ABOLITION OF WHAT?
This Article defends a structural theory of the brutality of the carceral state. We argue that American penal systems are destined to be inhumane, barring sweeping changes to the social and economic order of the United States; and that prison and police abolition are neither sufficient nor necessary...
| Publicado en: | Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology Vol. 114; no. 3; pp. 525 - 580 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Northwestern University
Summer2024
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ssf&AN=182060540&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ssf uiTerm: 182060540 longDbName: Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson) uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 00914169 CLC jtl: Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology issn: 00914169 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Summer2024 vid: 114 iid: 3 pid: 1093 pub: Northwestern University artinfo: ui: 182060540 ppf: 525 ppct: 55 formats: fmt: @attributes: type: P size: 11.4MB tig: atl: ABOLITION OF WHAT? aug: au: LEWIS, CHRISTOPHER USMANI, ADANER affil: Assistant Professor of Law, Harvard Law School Assistant Professor of Sociology & Social Studies, Harvard University su: Social democracy Social services Social policy Social order Social goals sug: subj: Social democracy Social services Social policy Social order Social goals Other Individual and Family Services ab: This Article defends a structural theory of the brutality of the carceral state. We argue that American penal systems are destined to be inhumane, barring sweeping changes to the social and economic order of the United States; and that prison and police abolition are neither sufficient nor necessary to bring these kinds of changes about. This theory stands on two premises. First, we defend The Principle of Less Eligibility, which holds that it is politically infeasible for capitalist democracies to permit the incentives to defy the law to exceed those to obey it. As we show, the Principle of Less Eligibility implies that the brutality of the American carceral state is a symptom of the clustered and concentrated disadvantage that define the American ghetto. Second, we show that social policy is bedeviled by what we call The Efficiency-Feasibility Paradox. Hyper-targeted social programs are a more efficient way to improve the lives of the least well-off than universal social policy. But it is politically infeasible for governments to fund hyper-targeted programs at the scale necessary to eliminate the American ghetto. Abolishing the American ghetto will require appealing to the interests of a broad majority. Together, The Principle of Less Eligibility and The Efficiency- Feasibility Paradox imply that an improvement in the prospects of the least well-off is necessary to redress the brutality of the carceral state and that the most feasible path toward both goals is social democracy. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: N holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|