zlacker

[parent] [thread] 21 comments
1. ugh+(OP)[view] [source] 2010-07-23 22:14:41
US incarceration are ridiculous and irrational. Why are European countries and Japan so different, though? They also have elected politicians and special interest groups, what’s going on there?

I think it mostly has something to do with the directness of democracy, not with a difference in opinion or mentality.

Democracy in the US is very local and direct, politicians can actually be punished by the voters for not being tough on crime. That’s not so easy in (for example) Germany. You vote predominantly for parties – the whole package – not politicians. Something as comparatively unimportant as criminal law is going to get swamped by all the other issues, hardly anybody will focus on the particular weak spots of one lowly member of parliament. That would be a waste of effort.

Moreover all decisions about the criminal law are made on the federal level, in commissions full of experts (a lot of academics: criminologists, psychologists …). There is no reason for politicians in those commissions not to follow their recommendations. Voters will hardly ever notice what they decide, it is going to get lost under all the other issues.

You can actually be successful as a German politician who has a image for being tough on crime on the very local level (in, say, a city state), but on that level you can do no more than strictly enforce the rules that already exist. That will hardly change incarceration rates, though.

You don’t need a culture shift, you need a different political system :)

replies(6): >>dieter+B >>_polit+22 >>rsheri+7e >>w00pla+1f >>kingka+Sg >>maskli+Dm
2. dieter+B[view] [source] 2010-07-23 22:35:09
>>ugh+(OP)
Upvoted. However, a different political system would itself necessitate a cultural shift.
replies(1): >>ugh+e2
3. _polit+22[view] [source] 2010-07-23 23:24:42
>>ugh+(OP)
Actually, the incumbency rate for the House of Representatives has been well over 90%, due to corporate financing, redrawing districts, etc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_stagnation_in_the...

As for Germany, it seems there's a lot more political choice, even at the top levels. Due to a greater diversity of parties, which more accurately reflects people's opinions than the US's two-party system. In my view, the US isn't particularly democratic, and anyway all of these nations have top-down "democracies."

replies(2): >>ugh+E2 >>stretc+ia
◧◩
4. ugh+e2[view] [source] [discussion] 2010-07-23 23:29:41
>>dieter+B
Sure. I was being facetious. Lowering incarceration rates in the US is probably a hard problem which would need all kinds of shifts.
replies(1): >>patric+n5
◧◩
5. ugh+E2[view] [source] [discussion] 2010-07-23 23:49:28
>>_polit+22
Is that the same in the state’s legislative bodies? I don’t know how relevant federal legislative bodies are in this discussion since criminal law is mainly a responsibility of the individual states, not the federal government.

America is a huge country, it’s not exactly surprising that you get all those effects you have on the federal level. That, at least to me, seems to be somewhat softened by a particular strong brand of federalism (in the European sense, meaning strong and independent local and state governments).

◧◩◪
6. patric+n5[view] [source] [discussion] 2010-07-24 02:02:59
>>ugh+e2
If "direct democracy" was so powerful, how come they keep making laws against p2p or legalization of weed given that most people are against those laws?
replies(2): >>Ardit2+Ef >>Qz+Tl
◧◩
7. stretc+ia[view] [source] [discussion] 2010-07-24 05:55:35
>>_polit+22
I agree. And choice is even greater in Switzerland. You and your neighbors can even move your neighborhood to a different cantons.

These laws come from DC and the states have lost a lot of the power they had initially. The federal government had a list of powers. They call them the enumerated powers. The states had everything else.

And the citizens could leave a state if they didn't like it. A lot easier to do than leaving the country.

Which is why local laws are not really that oppressive, even if they are. But federal law is all encompassing and difficult for you to influence. They can pretty much ignore the individual and usually do, except when they need something to grandstand about.

replies(1): >>shalma+sG
8. rsheri+7e[view] [source] 2010-07-24 10:24:23
>>ugh+(OP)
Germany doesn't have the kind of crime problems America has, so naturally it's not going to be a big issue.
replies(1): >>ugh+Cf
9. w00pla+1f[view] [source] 2010-07-24 11:51:23
>>ugh+(OP)
> Why are European countries and Japan so different, though?

For a Japanese person, the conviction of a crime (and the shame it brings) is much worse than the jail sentence. If you are convicted of a crime, your family usually breaks off all ties with you.

Other countries (such as Singapore or China) has laws that are more harsh - which ensures that people do not break it (e.g. execution for drug offenses instead of imprisonment). If a person receives corporal punishment for vandalism, he will quickly stop without progressing towards further crimes (or run back to the USA with his tail between his legs).

replies(1): >>neilk+gl
◧◩
10. ugh+Cf[view] [source] [discussion] 2010-07-24 12:22:34
>>rsheri+7e
There are many people in US prisons who wouldn’t be in jail if they did the same thing in Germany (e.g. no three strikes law or mandatory sentencing in Germany).

The prison population might still be higher without those laws because of a difference in crime rate – but not quite as high.

replies(1): >>rsheri+uj
◧◩◪◨
11. Ardit2+Ef[view] [source] [discussion] 2010-07-24 12:23:47
>>patric+n5
I do not think most people are in favour of legalizing weed if by most people you mean the general population and not the teenagers.
12. kingka+Sg[view] [source] 2010-07-24 13:34:02
>>ugh+(OP)
The US is still the wild west in many ways.
◧◩◪
13. rsheri+uj[view] [source] [discussion] 2010-07-24 15:07:04
>>ugh+Cf
And if America had Germany's laws, there would be much higher crime rates. America did have soft crime laws before the 1990s, and it did have much higher crime rates. That's why the US got tough on crime and Germany didn't.

The countries just aren't comparable.

◧◩
14. neilk+gl[view] [source] [discussion] 2010-07-24 15:56:00
>>w00pla+1f
Oh no, there's no crime in Japan.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakuza

It seems to me the harsh punishment of crimes like vandalism is not so much lawfulness as it is about Asian values of group solidarity. When it comes to organized crime, or crime by officials, there's scarcely any need to hide it, since the population is so used to ignoring the misdeeds of the well-connected.

I agree with part of what you said: dishonor is the real punishment. But that's exactly why past a certain point, "getting tough" doesn't work. In the USA, it's so out of proportion now, that in many poor or ethnic minority communities in the USA, the police are perceived as oppressors, not guardians of law and order. And there's no big dishonor in going to jail for a time.

replies(4): >>w00pla+qm >>j_bake+av >>Confus+aL >>yalurk+9u3
◧◩◪◨
15. Qz+Tl[view] [source] [discussion] 2010-07-24 16:21:05
>>patric+n5
"direct democracy" is really the wrong term. The US has a representative democracy, where the people generally don't vote on laws, but rather vote for politicians who vote for laws. Germany has a similar system, except according to the other poster, people vote more for political parties rather than individual politicians. You could say that the US has more "direct representationalism". In reality, representative democracy is about as undemocratic as a democracy can get.
◧◩◪
16. w00pla+qm[view] [source] [discussion] 2010-07-24 16:40:13
>>neilk+gl
> Oh no, there's no crime in Japan.

Violent crime in Japan is ridiculously low.

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakuza

You know that a large percentage of the Yakuza are Korean? In any case, every country has organized crime - yet the Yakuza isn't that violent.

Japan isn't that violent - when you compare things such as murder statistics. I know, I lived in the most violent country and in Japan. Japan is a joke.

> But that's exactly why past a certain point, "getting tough" doesn't work.

The USA never had any really tough laws. I bet that if the USA starts executing major drug dealers (like Singapore), drugs would be a much smaller problem.

> In the USA, it's so out of proportion now, that in many poor or ethnic minority communities in the USA, the police are perceived as oppressors, not guardians of law and order.

The problem in the USA is that it only gets tough when it is too late (e.g. after the 3rd major offense). It should be tough on the first offense (however minor). It is much more difficult to change an established behaviour than a new behaviour - every animal trainer knows this (and it is the same with people).

In any case, the problem with certain ethnic communities is that they value crime (e.g. showing how tough you are) and idolize criminals. That is not the problem of the police - but of the communities. Idolize criminals, dress like criminals and act like criminals and you may be treated as one.

I bet that this idolization of organised crime would disappear if there were chain gangs of criminal members of the community cleaning parks, schools and toilets.

Instead criminals sit in prison doing nothing and each prison becomes a Crime University.

17. maskli+Dm[view] [source] 2010-07-24 16:47:27
>>ugh+(OP)
> You don’t need a culture shift, you need a different political system :)

A culture shift is also needed. In most of Europe, being tough on crime is not a requirement for being elected.

Furthermore, judiciary usually isn't elected, which avoids judges themselves having to become tough on crime for their next mandate (though they're not immune to hierarchical pressures of course).

◧◩◪
18. j_bake+av[view] [source] [discussion] 2010-07-24 22:09:49
>>neilk+gl
One thing to bear in mind about Japan: they put people in mental institutions rather than jails. All it takes to get a person committed against their will is the opinion of one family member and one psychiatrist. In the US, a court order is needed to hold someone against their will for longer than a few days.

Generally speaking, "troublemakers" will go to a mental hospital before going to jail. That's probably why suicides are so high in Japan as well: the mental health system is so overloaded they can't appropriately deal with real problems.

◧◩◪
19. shalma+sG[view] [source] [discussion] 2010-07-25 08:13:52
>>stretc+ia
HOAs are even more local and yet they can have some of the most restrictive regulations around. I don't think your thesis holds.
replies(1): >>yalurk+2u3
◧◩◪
20. Confus+aL[view] [source] [discussion] 2010-07-25 13:10:14
>>neilk+gl

  Oh no, there's no crime in Japan.
He didn´t say that, nor did he imply it. Using this kind of straw man argument polarizes the discussion.
◧◩◪◨
21. yalurk+2u3[view] [source] [discussion] 2010-07-28 22:59:17
>>shalma+sG
I think you misunderstand the parent post, HOAs are actually a perfect supporting example. Even the most tyrannical HOA rule isn't actually that bad, because you can just move a few blocks away to a less-strick HOA or a house with no HOA at all.

However, if a law is passed at the federal level, you're pretty much stuck with it. With local (or hyper-local like HOAs) you can vote with your feet by moving.

◧◩◪
22. yalurk+9u3[view] [source] [discussion] 2010-07-28 23:04:54
>>neilk+gl
I'd question you even need to qualify your statement about perception of the police as "poor or ethnic minority communities".

My social circle is mostly educated, upper-middle class white males. Most still see police as oppressors, many have had negative experiences with police abusing power & harassing them.

[go to top]