Recall a few weeks ago when President Obama negotiated with the Republicans over the legislation that involved the extension of the Unemployment Benefits and the "Tax Cuts For The Rich" that the GOP wanted? At that time it was President Obama who was attacked by the Progressive-Fundamentalists for caving too quickly and not holding out for a better deal.
Please take this same template and apply it to the curious situation that is being exposed with regard to the prison protests in Georgia regarding the treatment of those who are incarcerated. The claim is that certain labor practices and violations of the prisoners human rights are taking place.
Notice that in the conversations from the supporters of these prisoners who are on the outside of the "Prison Industrial Complex" the entire conversation is focused upon the "injustice" rendered by the state institutions. It appears to be a given that the inmate has certain inalienable rights and that none of them will be compromised. In fact the struggle to identify these violations trumps any hint of resentment about what these men have done to enter into these prison walls.
(Please note: As I type this I am watching a DVD in which the works of hard left operative Howard Zinn are being dramatized by several orators on stage. Indeed the "United States" is the soul target of their indictments. )
Simply put the viewpoint that is present in the Howard Zinn dramatization is also present among the protesters against the treatment of prisoners in the state of Georgia. The "Activists Of Leisure" reserve the right to look past any number of civil rights and human rights violations that are more proximate to their domicile and instead make an indictment of a more favorable target to their ideology and cause.
As these "Activists Of Leisure" act out they are required to deny their "establishment power" over any of the conditions that are troubling to them. With activist Michelle Alexander providing the voice to their claims that "most of these men are locked up for unjust reasons anyway" - per the abundant drug related offenses - the attempt is to negate the observations made by people like me.
You see - Our "perennial victim" was walking down the street, minding his own business, doing everything that he is supposed to be doing. The SYSTEM crept up from behind him, with nefarious intent and clubbed him upside the head. When he woke from the blunt force trauma - without access to health care - he found that he was IMPRISONED. The worst type of damnable situation where one "can't lose for trying".
Assuming The Aggressive Ownership Of The Outcomes As An Alternative
My proposal is that a CONDITIONAL transaction be made with these men who proclaim suffering and injustice behind these prison walls.
Those who have acted out in some manner against the interests of the community must compelled by their present difficult situation to TRANSACT with the same community that they have violated prior to this same community agreeing to assist them.
I challenge ANYONE to tell me the downside of this transactional approach?
If these incarcerated men refuse to reform themselves upon getting out it is our community who will continue to suffer. If they agree to these preconditions - this same community will see a let up of the assaults that we all know are present.
Those who would accuse ME of being complicit in the states "torture" and "labor rights violation" transacted by the state are ALSO the same people who are most inclined to be unwilling to tell us what these incarcerated men have done and the damage that it has rendered upon the community.
The only person worthy of their indictment are those who ultimately stand against their agenda.
No comments:
Post a Comment