The U.S. system is not just "too-strict sentencing guidelines" either; the prevalence of rape makes it imo basically an inhumane system. The government will not usually actually rape you (though rape by prison guards is also a problem), but it will put you in conditions that it has known for decades are likely to cause you to be raped. It continues to maintain those conditions and knowingly forces people into them, in effect (probabilistically) sentencing them to be raped. And regular Americans on the street will joke about "pound-you-in-the-ass prisons" or "hope you like the butt sex!", apparently considering this an appropriate, perhaps even good, way to punish criminals, since it adds to the deterrence factor by making the prospect of going to a prison with such conditions a frightening one.
I guess we can make some hierarchy, where maintaining a prison system filled with starving inmates is worse than a rape-filled prison, which is in turn worse than a merely filthy/diseased prison, but it seems sort of pointless to justify things that way. I'd just go after the closest inhumane prison system, which I don't have to travel far to find. (It's also not purely a left-right thing; the left probably talks about it more, and the "tough-on-crime" right downplays the U.S.'s prison conditions, but it's also become a popular cause among Christian groups lately.)
Few would dispute that there are still many ways in which America leads the world, but let's not delude ourselves here: the prison system is not one of them. DPRK is an extreme case compared to the US, but the US is an extreme case compared to much of the industrialized world, and invoking "America-hatred" trivializes an important dialogue.
In general, Europe has some of the best prisons, and some of the worst prisons. France, Italy, Turkey, and Russia have horrendous prisons where in many cases prisoners don't survive their sentences. France's prisons are so historically bad that they've spawned whole revolutions numerous times, and are a common factor in their history. The EU was supposed to improve these conditions but it remains to be seen given they have very little data on how they're run, let alone anything publicly accessible.
In Asia only Japan has decent well run prisons, but their prisons are harsh while still having a high success rate. In the rest of Asia prisons are typically horrible, and even S.Korea has some awful conditions. Last thing I read said they don't feed prisoners and keep them in tiny huts, requiring their relatives to come and feed them. Burma is a massive police state with actual slaves by law.
In Africa, if you remove countries that just don't even have working governments, you find the prisons are also horrible, with the exception of maybe South Africa, but even they've had a history of nasty evil and torture (read about Steve Biko). It's improved a lot, but not nearly as much as it should.
The US is similar to Europe, with some of the worst and some of the best prisons in the world. Now, we're not talking about American legal policy on things like wrongful imprisonment by the LA Crash unit, idiotic "3-strikes your out" laws, or minimum sentencing laws. I'm talking the actual conditions of the prisons in the US as labeled by organizations like Amnesty International. In our case, prisons are generally alright, with a few standout offenses like Sheriff Joe Arpaio in AZ, and most prisons in the south and California. The worst state is definitely California, which makes sense given they've had more complete city wide riots than any other state in the nation and their huge gap between rich and poor.
But, a significant difference between our prison system and many others around the world (even those in Europe) are our laws about open records on how they're run and our recent trend of civilian oversight groups and recitivism prevention. Starting in about 2004 there's been a huge push to increase monitoring of prisons, offenses, guard abuses, and to help parolees stay out of jail. I personally worked on systems that tracked guard abuses at Riker's Island and the NYC DOC, as well as finger print systems for prisons that do early release programs and job release programs.
The biggest problem in American prisons is the advocacy by law enforcement of inmate-on-inmate rape as a sanctioned form of punishment. There's been numerous cases of countries refusing to extradite criminals based purely on our joke that a man will get ass raped in prison. If you wanted to focus your activism and hatred on any one thing to improve our system, it would definitely be eliminating rape.
In general, through my research and my own need to improve prisons, I found that prisons are horrible poorly managed hell holes everywhere. They generally reflect the cultural fear of the dominant members of a region against the "unclean" citizens, outsiders, and the low class. The difference between American prisons and this one in N.Korea is the size of it and the blatant attempt to keep it secret from the rest of the world. Very few countries in the world try to hide prisons, and when they do it's considered horrible, but none of them are hiding a prison that's the size of Manhattan:
Compared to utopia, sure, America is a shithole. But compared to just about any other real place, on just about any other metric, we're doing pretty well. To argue that we somehow don't have the right to call other nations or people out for their atrocities, because we don't compare well to utopia, is ridiculous. We have a duty to call other people out on their bullshit.
It's been my experience that most of the wealthy/privileged in the U.S. are simply unaware of how horrible things are[1]; that it's nicer to believe convenient fictions than be faced with a moral/emotional imperative to "do something". For these and other[2] reasons, America's institutions are more deserving than N.K.'s of American/Western public attention and outrage, proportional to the degree that they violate American values.
[1] e.g. http://bit.ly/mwO0dP
[2] another important reason is that American outrage can actually do something useful in the U.S., but is almost completely impotent w.r.t. N.K.
I thoroughly agree with the first sentence of your second point. I would go further to say that, since almost all of America is wealthy and privileged (compared to the rest of the world), and add in the fact that only ~22% of our citizens have passports, most of us have no fucking clue how horrible things are in much of the world. That's why I think exposing this kind of stuff, and shaming those responsible, is worthwhile.
The gains to be had in America are, relatively, minor compared to the gains that could be achieved for hundreds of millions around the world. Look at the recent events in the middle east. How much of the was precipitated by worldwide outrage over human rights issues for the last 30 years? I don't know, but I can't imagine they didn't bolster the protestors' resolve to some degree.
That's not to say we should ignore the problems here, and obviously people aren't. There's a thousand different versions of the Innocence Project run by people trying to right the perceived wrongs in all segments of American society. But there's enough outrage to spread around. To say we don't, as individuals, have the time or energy to focus a miniscule amount of attention on the worst off of those around the world is ridiculous.
That's not to say what you mention about the legal system isn't screwed up, it's just to fix the penal system you have to focus on things the penal system can change. They can't change the 3-strikes laws, but they can change early release programs, surveillance, oversight, IT budgets, conditions, training programs, guard training, etc.
Say every American was upset at N.K.'s horrible treatment of prisoners. So what? What's going to happen -- the U.S. would need to go through China before it could touch N.K. And bombing a country on humanitarian grounds is a little absurd.
But if every American were upset about the penal system, or about "3 strikes laws", or prison rape, the problem would be solved almost right away (indeed, American complacency and populism caused some of these problems in the first place).
There's also the rape angle as discussed above. Here in Australia, there's no real mindset about rape in prisons, but when I see Americans discuss it, it's either joked about or implicitly/explicitly declared to be 'part of the prison experience' and that you somehow deserve it if you go to jail... and it seems no-one is interested in wondering if it really is justice for a person imprisoned due to carrying a small amount of personal drugs to be raped as part of their 'debt to society'.
I guess it's the old 'glass houses' situation.
Is there a country/region that does it "right"?
Ten years and 1.5 billion Norwegian kroner ($252 million) in the making, Halden is spread over 75 acres (30 hectares) of gently sloping forest in southeastern Norway. The facility boasts amenities like a sound studio, jogging trails and a freestanding two-bedroom house where inmates can host their families during overnight visits.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1986002,00.... / http://www.good.is/post/halden-prison-who-cares-if-it-coddle...
Personally, I think that prisons need to be both retribution and rehabilitation at the same time, and base their mode of operation on the Military, but that's my personal opinion. Based on that I'd say the Japanese probably come the closest, with the actual Military being second. I say this not because I don't care about prisoners, but because I know first hand that the way bootcamp operates is a fast efficient way to retrain people who are unwilling to be trained. It also doesn't do this with violence (anymore) so it would be humane without being "soft".
If however you think prisons should be about rehabilitation then, I believe Denmark or Sweden have the best. They also have a highly homogeneous society with only one main race to deal with, so that's why that works for them. In other words, it's easier to retrain people to fit into society if everyone is already from that same society.
Other than that, they just suck everywhere.
Right. And the calorie counts, and the min / max temperatures. And the habeas corpus, and the due process prior to incarceration. And the press freedom to investigate. And the public election of legislators making the laws defining criminality, and executives running prisons. Otherwise, no difference.
See, in North Korea, when you start a "push to increase monitoring of prisons", you go _into_ the prison, do not see a judge, do not pass Go. And your family. And you don't come out. This alone strikes me as a really important difference.
Maybe people aren't sufficiently exercised about US prison conditions. But suggesting those are the same as North Korea only flips the "not credible" bit for every further comment you make.
There are prisons in the United States where a significant percentage of the population are raped, and there are prisons in the United States where no inmates are raped. Prisoner sexual abuse isn't an inevitable consequence of incarceration, and we need to stop assuming it is.
Then start reading literature from Amnesty International: http://www.amnesty.org/
Despite what people think, AI isn't about any kind of "liberal agenda", they're just about wrongful imprisonment, torture, and basic human rights.
That'll get you started in statistics, and then you can start looking for the various Dept. of Correction websites in each state to see what initiatives they have, and you might even be able to get at their stats (although usually you have to ask or FOIA to get them).
Do you know if this is correlated with overcrowding of prisons (actual capacity vs. intended capacity)? You mentioned California prisons are some of the worst, to my knowledge they are also the most overcrowded?
What strikes me in a comparative analysis of the US penal system is not quality of treatment, but the perverse economic incentives promoting hoarding such a large percentage of the population in them. I would argue the biggest problem in the American penal system is public policy structuring unrehabilitated prisoners as assets:
1a. The standard contract for private prisons seems to be money per prisoner housed rather than money per prisoner rehabilitated.
1b. Each prisoner generates further revenue for the private prison as a labor source.
1c. Thus on a balance sheet, each additional unrehabilitated prisoner becomes an asset to be kept rather than a liability to be reduced.
2. Allowing drugs inside prisons becomes an efficiency gain, as prisoners failing drug tests results in assets being held longer.
3a. When prisoners are housed in prisons in rural districts, they count towards that districts population for purposes of calculating representation in state legislature. Even though prisoners cannot vote and are primarily from urban districts.
3b. Prisoners then also become an asset rather than liabilities for politicians in rural districts by giving them undue representative power. Politicians then are incentivized to increase this asset by supporting minimum sentencing laws.
Now there may be no direct agency or conscious intent to the above, but historically changing the underlying structure of economic incentives can have profound positive effects on individual behavior: http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2010/09/09/129757852/pop-quiz... . I'd be interested to know if this perspective fits with your knowledge of the subject.
While the scale of this issue is completely different, the US does have the tendency to use secret prisons - in different countries. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_site#Suspected_black_site...
What really bothers me about those sites is that they don't seem to be monitored by local government at all. The US is many times accused of torturing the prisoners in countries which don't allow such practice.
Are there bad prisons in the US? No doubt. Is the average US inmate experience anything like what is the RULE in these gulags? No. Does the scale between the two matter? Yes. Do the crimes (sometimes "crimes") and due process issues matter? Yes. Can we go on and on with specific, provable differences which make the NK citizen's experience far more horrifying? Yes.
Problems with the prison system in the US belong in their OWN THREAD, where they don't distract from THIS PROBLEM. The fact that some folks feel the overwhelming urge to bring them up here speaks a lot about what they think is important: Scoring points against the US. The US prison system is not relevant to the NK prison system. This isn't a game. NK doesn't get to pick out worst case practices from the US to justify its sweeping unchecked abuses. And it certainly doesn't deserve the aid of willing amateur PR people on random internet message boards.
NK is the same country that quietly let millions of its people starve while it spent a large fraction of its total wealth trying to build the tallest hotel in the world! That's the philosophy and those are the priorities of the organization behind these gulags. But you're telling me the REAL story here is the US prison system?
But this is why NK gets to go merrily about its way starving and torturing its citizens.
No it's not. There are 3 foreign policy "sticks" that could be used to end this situation:
1. Invasion
2. Sanctions
3. Shaming
Aggregation of frustration is not one of them.
They have differing requirements in order to be effective:
1. Requires a weak enemy military and existent domestic political opposition to the regime. Internal dissonance exists and your forces are not over-leveraged on other fronts.
2. Requires the entity to already be integrated in the global economy. There is something real you can withhold that will not cause additional mass starvation.
3. Requires high social proof. Those doing the shaming can easily deflect accusations of hypocrisy to rapidly build a global and regional (Chinese) consensus.
Notice that no conditions necessary for 1 or 2 are present. This leaves 3 as one of the most obvious routes to discuss. As the US currently has the world's largest population of prisoners, it makes it hard for the USA to end the prisoner problem in North Korea as effectively as it could. Discourse will necessarily gravitate towards how the US can improve its social proof by striving for exemplary domestic policies. It's not a matter of "moral equivalence", but of being open to moral improvement when others remind us of our faults. Unless we can think of a new kind of stick, this may remain the best way to help those in North Korea.
Just spend some time listening to NPR. Constant propaganda telling the listener to respect our government, its institutions, its parties, etc. Why does anyone take American political parties seriously? There is a lot of energy spent propagandizing us about their greatness.
Why should any American care about any foreign prison when rape is used as an unofficial form of punishment in US prisons?
The only purpose of this sort of story is to feed Americans' appetite for feelings of superiority and to allow us to ignore the horrific conditions facing American prisoners.
So unless you think that conditions for North Koreans would be improved by American bombs, I suggest you spend your energy worrying about problems that you can actually make an impact on, such as US prisons, and stop being self-righteous about problems in other countries.
Of course that says nothing about how bad the prisons are. But it probably does say something about the quality of the justice system as a whole.
just to clarify for others. The high conviction success rate in japan has to do with at least two things:
1. Only cases which have high chances of success are pursued (so you get cases where "people fell down a staircase".
2. Detainees have little expectation of talking to an attorney any time soon. Confessions, co-erced or otherwise, are sought after with vigor by the police. From Wikipedia "Confessions are often obtained after long periods of questioning by police. This can, at times, take weeks or months during which time the suspect is in detention and can be prevented from contacting a lawyer or family.[2] Thus, since the suspect is put through prolonged strain, stress and pressure, the reliability of such confessions can be questioned. To Japanese citizens and police, however, the arrest itself already creates the presumption of guilt which needs only to be verified via a confession.[2] The interrogation reports prepared by police and prosecutors and submitted to the trial courts often constitute the central evidence considered when weighing the guilt or innocence of the suspect.[3]"
Rape seems to be very prevalent in South Africa's overcrowded prisons, and South African society seems to actively condone prison rape.
Regarding your Biko point, he was murdered before he was sentenced. Although political prisoners under Apartheid were kept under harsh conditions, after visiting Robben Island, I got the impression that conditions for them, overall, were better than those of general prisoners (especially by the mid-late 1980's).
Overall, I think that prison conditions, for general criminal suspects/convicts, have not gotten much better, although there is greater transparency, than in the past.
See this article on a UK extradition request, where prison conditions are being used as an argument to block extradition of a murder suspect to SA: http://www.iol.co.za/capeargus/shrien-s-gay-risk-defence-1.1...
Regime that interns its people in death camps? A system that engenders such poverty that people are forced into cannibalism? (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1875007335054132657#)
Couldn't possibly judge. Nope, not with all the similar problems here in the evil ol' US of A.
Such politics of resentment lead Soviets in the 1910s-20s to hate the upper class and the "imperialist" West, Nazis in the 1930s to hate the British and the Jews, certain Islamist elements from the 1980s and onward to hate the U.S., and so on. I don't mind a sound criticism of power, but I cannot stand resentment. Because those who resent those in power the most are often those who unscrupulously desire said power for themselves the most.
TL;DR: stop resenting and get back to hacking.
I grew up in a former communist country. There, if you were a critical thinker with a strong personality striving for your own economic well-being, you would generally end up labeled as the enemy of the state. The modern capitalist economy tends to reward such people, yet some still feel resentment (hint: in any system, egalitarian or not, there will be those who feel resentment).