So...this has really been bothering me, about the Lindemann thing. The fact that these SJWs seem to not respect the idea of rule of law, and seem to support mob justice. They base their opinions on their critical theories, which talk about power imbalances, blah blah blah, but as I said, those theories, while valid, are a double edged sword. They have a place in discussion, but if you focus SOLELY on them, you start seeing them in everything to the point the ideology becomes a self parody, and you kind of lose sight of other aspects of reality. Social justice ideology is a lens, but it's only a lens, not the most important lens, or the only lens. It gives you one view of the world out of a possibility of many, but it lacks on so many other things.
In sociology, critical theories are subsets of conflict theories, which focus mostly on power imbalances. But, functionalism focuses on WHY things are the way they are and what positive social functions they serve, and that's what I'm going to focus on here.
It is true that rape is an extremely underpunished crime, and that there isn't much evidence in most scenarios, and that in the court of law, rape cases don't hold up and many criminals walk free. But when we consider things like criminal justice systems, we need to focus on two kinds of errors here. Sure, we should consider the possibility that standards of evidence are too strict where we can't lock up actual criminals for actual crimes, but we should also consider what would happen if we made the standards laxer. We could, instead of letting guilty people go free, be locking up tons of innocent people. Any criminal justice system is going to have these kinds of errors both ways. We can totally live in a world in which some people who are guilty walk free, and some who are innocent get locked up. But if we had to choose one, which one is preferable?
Our society is built around the idea that it is better to let guilty people go free, than to lock up innocent people. Our society was the first modern democracy, here in the US, and most of the rest of the "free world" have constitutions that are based on ours, or other ones like ours. I don't think the US constitution is perfect, mind you, it is an over 200 year old document full of flaws and compromises and has many institutions that havent aged well, but the concept of "innocent until proven guilty", and the ample rights granted to citizens and suspected criminals one of its hallmark contributions to modern society.
We used to have societies where people were locked up on mere suspicions for crimes. Where we wouldn't give people fair trials. Where we shot first and asked questions later. Where we tortured people for craps and giggles. And...those societies aren't very preferable to live in since they run the risk of an unchecked authoritarian just locking up whomever they wanted and abusing them and violating their established rights as human beings. We decided, no, human beings are entitled to a certain amount of dignity, and certain freedoms, and and certain rights, and that these are good, because the consequences of having such things are good.
It is generally speaking much better to presume innocent until proven guilty, and have standards of evidence as high as "reasonable doubt" in order to prove someone of a crime. It's better for there to be rules and procedures to be followed and that things that break those rules and procedures are inadmissible in court. It's better that we ensure our justice system makes a lot of errors in assuming that guilty people are innocent, than the other way around.
And that's what scares me about SJWs, cancel culture, and this mob justice crap. They literally have the same mindsets as the crazy whacko Trumpers and their fascism at times. Wanting to lock people up for crimes regardless of their guilt (remember their calls to lock up Hillary?), wanting to ruin peoples' life based on mere allegations, rather than waiting for evidence to come in to prove wrongdoing was done.
Everyone deserves a presumption of innocence. it is on the justice system to prove people guilty. And yes, on subjects of rape and sexual assault, maybe our justice system is a bit anemic. But what's the alternative? Throwing people in jail based on no evidence? Mindlessly believing whatever rumors anyone creates? I stand by the idea that allegations require proof, and to quote Christopher Hitchens, I believe that which is presented without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
I also support the institutions doing their job rather than people. These people think they're vigilantes. One of them even compared themselves to Batman. You're not batman. You'll NEVER be batman (r/unexpectedsaoabridged). Seriously vigilante justice, the idea of an angry mob trying to go after someone who has not had their day in court is a dangerous precedent to set. Our entire society was designed to try to avoid the flaws associated with the alternatives to the rule of law, and here these SJWs just don't care and wanna more or less lynch Till because of allegations that are so weak the Lithuanian police aren't even going to pursue them further.
It scares me that people just dont leave things that are obviously criminal matters to the authorities intended to handle criminals. Then again they dont trust the authorities to get the results they want. Because they're ideological extremists who are narrow minded and focused on spreading their ideology rather than establishing some sense of true justice.
I know it sucks, if someone who is guilty ends up not getting prosecuted. The good news is most offenders are repeat offenders, so if they don't get nailed this time and they're guilty of that kind of behavior, they'll likely get nailed eventually. If Till really does regularly sexually assault people at his concerts and afterparties, something is bound to happen eventually unless he completely changes his behavior. At which point I'd be fine with mere deterrence. The purpose of the justice system shouldnt be first and foremost to punish criminals, but to deter and rehabilitate them. If this experience causes till be to more cautious about his sexuality in the future then that's a positive thing for me.
No comments:
Post a Comment