The New York congresswoman is a darling of the left, but she can't win anyone else until she admits that some form of criminal justice is necessary for a civilized society.
You've admitted that she's deeply ideological, entirely ignorant on the subject, and yet aggressively inclined to push extreme policies on a topic she knows nothing about. Yet you think such a person is potentially suitable to lead our nation if she'd just brush up a little and tone her rhetoric down a bit so she doesn't scare off moderates. That puts the cart before the horse and then has it walk backwards.
Instead of starting with a policy idiot who happens to have charisma and hoping to educate her into a halfway decent position before she wrecks the country, how about finding someone who has the good sense to know what they are talking about and try to teach them better social skills?
Anyone who ever even thought this let alone stated it, including AOC, are forever disqualified from ever winning the US presidency. The stupidity of some from the Left is that because perpetrator experienced hurt - that this person’s trauma trumps that inflicted on the victim when it comes to criminal justice. It’s ass backwards, ignorant of human nature, and keeps people on the streets who deserve to be behind bars.
Interesting that you are going off the assumption that every incarcerated person is in prison because they are a “perpetrator” who harmed a “victim.” Lot of non-violent drug offenders in our prisons.
Alice, in Florida, prisoners want very much to be sent to private prisons. They prefer them! Why, you ask? Because in a rather pointless exercise in macho tough-on-crime bravado, the Florida legislature decreed that government prisons couldn’t have air conditioning. In Florida. But the private prisons can -- and do. Not for the comfort of the prisoners per se, but because it’s harder to hire guards if they have to work in sweltering heat, and it’s physically impossible to provide climate control for guards and not prisoners.
My guess is she may be influenced by people advocating some sort of "restorative justice", which seems to be rooted in the idea that there's no such thing as a criminal or individual victim, and they're both victims of societal evilness.
In practice, it ends up being a criminal-friendly scheme where the victim is supposed to be forgiving, while the perpetrator somehow makes amends. And you end up with the lion and the lamb discussing lunch plans.
AOC wouldn't like the world before police and prisons, where most non-minor criminals were hanged, beheaded at the block (beheading was considered more dignified than hanging, so it was often reserved for nobles or wealthier commoners), or conscripted into slavery for the state.
That's not what restorative justice is. Restorative justice believes that the best way to address the harm and prevent it from happening again is through a restorative process that involves the willing cooperation of both the victim and the perpetrator.
It is one powerful tool for addressing harm, but it's clearly not meant for every situation.
She's constitutionally inadmissible to be President until she permanently drops all of her fake accents. Sorry AOC, if you want to be President, no more Southern Black Church Sermon or Tony Montana. I don't make the rules
Americans are not fine with a humane criminal justice system. Most Americans are very punitive and want tough on crime policies. Its why Trump was so successful this year. There's a reason why capital punishment has succeeded 31 out of the 34 time it has been on the ballot. There's a reason why Prop 6 failed in California.
I don't think for most folks that the desire to be "tough on crime" is at all difficult to align with "a humane criminal justice system". Being tough on crime means making it difficult and undesirable to commit the crime in the first place and then having consequences when someone commits a crime anyhow.
In the real world at present, this would mean not decriminalizing shoplifting. It would mean actually encorcing and prosecuting the laws. It would mean supporting a well trained police force.
Several Trump voters that I know have spent extended time in jail and are understandably very liberal and humane in their belief that those incarcerated should be treated humanely and once released that they have "paid their dues" and should have the full rights of any citizen. But at the same time, if someone were to break into their neighbor's house or store, they want to see the perpetrator arrested and convicted. Outside of partisian discord, these two beliefs are not a source of cognitive dissonance.
This seems a very normal way to feel and yes, Trump recognized this while the Dems did not. So, yes, Trump won, but isn't that how a functioning democracy should work? There is nothing nefarious about it.
I liked pre-DC AOC. Now, I’m wary of her. I didn’t even know she was interested in this, though. (Consequence of information overload, I guess.) To me, this idea sounds as nuts as expecting the economy to get better after the additional tax cuts Musk is envisioning. Didn’t he say things would likely get worse before they get better? I easily envision the worst criminals going on sprees… There was that guy who went on a stabbing spree recently! No matter how wonderful a transition plan could be behind something like this, no way anyone hangs in there long enough to listen.
In my opinion, anyone who seriously advocated for (and doubled down) those specific policies and trashed everyone else as delusional bigots who even questioned the wisdom of such rhetoric are radioactive active. And, Abolish/Defund the police and Abolish prisons are rhetorical platforms that have a tremendous half life.
Zaid, fortunately, her actions in Congress are already more sensible. She needs a conversation with Obama. ... Unless she gets 'The' speech at the next Convention, she will have to wait - it would be a good idea in any case. She would still only be 43.
Trump ran on some pretty wild promises. That kind of unapologetic, hyperbolic talk can play well for some people. One thing Republicans do is they never act embarrassed by their positions.
But it’s an incredibly stupid thing to put anywhere near your platform. Nobody but Brooklyn Institute for Social Research donors care about crap like that. It might as well be another culture war issue.
You've admitted that she's deeply ideological, entirely ignorant on the subject, and yet aggressively inclined to push extreme policies on a topic she knows nothing about. Yet you think such a person is potentially suitable to lead our nation if she'd just brush up a little and tone her rhetoric down a bit so she doesn't scare off moderates. That puts the cart before the horse and then has it walk backwards.
Instead of starting with a policy idiot who happens to have charisma and hoping to educate her into a halfway decent position before she wrecks the country, how about finding someone who has the good sense to know what they are talking about and try to teach them better social skills?
Anyone who ever even thought this let alone stated it, including AOC, are forever disqualified from ever winning the US presidency. The stupidity of some from the Left is that because perpetrator experienced hurt - that this person’s trauma trumps that inflicted on the victim when it comes to criminal justice. It’s ass backwards, ignorant of human nature, and keeps people on the streets who deserve to be behind bars.
Interesting that you are going off the assumption that every incarcerated person is in prison because they are a “perpetrator” who harmed a “victim.” Lot of non-violent drug offenders in our prisons.
Actually not many at all
Not many as of 2014.
But of course, as we learned from "Shawshank," everyone in prison is innocent.
There can be no abolition of police and prisons while we remain a capitalist state; the two are inseparable.
And a socialist planned economy won’t need any instruments of state power. It will just run on rainbows.
Never said socialism would not use instruments of state power lol but go off king
This is correct. Communist never had anything like police enforcement and never had places to send people away like prisons.
While we still have private prisons and people getting rich as fuck off of mass incarceration, nothing can fundamentally change.
Alice, in Florida, prisoners want very much to be sent to private prisons. They prefer them! Why, you ask? Because in a rather pointless exercise in macho tough-on-crime bravado, the Florida legislature decreed that government prisons couldn’t have air conditioning. In Florida. But the private prisons can -- and do. Not for the comfort of the prisoners per se, but because it’s harder to hire guards if they have to work in sweltering heat, and it’s physically impossible to provide climate control for guards and not prisoners.
I’ve been to Australia! I just got back from a month there. Unlike you, most Australians I met were pretty good-natured.
Her past words and attitude will ensure that she will meet er be president.
She won’t!! She would be worse than Harris!! She’d never win!!
My guess is she may be influenced by people advocating some sort of "restorative justice", which seems to be rooted in the idea that there's no such thing as a criminal or individual victim, and they're both victims of societal evilness.
In practice, it ends up being a criminal-friendly scheme where the victim is supposed to be forgiving, while the perpetrator somehow makes amends. And you end up with the lion and the lamb discussing lunch plans.
AOC wouldn't like the world before police and prisons, where most non-minor criminals were hanged, beheaded at the block (beheading was considered more dignified than hanging, so it was often reserved for nobles or wealthier commoners), or conscripted into slavery for the state.
That's not what restorative justice is. Restorative justice believes that the best way to address the harm and prevent it from happening again is through a restorative process that involves the willing cooperation of both the victim and the perpetrator.
It is one powerful tool for addressing harm, but it's clearly not meant for every situation.
She is NOT the darling of the left. They call her a sellout.
She's constitutionally inadmissible to be President until she permanently drops all of her fake accents. Sorry AOC, if you want to be President, no more Southern Black Church Sermon or Tony Montana. I don't make the rules
Americans are not fine with a humane criminal justice system. Most Americans are very punitive and want tough on crime policies. Its why Trump was so successful this year. There's a reason why capital punishment has succeeded 31 out of the 34 time it has been on the ballot. There's a reason why Prop 6 failed in California.
I don't think for most folks that the desire to be "tough on crime" is at all difficult to align with "a humane criminal justice system". Being tough on crime means making it difficult and undesirable to commit the crime in the first place and then having consequences when someone commits a crime anyhow.
In the real world at present, this would mean not decriminalizing shoplifting. It would mean actually encorcing and prosecuting the laws. It would mean supporting a well trained police force.
Several Trump voters that I know have spent extended time in jail and are understandably very liberal and humane in their belief that those incarcerated should be treated humanely and once released that they have "paid their dues" and should have the full rights of any citizen. But at the same time, if someone were to break into their neighbor's house or store, they want to see the perpetrator arrested and convicted. Outside of partisian discord, these two beliefs are not a source of cognitive dissonance.
This seems a very normal way to feel and yes, Trump recognized this while the Dems did not. So, yes, Trump won, but isn't that how a functioning democracy should work? There is nothing nefarious about it.
Trump also signed the First Step Act, which has brought thousands of people home from prison sooner.
I liked pre-DC AOC. Now, I’m wary of her. I didn’t even know she was interested in this, though. (Consequence of information overload, I guess.) To me, this idea sounds as nuts as expecting the economy to get better after the additional tax cuts Musk is envisioning. Didn’t he say things would likely get worse before they get better? I easily envision the worst criminals going on sprees… There was that guy who went on a stabbing spree recently! No matter how wonderful a transition plan could be behind something like this, no way anyone hangs in there long enough to listen.
In my opinion, anyone who seriously advocated for (and doubled down) those specific policies and trashed everyone else as delusional bigots who even questioned the wisdom of such rhetoric are radioactive active. And, Abolish/Defund the police and Abolish prisons are rhetorical platforms that have a tremendous half life.
Zaid, fortunately, her actions in Congress are already more sensible. She needs a conversation with Obama. ... Unless she gets 'The' speech at the next Convention, she will have to wait - it would be a good idea in any case. She would still only be 43.
Obama is now a ‘has been’. History will not look kindly on this guy who wouldn’t leave Washington, and pulled the shadow strings for much too long.
Trump ran on some pretty wild promises. That kind of unapologetic, hyperbolic talk can play well for some people. One thing Republicans do is they never act embarrassed by their positions.
But it’s an incredibly stupid thing to put anywhere near your platform. Nobody but Brooklyn Institute for Social Research donors care about crap like that. It might as well be another culture war issue.
As far as the principle of the matter, I agree.
I would argue this is even more far out there than building a wall with Mexico
I mean, building a wall was a Bush and Obama era Democrat thing. It only became radioactive with that party when Trump made it his issue.