Published on 02/10/22
Introduction
Fyodor Dostoevsky's statement, "A society should be judged not by the way it treats its outstanding citizens, but by the way it treats its criminals," holds significant symbolic importance in discussions surrounding prisons. The historical use of imprisonment as society's primary method of punishment raises a fundamental question: Does it work? To answer this question, it is essential to clarify what is meant by "work" and for whom. In this essay, we will examine two predominant perspectives to analyze whether prisons work:
1. The humanitarian perspective, which asserts that prisons aim to reform prisoners for the greater good of society.
2. The post-modernist perspective, which argues that prisons exist as a tool for controlling the population on behalf of the ruling party.
The contention is that the question of whether prison works does not yield a simple yes or no answer; it depends on one's perspective. From the viewpoint of prisoners, prisons often fail to work, whereas from the perspective of those in power, prisons function effectively.
Status Quo of Prisons in Contemporary Society
Scholars have extensively studied modern prisons, leading to several key findings. Firstly, many U.S. prisons face resource scarcity, leading to the emergence of a thriving underground market in which illicit drugs are used as currency for trading essential commodities. This trade has even increased during the pandemic.
Secondly, prisons tend to provide an environment where inmates learn and reinforce criminal behaviors. The peer effect within prisons often leads to the formation of criminal networks and influences behavior after release.
Lastly, the recidivism rate, which measures how many released prisoners re-offend, is alarmingly high in some countries, such as the United States, with approximately 70% re-offending within the first five years of release. This high rate is linked to factors like the lack of access to job skills programs during incarceration and the significant social barriers faced by ex-convicts.
These findings do not, by themselves, present a clear argument. Their interpretation depends on the perspective from which they are viewed.
The Humanitarian View of Prison
From a humanitarian standpoint, prisons are intended to rehabilitate individuals who have violated the social contract. Philosophers like Hegel proposed that incarceration should be a process of "re-education," transforming prisoners into productive members of society. However, the evidence suggests that these goals are often difficult to achieve. Prisons may not adequately facilitate the re-education of prisoners, as they lack access to quality educational programs and face numerous social barriers upon release. Additionally, the prison environment can foster criminal behavior and the formation of criminal networks, ultimately contributing to high recidivism rates.
While some point to the success of Norwegian prisons with a low recidivism rate as a counterexample, it's important to note that Norway's extensive investment in prisoner rehabilitation and its robust social welfare programs make it an exception rather than the norm.
In summary, contemporary prisons often fail to achieve their humanitarian goals of rehabilitating prisoners and reintegrating them into society.
The Post-Modern View of Prison
The post-modern perspective, notably articulated by Michel Foucault, posits that prisons exist to produce "delinquents" and serve as a tool for exerting disciplinary power over the population. From this standpoint, prisons are considered successful in their objectives.
The social stigma against ex-prisoners, the criminogenic effect of prisons, and the high recidivism rate are viewed as evidence of prisons effectively producing delinquents. Delinquents play a crucial role in a post-modern understanding of prisons as they make it easier for the government to target specific populations for surveillance and control. Politicians often use the presence of delinquents to advance their agendas, creating a constant focus on law enforcement and control within the population.
This perspective contends that prisons are instrumental in redefining illegality for political purposes, maintaining civil obedience, and providing the ruling class with political legitimacy and resources for surveillance.
In this view, prisons are no longer seen as merely institutions for reform and rehabilitation but as powerful tools employed by the government to control and manipulate society. The perspective shifts from evaluating the success of prisons based on their ability to rehabilitate individuals to assessing their efficacy in achieving broader political and social objectives.
From a post-modernist standpoint, prisons are not failing, but rather, they are fulfilling their intended functions. They are instrumental in creating and maintaining a particular social order that serves the interests of the ruling class. The production of "delinquents" and the perpetuation of criminal behavior, as evidenced by high recidivism rates, are viewed as deliberate outcomes rather than unintended consequences.
The presence of delinquents allows for increased surveillance, which is more efficient than monitoring the entire population. It also serves as a constant target of power, granting political legitimacy to those in authority. Delinquents, in this context, become a convenient scapegoat for societal problems, allowing the government to divert attention from broader issues and maintain its control over the population.
In essence, from a post-modern perspective, prisons are effective in silencing dissent, controlling marginalized groups, and preserving the status quo. They are not judged by their ability to reform prisoners but by their success in exerting disciplinary power and serving the interests of the sovereign power.
The question of whether prisons work, therefore, highlights the complexity of assessing the effectiveness of these institutions. It underscores the importance of considering multiple viewpoints and interpretations, as well as the need to question the underlying purposes and motivations behind the prison system. In doing so, we can gain a more comprehensive understanding of the role of prisons in contemporary society and their impact on both individuals and the broader social and political landscape.
Comments