Troy Davis
I've always been again the death penalty. Against it no matter the situation. Even leaving out my moral/political stance against the concept of any state getting to decide who lives and dies, the fact remains that:
humans are inherently imperfect/biased, and as they govern themselves by systems of justice they have created these systems are also inherently imperfect;
under an inherently imperfect justice system where the death penalty is an option, innocent people absolutely WILL, from time to time, be unfairly convicted and put to death; and as such
the regular occurrence of such a travesty is an absolute certainty, not a ~bleeding-heart hippie's fantastical nightmare.
The logic behind taking a position against this horrifying certainty should be extremely straightforward, but plenty on the right and even the mainstream left seem to be incapable of grasping that reasoning.
In any case, the Troy Davis case perfectly illustrates why I've always been uncomfortable when people who self-identify as progressive or liberal profess sentiments like, "Well, I'm not in favor of the death penalty but in situation X involving criminal Y where the guilt is ~totally obvious~ and the crime is totally heinous, I can see it being justified."
Just no. No no no. Who are YOU to make that decision? How do you not see that justifying a policy in "obvious" cases allows, under our imperfect systems, for its INEVITABLE misuse in others? How do you not see that being in favor of the death penalty in so-called "obvious" situations is the reason why Troy Davis lies dead? How do you not see that your "anti-death penalty except when it makes perfect sense" stance is effectively a pro-death penalty stance? Saying you're a liberal who would only allow the death penalty in ~obvious situations~ makes you no different than a George W. Bush or a Rick Perry, who each have presided over the deaths of hundreds of incarcerated people in Texas. You're just as pro-death penalty as they would be in "obvious" situations; the only difference between you and them is that you have less faith than they do in The System's ability to administer justice properly.
Oh, and it's been hilarious listening to the mainstream left and the Dem Party faithful on the news/internet/etc. circling the wagons and defending Obama for not even offering an opinion re. Troy Davis. Don't get me wrong, I have no illusions that a President could have done anything to change the course of a state prosecution: as White House Press Secretary Jay Carney explained, "it would not be appropriate for the president of the United States to weigh in on specific cases like this one, which is a state prosecution."
So I get it. It's not like Obama actually saying something on the matter might have saved Troy Davis's life. But how fucking dumb does the line "it would not be appropriate for the President of the United States to weigh in" look in the context of what's going on in the world right now? Obama just made a significant dick-waving speech to the UN in which he claimed, using a disgusting disregard for logic, that he was ~soooooo ttly~ for Palestinian statehood even though he is also against Palestinians asking for international recognition of Palestinian statehood. (Seriously, how does this even work? How do you claim to be for a people's right to self-determination and then turn around and in the same breath say that you're going to cockblock these people from achieving their dreams because they're going against your own interests and rendering you irrelevant in the process? Fucking ridiculous.)
So wait wait wait. It "would not be appropriate for the President of the United States to weigh in" on a domestic state-level criminal prosecution, but it's TOTALLY okay for him to weigh in on why it's wrong for a people to achieve their goals for self-determination in a way that goes against US/Israel interests? As the anti-war group ANSWER said yesterday, the President doesn't feel constrained from speaking out about executions in Iran and other sovereign countries and the White House regularly poses as the ~human rights champion of “specific cases” in other countries. The President did his best to cheerlead for yet another war in Libya and sell it to the public both at home and abroad, so why does the White House remain mute when it comes to a glaringly obvious miscarriage of justice within the boundaries of the United States?
Like I said, no, I wouldn't have expected a public statement from Obama to save Davis's life. All I'm saying is that it's High Grade Bullshit for apologists to argue that it's ~inappropriate~ for him to weigh in on a case he has no effective jurisdiction over. Press Sec. Carney is talking about the "inappropriate" nature of such a hypothetical act because he's covering for the fact that the lack of a comment was a purely political, calculated move-one that reflects where the White House's interests lie and the administration's deliberate CHOICE to not exhibit any leadership in this situation. And while it's sad that this is how the White House framed the debate, spewing this sort of perfectly spun bullshit is Carney's job. What's REALLY sad is that apologists ate it up immediately and uncritically, and did their best to shut down differing opinions instead of thinking. We have a President who is perfectly willing to speak up and "take the lead" and give us his opinion and show some gonads when he wants to bomb brown people abroad, so please, don't try to tell me that it's the "inappropriateness" of it all that's stopping him from having a public opinion of the unjust murder of a person of color at home. This is about priorities, plain and simple, and our President has precious few of the right ones, no matter how people try to rationalize his actions or lack thereof.
P.S. If your blood isn't boiling enough over the death of Troy Davis, enjoy this little bit of rage-making juxtaposition.
"If there is no struggle there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom and yet deprecate agitation are men who want crops without plowing up the ground; they want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its many waters.
"This struggle may be a moral one, or it may be a physical one, and it may be both moral and physical, but it must be a struggle. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will. Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them, and these will continue till they are resisted with either words or blows, or with both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress."
(Frederick Douglass)
May Troy Davis rest in peace, and until the mainstream left is willing to put some actual conviction behind their principles and hold the politicians who are supposedly on our side accountable, may the ideals that Americans hold dear rest in peace as well.
humans are inherently imperfect/biased, and as they govern themselves by systems of justice they have created these systems are also inherently imperfect;
under an inherently imperfect justice system where the death penalty is an option, innocent people absolutely WILL, from time to time, be unfairly convicted and put to death; and as such
the regular occurrence of such a travesty is an absolute certainty, not a ~bleeding-heart hippie's fantastical nightmare.
The logic behind taking a position against this horrifying certainty should be extremely straightforward, but plenty on the right and even the mainstream left seem to be incapable of grasping that reasoning.
In any case, the Troy Davis case perfectly illustrates why I've always been uncomfortable when people who self-identify as progressive or liberal profess sentiments like, "Well, I'm not in favor of the death penalty but in situation X involving criminal Y where the guilt is ~totally obvious~ and the crime is totally heinous, I can see it being justified."
Just no. No no no. Who are YOU to make that decision? How do you not see that justifying a policy in "obvious" cases allows, under our imperfect systems, for its INEVITABLE misuse in others? How do you not see that being in favor of the death penalty in so-called "obvious" situations is the reason why Troy Davis lies dead? How do you not see that your "anti-death penalty except when it makes perfect sense" stance is effectively a pro-death penalty stance? Saying you're a liberal who would only allow the death penalty in ~obvious situations~ makes you no different than a George W. Bush or a Rick Perry, who each have presided over the deaths of hundreds of incarcerated people in Texas. You're just as pro-death penalty as they would be in "obvious" situations; the only difference between you and them is that you have less faith than they do in The System's ability to administer justice properly.
Oh, and it's been hilarious listening to the mainstream left and the Dem Party faithful on the news/internet/etc. circling the wagons and defending Obama for not even offering an opinion re. Troy Davis. Don't get me wrong, I have no illusions that a President could have done anything to change the course of a state prosecution: as White House Press Secretary Jay Carney explained, "it would not be appropriate for the president of the United States to weigh in on specific cases like this one, which is a state prosecution."
So I get it. It's not like Obama actually saying something on the matter might have saved Troy Davis's life. But how fucking dumb does the line "it would not be appropriate for the President of the United States to weigh in" look in the context of what's going on in the world right now? Obama just made a significant dick-waving speech to the UN in which he claimed, using a disgusting disregard for logic, that he was ~soooooo ttly~ for Palestinian statehood even though he is also against Palestinians asking for international recognition of Palestinian statehood. (Seriously, how does this even work? How do you claim to be for a people's right to self-determination and then turn around and in the same breath say that you're going to cockblock these people from achieving their dreams because they're going against your own interests and rendering you irrelevant in the process? Fucking ridiculous.)
So wait wait wait. It "would not be appropriate for the President of the United States to weigh in" on a domestic state-level criminal prosecution, but it's TOTALLY okay for him to weigh in on why it's wrong for a people to achieve their goals for self-determination in a way that goes against US/Israel interests? As the anti-war group ANSWER said yesterday, the President doesn't feel constrained from speaking out about executions in Iran and other sovereign countries and the White House regularly poses as the ~human rights champion of “specific cases” in other countries. The President did his best to cheerlead for yet another war in Libya and sell it to the public both at home and abroad, so why does the White House remain mute when it comes to a glaringly obvious miscarriage of justice within the boundaries of the United States?
Like I said, no, I wouldn't have expected a public statement from Obama to save Davis's life. All I'm saying is that it's High Grade Bullshit for apologists to argue that it's ~inappropriate~ for him to weigh in on a case he has no effective jurisdiction over. Press Sec. Carney is talking about the "inappropriate" nature of such a hypothetical act because he's covering for the fact that the lack of a comment was a purely political, calculated move-one that reflects where the White House's interests lie and the administration's deliberate CHOICE to not exhibit any leadership in this situation. And while it's sad that this is how the White House framed the debate, spewing this sort of perfectly spun bullshit is Carney's job. What's REALLY sad is that apologists ate it up immediately and uncritically, and did their best to shut down differing opinions instead of thinking. We have a President who is perfectly willing to speak up and "take the lead" and give us his opinion and show some gonads when he wants to bomb brown people abroad, so please, don't try to tell me that it's the "inappropriateness" of it all that's stopping him from having a public opinion of the unjust murder of a person of color at home. This is about priorities, plain and simple, and our President has precious few of the right ones, no matter how people try to rationalize his actions or lack thereof.
P.S. If your blood isn't boiling enough over the death of Troy Davis, enjoy this little bit of rage-making juxtaposition.
"If there is no struggle there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom and yet deprecate agitation are men who want crops without plowing up the ground; they want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its many waters.
"This struggle may be a moral one, or it may be a physical one, and it may be both moral and physical, but it must be a struggle. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will. Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them, and these will continue till they are resisted with either words or blows, or with both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress."
(Frederick Douglass)
May Troy Davis rest in peace, and until the mainstream left is willing to put some actual conviction behind their principles and hold the politicians who are supposedly on our side accountable, may the ideals that Americans hold dear rest in peace as well.