You must log in or # to comment.
The only thing that pissed me off more than Trump winning, was seeing how many good Props failed, and bad ones passed.
I’m glad we made LGBT marriage part of our constitution, but jesus christ the voting base here is NIMBYs, NeoLibs, and Conservatives.
Exactly right
My guess is that all those people who didn’t show up to vote dem weren’t around to vote for the other dem items.
There was a certain irony in ranked choice ballot initiatives failing while the same people that didn’t show up complained about both candidates being “exactly the same” or to punish the Democratic party.
Big time. Hurts to see it happen.
Maybe next life I will be free to vote how i want.
Can you expand on that? Good news in American politics would be a nice change.
- California made it in the constitution that marriage is between two people, gender or sex is not considered what counts
- And we also made it so Medi-Cal gets a permanent chunk of funding no matter what the budget is doing.
That sounds great!. I’m happy for Californians.
This was a result of election night that is underreported, but hugely telling and frustrating.
All this noise about California being liberal, progressive, and the resistance to Trump. But they kept slavery in prison legal. And I think the people who are predicting prison “labor” will be used to replace migrant labor if mass deportation does happen have it right. And California had a chance to make that impossible and decided not to.
Criminal labor isn’t split down any party line.
I’ve voted blue for decades, just so I can say I did the right thing: harm reduction.
This nation’s last, last, last chance to improve its course would have been to soundly reject the supply side, trickle down Reaganomics grift, but when they lied that YOU could be one of the rich ones one day, Americans giggled like schoolgirls and the former party of labor went full neoliberal to take the larger corporate bribes unions just couldn’t match. That is when any hope for the US to become the benevolent nation it never was but claimed to want to be died.
Citizens United was just a victory lap for the capitalists to piss on its decomposing corpse.
Anyone who wants to claim this country was over a couple of Tuesdays ago, hasn’t been paying attention.
And it wasn’t the Neonazi scum that killed it either, they just see opportunity in the cultural vacuum and chaos. Twas unchecked capitalist greed that killed the beast.
And all because 1950s McCarthyism incepted America with a seed that may eventually destroy it long after the USSR’s dissolution
I’d zoom out, Capitalism has a growth phase and decay phase, we are at the tail-end of the decay phase and need to jump to Socialism. Marx’s analysis makes this more clear, I wrote an introductory Marxist reading list if you want to check it out.
This is why we need a “New California Republic”, with rangers to protect the population, just don’t listen those anti-mutties bigots…
Always enjoy your posts, ozma.
Thank you. I try.
If we had 50 million more like you, this nation would be lovely.
Thank you
Wasn’t the ballot initiative also deliberately confusing? I remember seeing something about it and reading it myself and going “what the fuck is the answer for no slavery?”
No, it wasn’t. It had no argument against, no supporters against, and the text was extremely simple.
Yes/No Statement
A YES vote on this measure means: Involuntary servitude would not be allowed as punishment for crime. State prisons would not be allowed to discipline people in prison who refuse to work.
A NO vote on this measure means: Involuntary servitude would continue to be allowed as punishment for crime.
Although I can’t seem to find if this text is on the ballot to explain it
Yep that’s what’s on the ballot too. Very simple. I’d argue middle-school level or below.
They also still have the death penalty.
“Scratch a liberal, and a fascist bleeds.” Makes you question if Californians really care for the marginalized.
I mean given what I’ve seen of their treatment of the homeless it’s very obvious many if them don’t.
I don’t understand your first sentence. California is way more evenly matched than people would like to believe. There’s also a bit of selection bias where the super racists leave after a few years because what is objectively not a particular caring state is still too “woke” for them so they try Texas/Colorado.
I digress, San Francisco’s politics is considered very progressive. At the same time, NIMBY laws are very strong and contributed to homelessness there.
It has not collapsed yet. Democrats are electing a new chair RIGHT NOW (I don’t know the date, but in the next few weeks).
They are going to elect a centrist. We can stop them. Now is the time.
If the new DNC is progressive and inspires people, it will prevent reluctant Republicans from going full scorched earth.
A progressive platform will win Democrats the white house for the next 20 years. Ask FDR how I know.
This, right now, is the final chance we have to prevent collapse.
Spread the word, share & cross post.
The DNC goes where their donors want them to go. We have no real impact on what the DNC does, the wealthy Capitalists that buy them do. Collapse isn’t prevented even if the Dems went progressive, it would just be slowed, you can’t escape Capitalism’s inherent unsustainability.
Clearly most people don’t consider forced labor slavery in a prison environment. At least not in California or any of the other states that allow it.
I voted against it because I think they are plenty of prisoners that want to work, so we don’t need to be forcing people, but I also understand how people could just consider it a part of the punishment too. I mean, you take away so many rights of a person when you imprison them. What makes this facet special? Is it because we used the magic word slavery and so people suddenly feel guilty because of America’s past?
The prisons themselves litreally didn’t care enough to even argue against it, which should tell you how little this actually impacts their workforce. My understanding was that people were just getting upset at having to do wildfire related work when things started getting dangerous after they reaped all the rewards and training for that job.
It’s like being a firefighter for the pay, chili, and comradery, then balking when you are told to go fight a fire. Your average person could do that and probably be fired on the spot. Prisoners don’t get to make that decision.
You understand they weren’t paid for that training or job, right?
You understand they weren’t allowed to do that job when they were out of prison, right? Even as a volunteer they’d be disqualified. They received no benefits for risking their lives, but we’re punished if they did not. They were not sentenced to death.
To your main point, slavery is bad in all contexts. Corporations shouldn’t get to have slaves because they pay their workers so badly they turned to crime.
Inmates shouldn’t have rights. They are worse than animals, have no conscience, no reform measures have actually worked in terms of reducing recidivism, and victims matter more than offenders.
Having them do “Slave labor” is justified.
Do you… do you really rhink that way?
The crime: smoked a joint
Trolling used to mean something, man.
It was an art form, subtle and truly beautiful to behold. Now look at what it has become. Truly makes you cry
Didnt you name yourself after a criminal played by someone who assaults children?
Beautiful. See, this it’s done
You do know that countries focused on rehabilitation over punishment have low as hell crime rates right?
What race are they?
Objection: Relevance
I wouldn’t feed the troll if I were you, that’s what they are after.
America is falling apart, but not because some people’s pet issue is miscasting prison convict work as “slavery”. Fasten your seat belts.
if it’s not slavery, then why is it specifically an exception under the constitutional ban on slavery?
miscasting prison convict work as “slavery”
Found the asshole voting against human rights, gross
Yep, we know those workers have a choice of employers and get at least minimum wage, regular increases for merit, regular holidays and personal days, the right to organize, and an assortment of benefits. Their pay is commensurate with anyone doing similar jobs, right? There’s no way that’s space labor
Correct, prison labor is a form of involuntary servitude the 13th Amendment explicitly doesn’t apply to. Bear in mind, all this time I haven’t even argued in favor of prison labor. I’m saying calling it slavery is inappropriate, no matter how passionate you are about it.
It can be called slavery while still being permissible under the constitution. It’s not illegal slavery, just like pre-civil war slavery in the south wasn’t illegal… But it’s still slavery.
Slaves have owners, but call it flapjacks or pudding or whatever makes you feel like a keyboard justice warrior.
If “has an owner” is what everything hinges on, and the Department of Corrections or whoever has full custody and control doesn’t count, fine. I guess that’s technically in the first definition that came up. But Jesus Christ, when the vast majority of conditions match up, you sure spent a hell of a lot more time puffing your chest and acting high and mighty instead of, you know, explaining why it isn’t. You had to go through a few responses before any explanation at all!
Yes, having an owner is what the word itself hinges on. The imagery and emotion that go with it aren’t a handy colorful Post-It to stick on something else.
And a lot of people think (not unreasonably IMO) that it hinges on the involuntary labor. I’m all for strong arguments and being accurate or whatever, but even if someone is one of today’s ten thousand it doesn’t do any good to insult them and repeat your unsubstantiated point. You know why this doesn’t perfectly fit the dictionary definition of slavery, we don’t. Is it too much to ask for you to tell us that detail, if you’re going through the trouble of commenting?
“It’s not slavery, its involuntary servitude.”
This guys is either trolling or dumb as a bag of dumb cunts
Name-calling - a time-honored way to win any argument. Respect!
Semantics isn’t an argument, it’s a waste of time.
One person was arguing that they shouldn’t be able to refuse to do “chores” in prison, but the things they do there are things like making license plates, furniture, and fighting wildfires. A bit far from mopping up and taking out the garbage.
Is that person wrong though? Would they be able to refuse “chores”?
Edit: This is not a rhetorical question. I want to know if they are factually correct or not.
Why are you taking jobs away from the working class and giving it to prison slaves?
Prisoners are a subset of the working class. I am advocating for giving them jobs and paying them a reasonable hourly wage for those jobs (measured in dollars and not cents) so that they can gain work experience that is useful when they are released, and so that the fruits of their labour can also be used to offset the cost of their incarceration, compensate the victims of their crime, and build up a nest egg that can be used to help them re-integrate back into society.
And these jobs are not typically those that the free working class are willing to do anyway. That’s why the companies offering these kinds of jobs always get busted hiring undocumented workers paying them next to nothing with no paid breaks, days off, overtime pay, and in horrendous working conditions.
They’re in prison. Forcing them to do anything is wrong. We’ve already taken their freedom. Using them as labor is morally wrong. Especially when you look at the punishments like solitary.
I’d argue that simple chores can be used to help inmates get used to structured work as part of a reintegration effort. Of course that only makes sense if reintegration is the main goal of the prison system, which isn’t the case in the United States.
In any way, if inmates were to do labor, they’d have to be subject to labor law including worker protections and minimum wage provisions. That would probably require the United States to abolish slavery first, which isn’t going to happen anytime soon.
If it’s not against their will. Sure.
A guy I knew once that I definitely wouldn’t call a friend, used to say, “the only way you can change a man is if he’s in diapers.”
And in a lot of different aspects that has resonated with me, in this case, if you’re forcing a person to do labor in order to make that a better functioning member of society… It’s not going to work. They may just do the work they are forced to do without changing at all. Or they just cause trouble. OR, you hire prisoners to do the job that they need and then substitute labor that they can’t hire within. But the logic or forcing someone into submission just will never work, that’s definitely a reason why the recidivation is high.
A lot of these folks in prison were raised “free range” or completely feral and thus were never taught even the most basic elements of home care and cleaning. Knowing how and when to do those “chores” is essential should any of them want to reintegrate into society as any sort of a functioning person. Like the military will show recruits basic hygiene because some of these recruits were never taught it.
Oh wow, we are doing these savages a service! Now, go put out that wildfire, unclean one /s
Jesus, this sounds like Europeans landing at whatever they colonized centuries ago
Chores = firefighting? Where the fuck did you grow up?
California prisoners are used as fire fighters on wild fires.
Man…. The disconnect here
Prisons are almost entirely run by prisoners. There are no “labor laws”
Prisons are almost entirely run by prisoners. There are no “labor laws”
That’s what they’re saying.
If prisoners are to do manual labor, labor laws should apply, but that would require the USA to abolish slavery.
Nonsense. Of course abolishing prison slavery would be a good thing. But the alternative, should such involuntary servitude remain, would be to impose humane regulations on such labor.
That was not a rhetorical question. I am asking if that argument is or is not factually correct.
They can’t refuse any job short of firefighting. They will be punished for doing so. Reports from former inmates indicate punishments range from solitary to beatings.
Let me rephrase: would the proposition, if it had passed, prohibited prisons from requiring prisoners to perform domestic duties within the prison?
See that’s still too vague. Cleaning the bathroom is a domestic duty and yet is something a janitor does in this context. I would say that’s probably the dividing line, if it’s something you’d pay someone to do then they would be banned from requiring it.
I guess I’ll put my personal opinion on the record here. I think that penal labour is generally an exploitative industry, if you want to call it that. And I do think that prisoners who perform work should be paid for that work. At the same time, I’m also sensitive to the fact that it costs a great deal of money to pay for room and board and security for prisoners, and that it’s also fair that their labour be used to offset some of the cost of their own imprisonment rather than laying the burden entirely on the public purse.
So while I don’t support solitary confinement as a punishment (for anything), I do think that prisoners should have to at a minimum cook and clean for themselves. If they don’t want to cook, then nobody else should have to do it; they just won’t have dinner that night if they don’t cook and serve it themselves. If nobody wants to wash the dishes, then it’s not the administration’s problem if there aren’t any clean plates to use for the next meal. If nobody wants to clean the shower, then it’s not the administration’s problem if grime starts to build up on it. The State should not force the prisoners to work, but it also shouldn’t be the State’s responsibility to provide janitors or cooks to look after them.
Which means I agree that “extra” work beyond what’s necessary to maintain the basic needs of the prisoners should be paid and optional. “Optional” meaning there’s no punishment if you choose not to do it, but if you don’t, you won’t have money to pay for services like postage stamps, extra phone calls, or the prison commissary. Even if prisoners are only paid half of minimum wage, that’s still an improvement, because it recognises that their labour has value and this money can also be used to pay for fines and restitution. A pretty common problem among the newly-released is that they are saddled with an obscene amount of debt because the State makes them pay court costs, room and board, fines, parole monitoring fees, and restitution but only pays them fifty cents an hour for their work, meaning they leave prison thousands of dollars in debt with the threat of parole revocation if they can’t pay. That just drives people to resort to crime in order to find the money.
Oh it’s worse than that. California voted to make more homeless people, expand the three strikes system by turning some misdemeanors into felonies, and voted itself a slave state to take advantage of all that new prison population.
All that’s left is to privatize the pipeline.
But it’s okay, they removed the defunct ban on same sex marriage so they’re still progressive! Yay!
The baton used to crush your skull will be rainbow colored and have BLM on it.
I entirely agree with your point, it’s hypocritical “progressive” bullshit to maintain slavery.
But if I’m being honest, California is on my short list to move to because my state doesn’t support same sex marriage and I expect Obergefell to be overturned. It’s horrorific to be in this position but that’s me and my partners reality.
Oh it’s definitely better than other other states. But I would suggest checking out the NE and NW as well.
