
Tolstoy’s ‘Resurrection’ is strikingly similar to how we treat prisoners today - AppleseedJenny
https://macroaffairs.com/tolstoy-resurrection-prison-industrial-complex/books/
======
testvox
> But what do we do? […] We do not merely do nothing to get rid of the
> conditions in which such people are born – we actually encourage the
> institutions which produce them. We all know what these institutions are:
> the mills, the factories, the workshops, the inns, the pot-houses, the
> brothels. And far from wiping out establishments of this sort – considering
> them necessary, we encourage and regulate them.

Would the world really have less crime if we didn't have factories and inns?
Agrarianism is so alien to modern life I can hardly imagine it being a
dominant philosophy.

~~~
lixtra
My understanding of the US prisons was that many people with mental issues end
up there instead of proper mental health care [1].

I can imagine that people with mental issues are also more likely to end up in
inns and brothels. These people remain problematic after closing those
locations. Even more so with factories as you already pointed out.

[1] [https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/saving-
normal/201303...](https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/saving-
normal/201303/prison-or-treatment-the-mentally-ill)

~~~
brownbat
We had a case once where a guy kept breaking into a local business. Didn't
take anything, just broke the door or a window and picked things up and moved
them around a bit then left. Did it repeatedly despite a series of warnings
and discussions.

Guy was not malicious, just not mentally healthy. Doing nothing meant the
business would continue to get harassed.

Judge and prosecutor and defense attorney had a long conference about how none
of the options available were any good.

Mental health courts are one approach being tried out in a few jurisdictions:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_health_court](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_health_court)

Basically like a plea agreement with conditions to enter into a community
based support program or some kind of treatment program.

They aren't without criticisms, but they provide a tool to deal with these
messed up situations the criminal justice constantly gets stuck with.

~~~
toomanybeersies
So what was the end result? Did they send the guy to prison or try and get him
the help he needed?

~~~
brownbat
They had no authority to compel treatment.

I think they used the minimum sentence then worked to set up a mental health
court for future cases.

------
sytelus
In US constitution, the 13th amendment leaves out only prisoners from salvery
clause. It was bit shocking because US constitution essentially says that
government _can_ use prisoners jus like slaves!

I feel our current system of punishments and prisoners is very barberic. In my
experience, people change dramatically in beliefs and who the are every 7-10
years. So having a prison term longer than that is essentially same as
transferring sentence to quite different person. Also things like solitary
confinements are beyond bewildering. I hope future prisons are essentially
closed large spaces where prisoners make their own sustainable living. Prison
shouldn’t be about enslaving a person but rather isolating him/her from
society for safety of others all the while retraining them to be part of
society again after no more than 7-10 years.

~~~
zapita
> _In US constitution, the 13th amendment leaves out only prisoners from
> slavery clause. It was bit shocking because US constitution essentially says
> that government can use prisoners just like slaves!_

It’s definitely a shocking feature of the constitution. I’ve been wondering
lately if it really can be (or has been) used to justify things like forced
labor benefiting a for-profit corporation at below the legal minimum wage. The
text says “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment
for crime...”. Couldn’t one argue that being in prison is the punishment - but
working in a corporate sweatshop is additional servitude used not as
punishment but as abuse of people already being punished?

~~~
daniel-cussen
Well, it's antiquated. Back in the day the basics were expensive, so just
keeping someone alive who wasn't working to pull his weight was basically
unthinkable. If you fed people for nothing, _back then_ , people would commit
crimes just for the sake of being imprisoned.

But now that food is way cheaper, and so is clothing and shelter (not the real
estate and finance component--just the construction), I think the rationale is
out of date.

------
oneplane
The 'we' here seems to assume the USA? Because this is nothing like the prison
systems around here.

~~~
fouc
A good point. The thread name could be updated to have <USA> at the end
perhaps.

------
jordigh
> No Spoilers.

This is a weird fixation we have in the modern world. Is anyone really
thinking that by knowing the plot of a 120-year-old novel their experience of
that novel could totally be ruined?

~~~
themodelplumber
I don't see why the age of the novel factors in. Reading is a subjective
experience with a variety of modes and conditions, so if for example the
subject is working their way through old novels as a hobby then yes, I really
can see why it'd be just as annoying to have the 120 year old plot spoiled as
it would be for a brand new movie.

Still, I think "spoiler alert" is a lot better in cases like these than "no
spoilers." It gives freedom of choice to the reader.

~~~
gnulinux
One should never read literature for it's plot. Learning the plot of a
literature book should have no affect in its enjoyment. This is similar to
enjoying a painting for it's plot: "oh so a man is looking up, it's night
time, there are a lot of stars, a large tree covering left side of the canvas,
the man has some sort vision problem and stars look really huge and yellow.
Then there is moon, shining yellow. Below the sky one can see a small city
blending with the dusk of the night." Is this an equivalent experience?

~~~
ars
> One should never read literature for it's plot.

Says who? What if I want to read literature for the plot? What if the
excitement of what's going to happen is what I care about, and the characters
are just a side thing?

What if some days I want to read for plot, other days I want world building,
other days I want character development?

> Learning the plot of a literature book should have no affect in its
> enjoyment.

And if it does affect it? Should we tell people not to read that book?

