marjaerwin: (Default)
If you think it is justified for police to shoot and kill people for disobeying their orders…

Then you think it is okay for some people to shoot and kill other people for disobeying their orders.

I have no words for how vile this is. It means you think it is okay to kill people for being unable to hear those orders, for being unable to make sense of those orders, for being disabled, for ignoring those orders, for ignoring that force-propped authority, for being human in an inhuman world.

That so many people think it is okay for some people to shoot and kill other people for disobeying their orders makes me wonder who would want an inhuman world, and why, when they can’t really live without a more human world.
marjaerwin: (Default)
It kinda amazes me that he could come up with both brilliant moral philosophy, such as his attempts to define a/the categorical imperative, and atrocious moral philosophy, such as his defense of revenge, or his support for white supremacy.

I am just going to point out two formulations of his categorical imperative, and how his oft-cited support for revenge/retribution contradicts this. I don't understand the third, but the first two cover the important ground:

In one formulation, he said that we should act only according to that maxim which we could, at the same time, will to be a universal law.

In another, he said that we should always treat humanity as an end in itself, never as a mere means.

Any form of revenge/retribution/returning evil for evil means treating revenge as an end in itself and the humanity of the target of the revenge as a mere means. Because it is pointless cruelty, it violates the formula of humanity. Because it is an evil for an evil, if it is consistent, then it leads to an endless cycle of evil, and it isn't good regardless of any formula; if it is inconsistent, it fails the formula of universal law.

I have a hard enough time understanding why anyone would support revenge, but I have a harder time understanding someone who actually thought about moral philosophy and contributed good ideas to moral philosophy would have supported revenge.


Jan. 10th, 2014 06:04 pm
marjaerwin: (Default)
Justice is restoring what is right. It's not revenge and adding to what's wrong. It's not institutional immunity and continued abuse. It's not following the procedures of the injustice system, which sometimes calls itself legal, sometimes civil, sometimes criminal, sometimes justice but is rarely more than one of these things.

So many people appeal to the legal system. It horrifies me. One claimed that "Justice is what you get from a jury in a courtroom. Do you have any better ideas?" but when people are framed and falsely convicted, as happens, that's an injustice. when people aren't framed but are convicted under unjust laws, or convicted for something they had to do to survive, as happens, that's an injustice. those things come from juries, and they're not justice. and when you get into the rest of the legal system, with people being beaten and raped while awaiting trial, with crooked plea-bargains, racism, ableism, bribes, prison labor, prison profiteering, v-coding [forced prison prostitution], and so on, there are too many injustices.

Justice is not an institution. Justice is an aspect of peace/justice/freedom, and one of the things we measure institutions against.
marjaerwin: (Default)
I’ve been triggered and scared since yesterday morning.

I think that our consciences are part of what makes us people. But when death penalty supporters start talking about how killing people is justice, I see that something has gone very wrong with their consciences. As children we’re exposed to a lot of pro-war, pro-death penalty, and other pro-murder propaganda, and it’s easy to internalize that. But at some point our consciences should lead us to reject all that propaganda. Instead, when people offer pseudo/sado-moral gibberish about how death is justice, I have to wonder if all that propaganda has somehow caused them to reject their consciences, or somehow corrupted their consciences.
marjaerwin: (Default)
She is being charged with doing what any humyn being should have done, in her place, and may face life imprisonment or execution for doing the right thing.

But so many people are saying she should be shot, and some are saying she shouldn't even be considered humyn, and that she should be shot and her supporters - all of us - should be shot.

And that's the nature of war and empire. It involves dehumanizing the other, and it involves dehumanizing one's self to serve the empire. I hate ideologies of national/racial loyalty, military loyalty, and oaths. All these things encourage us-and-them and despise our common humanity, and that's what war-mongers use these things for.

Ni aiþos, nih harjos, nih reiks, nih kaisar!


marjaerwin: (Default)

August 2017

13141516 17 1819
27 28 293031  


RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sep. 25th, 2017 02:24 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios