incredible amount of free labor in building the railroads, farming the land, and brought a lot of wealth to the economy of the United States. Racism today provides the same type of function as so far as cheap labor. The prison system is a racist system, that is disproportionately to the population imprisons black men. This racism is functional to the economy because it provides for a supply of cheap prison labor. In the same way sexism was very much functional in the past and even today.Women were seen in the private sphere only because it was convenient for the economy. While the man was focused putting his all on developing his career, the woman would take care of everything else- raising his children, cleaning the home, feeding him, and sexually satisfying him. To offer the male an escape from the pressures of his job, and also make sure that he would not have to worry about anything else- therefore amply raising his ultimate productivity at work, of course at the expense of her humanity. To this day women comparatively still make less than the male does in the same careers. They are another supply of cheap labor. So when we examine that structurally sexism is functional, and there are economical reasons why it is so deeply embedded in our laws and therefore society, how could we expect the same structure that finds it functional to change it?
This paper was copyrighted in 1982, thirty-two years later, post governmental regulations on the private realm we see an improvement in women’s rights but many of the sexist ideologies persisting to extend to current day. Women still only make seventy five cents of every dollar a man makes. Domestic violence, and the objectification of women through marketing is still in it’s prime. Pregnancy leave is the number one reason why many women fall behind in their careers, and its expense is still not covered by employers. Reproductive rights are still an issue, suggesting that the woman’s body is the territory of everyone else but the woman herself. My suggestion to the reversal of all the cultural sexism that takes place in forming the ideology of our representative leaders and society at large, would be regulating the cultural socialization factors that create this ideology in the first place. By tackling the cultural themes wether it is in media, language, or other mediums of cultural communication we can prevent the perpetuation of sexist ideology from its passage to the next generations, and encourage women to step out of their expected stereotypes. However the probability that something like this would actually take place at this point in history is unlikely, simply because sexism is still a main facet to which our economical system functions.
This is a TED talk of Laura Bates talking about her creation of a project called “Every Day Racism” which created a platform online for people to share their everyday experiences of sexist discrimination. She discusses many of the cultural ideologies that perpetuate sexism today.
SOC320: Law, Society and Civil Rights 