Libertarianism and Prison

[Brian]

I'm fairly on board with what some of the libertarians say on this board. I'm not %100, but I see the sense. Less government is a good idea, least government goes too far in my opinion. Anarcho-anything is a bad idea, I think.
Anyway, no bashing or attacking...
Are privatized prisons a good idea? How would that work? Would the prisoners pay for their own imprisonment? Not a bad idea. The harder you're willing to work, the better your living conditions. Same as on the outside. It would give us a good idea who wants to be rehabilitated.
Or, would we send convicted felons to private prisons, who make their own rules. Many if not most Americans would likely shoot for "cheaper is better". Screw em', they're criminals. That could lead to third world conditions.

 

[corplinx]

We libertarians believe in converting felons






into soylent green for the poor.

 

[Jocko]

Re: Re: Libertarianism and Prison

We libertarians believe in converting felons






into soylent green for the poor.

We Republicans believe in converting the poor into free meatloaf for the wealthy.

 

[Brian]

Us non-voters just try not to get caught.

 

[Batman Jr.]

Anarchy, though probably not plausible now by any stretch of the imagination, I see as the eventual goal of the evolution of civilization. Many think anarchy more as chaotic and disordered and dystopian. This is not necessarily true. Whenever the average guy now will approach the prospect of anarchistic society, he always envisages pillaging, raping, murdering, really just about any moral ill you could imagine. But think of it this way: has pillaging, raping, and murdering ever been consensual? No. By their definition, they never are. What is not consensual is considered governance. The anarchistic society which pursues its ideals with the greatest of verity would not include such atrocities, and paradoxically, nor would it include any manner of defenses against them. Anarchy is the form of "government" which truly lies with the people. The only catch is that it must lie with a great people.

 

[Brian]

Anarchy, though probably not plausible now by any stretch of the imagination, I see as the eventual goal of the evolution of civilization. Many think anarchy more as chaotic and disordered and dystopian. This is not necessarily true. Whenever the average guy now will approach the prospect of anarchistic society, he always envisages pillaging, raping, murdering, really just about any moral ill you could imagine. But think of it this way: has pillaging, raping, and murdering ever been consensual? No. By their definition, they never are. What is not consensual is considered governance. The anarchistic society which pursues its ideals with the greatest of verity would not include such atrocities, and paradoxically, nor would it include any manner of defenses against them. Anarchy is the form of "government" which truly lies with the people. The only catch is that it must lie with a great people.

It seems that you're hoping that humans will get better, I hope to hell you're right! What about the broken people? The Bundys, the Geins? My scenario for anarchy is this:
Bunch of people get guns and take my stuff, and my neighbors stuff.
We band together and get guns so people can't take our stuff.
We need to make rules about who guards what at what time.
If someone does not guard when they should we need a threat.
We set up a system to decide who is on duty and who's not.
We set up people to enforce that rule, our survival depends on it.
We have other people decide the punishment.
We have others decide if they need to be punished.
We pay people to guard them.
The money has to come from somewhere.

You see where I'm going?

I hope that humans get better, but I have no stake in facilitating it.

 

[shanek]

Are privatized prisons a good idea?

If someone came up to me with a killer plan for a privatized prison, I could get behind it. But no, in general I don't think privatizing prisons would necessarily be a good idea, nor is it a Libertarian position.

 

[BillyTK]

It seems that you're hoping that humans will get better, I hope to hell you're right! What about the broken people? The Bundys, the Geins? My scenario for anarchy is this:
Bunch of people get guns and take my stuff, and my neighbors stuff.
We band together and get guns so people can't take our stuff.
We need to make rules about who guards what at what time.
If someone does not guard when they should we need a threat.
We set up a system to decide who is on duty and who's not.
We set up people to enforce that rule, our survival depends on it.
We have other people decide the punishment.
We have others decide if they need to be punished.
We pay people to guard them.
The money has to come from somewhere.

You see where I'm going?

I hope that humans get better, but I have no stake in facilitating it.

Just to be provocative for the sake of it, consider what might happen with the police force replaced by private security services, and particularly if your situation is such that you carnt afford their services. (Some) Libertarians advocate private security services in place of state law-enforcement agencies. Do you really want to trust them with your children, your pets, or your home?!!

 

[Brian]

Re: Re: Libertarianism and Prison

If someone came up to me with a killer plan for a privatized prison, I could get behind it. But no, in general I don't think privatizing prisons would necessarily be a good idea, nor is it a Libertarian position.

Well, I would assume the anarcho-libertarians would not want a government run prison system. How are the anarchists viewed by mainstream libertarians? Are they the whackos?

 

[Brian]

Just to be provocative for the sake of it, consider what might happen with the police force replaced by private security services, and particularly if your situation is such that you carnt afford their services. (Some) Libertarians advocate private security services in place of state law-enforcement agencies. Do you really want to trust them with your children, your pets, or your home?!!

Nope, I wouldn't. The point of my post was that (i think) a government would form from anarchy quite naturally.

 

[Batman Jr.]

Nope, I wouldn't. The point of my post was that (i think) a government would form from anarchy quite naturally.

Hopefully, in the future, it won't. The problem today is that people are too submissive and can be too easily led by others. A government which ceases to be acknowledged is no longer a government.