If poverty is the mother of crime, stupidity is its father.
The faults of the burglar are the qualities of the financier.
Punishment is as likely to harden and corrupt prisoners as it is to reform them.
The reformative effect of punishment is a belief that dies hard, chiefly, I think, because it is so satisfying to our sadistic impulses.
The victims of crime have a right to see criminals made to pay for their crimes.
Society on the whole likes to believe in the principles of justice, fairness and equality. When we observe behaviour that we deem socially unacceptable, or actions that hurt us and others, we want them to pay for their actions and feel the consequences of stepping out of line. The legal system is the instrument which we in the democratic world refer to when deciding what punishments and the extent of their application are suitable.
There is this notion that the Law is a neutral entity, that it is sacred and has been passed down for many years, through many hands, and been shaped to be the most just and equitable version of itself that can exist. I would like to argue strongly against this notion. Our laws have embedded values within them, and they reflect the current popular opinion of the society of the time. It is not uncommon for us to look back at the punishments of old and recoil at their severity and inappropriateness for crimes. But there is nothing to say that those who come after us will look at our current legal policies and not experience the same disgust that we do, when we learn only 40 years ago Indigenous children were being forcibly taken from their home nations, ripped from their mother’s arms; a form of ethnic cleansing under the guise of doing it for their own good.
The Justice system is anything but just; it is a tool to enforce righteous punishments on those who we deem to step out of line. It does not adequately provide reparations to those who have been harmed; it simply creates more harm to who we decide should suffer. It does not heal, and reformation is never the goal of a system which is routinely used for entertainment by the general public. The family of a person who has been murdered does not get their loved one back when the murderer loses their life under a ‘righteous’ death penalty. There is nothing that can be done to erase the pain and loss that criminal imposed on the loved one’s family, so the only alternative our vengeance-seeking society can see is to take an eye for an eye; to do unto others as they have done to us.
Although the Justice system is not an instrument of justice, it reflects the deep flaw in our society that it is not built on forgiveness and letting go. We enjoy seeing people ‘get what they deserve’. That’s the reason why hundreds of years ago, executions were held in the town square and a public event for all to witness. I would argue that the frequent ‘cancelling’ of celebrities, musicians and personalities on the Internet is a modern version of cutting criminal’s heads off, with social media being the town square. There are many celebrities accused of racism with the only instances being years old, acts committed historically when they were teenagers. Yet we still relish in their public downfall, grasp at miniscule infringements on the most politically-correct ways to behave and use their public flogging as fodder for discussion in our own real lives. Even through none of these actions would have hurt many of these people personally, even though we do not know these celebrities.
The administration of justice is nothing but a spectacle, a way for us to feel right and good about ourselves. When we look back at the barbaric nature of crime and punishment 100 years ago, we fail to see the same undercurrent of revenge-seeking and righteous anger that we all still possess today. We fail to realise that no part of healing from the hurt someone does unto us is amplifying and passing on that hurt to others. We fail to realise that punishment makes nothing better, that taking away the freedoms of others will not extend our own. It simply hardens our hearts.