“Punitive grandstanding” is the most descriptive short phrase I could come up to describe the following concept:

A situation where someone pushes for extreme punitive measures against in immoral act, which in practice “virtue signals” moral superiority and implies people proposing lesser punishment are immoral. This behaviour often goes beyond what is proportionate or productive.

You probably know what I mean. Say there’s a new lemmy thread on a news community, it’s about someone having committed a horrible crime. All the comments end up being a sort of “jerk off contest” for who can propose the strongest punishment and thereby assert their moral superiority.

Instead of taking an approach to actually reduce the incident of said crime, looking at what problems might have led to it, how to care for the victim/family, and how to properly rehabilitate and treat someone who committed such an act, solely focusing on coming up with the most draconian punishment possible.

Anyone who comments something about the justice system ideally being rehabilitative gets accused of being no better than the criminal themselves or “helping” criminals.

I’ve just noticed this general trend which seems to be at odds with anarchist principles. I wonder what you think? Have you noticed this too? Do you think it’s a major problem? What can we do about it?

  • Rottcodd@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    21 days ago

    Exactly - that belief is not supported by the evidence

    Yet they continue to call for increasingly punitive punishments anyway.

    Why?

    • poVoq@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      21 days ago

      Because you don’t need evidence to believe something? Especially if you don’t care to look for such evidence?