“On the Atlanta Journal-Constitution Commentary on the Movie “The Help”

“On the Atlanta Journal-Constitution Commentary on the Movie “The Help”

by Bull Sullivan

 

Atlanta Journal-Constitution,  Sunday, August 21, 2011

Living & Arts Section

Culture

Black, white Atlantans talk about “The Help”

by Rosalind Bentley

Rosalind Bentley’s review and commentary of the film “The Help” could be of little help to anyone serious about understanding the complex dynamics of the relationship between white women and black women in the Southern United States. This is no fault of Ms. Bentley, unless we wish to fault her choice of commentators.  That it was her choice isn’t clear, however, as the article states: “The Atlanta Journal-Constitution asked present and former Atlantans to reflect on that era.” As I reflect on the superfluous comments by this racially imbalanced panel of  five “experts” I must insist, to be fair and balanced, that the reader follow my link to a FaceBook thread of the Atlanta, Georgia “Buckhead Native” Group, which serves to far better inform any interested person of the unusual nature of the relationship between white women, the employers, and black women, the employed, as seen by the children of those white women, many of whom were raised by their black maids. This thread:

( https://www.facebook.com/groups/45120523937/?view=permalink&id=10150261075683938) ,

and several others regarding “The Help” make clear that the complex racial relationships portrayed in Kathryn Stockett’s novel were often the crucible that led the generation of post world war children, War Babies and Boomers, to a compassionate understanding of racial equality and the need for racial justice.

What is amazing to me, a child as described above, literally raised by our maid, our mammy, Carolyn Manning, is that other than Wynette Blathers, who was a maid,  I can not imagine that either Professor Beverly Guy-Sheftall or the Honorable Julian Bond, both of whom were the elite children of educated “Middle Class” black parents, and both of whom could well be described as “high yellow” African Americans,  have any real understanding, other than academic or apocryphal, of the conditions of employment or the nature of the often personal emotional ties that the white wives  had with their black help. Nor can I assume, based on his observations, that Professor James C Cobb ever laid his head on the bosom of his black maid and sobbed over some school day disappointment while this dearest of all women, his maid or mammy, comforted him.

I would take nothing away from any of these three commentators; their personal achievement, their racial sensitivity, even if birthed in guilt or shame, is notable.  In fact, I wonder if Mr. Bond enjoyed such comfort; surely the son a University President must have lived in a house with some servants. And Dr. Guy-Sheftall, whose wise mother worked so hard as a teacher and accountant, and who was gifted by those efforts with a prestigious education at Spellman College, and Emory University, I wonder did she ever consider such a position?

Dr. Cobb, surely a Georgia Cracker, remains shocked that liberal white folks have domestics, “but it is a matter of class.”  The guilt he must feel that his parents would want to pay “them” (their farm help) in old clothes once the work was done. This professor’s red neck shines brightly as he casually notes “…it was like they (blacks) had to act grateful and happy to do it” and of course he notes “”so-called decent white folks got a lot of psychological gratification or felt “I’m helping these people…(they must be)so grateful to me…(I’m)doing something good”

Dr Cobb, as I reflect on your comments, I don’t believe you have been so close to a load of manure since you last visited your family farm in Hart County, Georgia. I’ve read a number of your articles and your blog, and am amazed that you can manifest such a lower middle class “guilt” driven understanding of Southern Culture.  I can surely appreciate that a University lead by a boyishly sycophantic upwardly motile “wanna be” southern gentleman,  as Doctor Michael F Adams is,  would have you as a Spalding Distinguished Research Professor, Southern History and Culture, but really, your comment “having a black maid was a status symbol” is neither well researched nor well considered.

Dr Guy-Sheftall, a little learning or in your case a lifetime of learning, can often obscure the ability to speak truth. One can become so certain that the facts are, as they present them, so universally true that those facts become part of a lie, the lie of self deceit and self conceit. “They were often vulnerable to sexual exploitation of the white men in the household.” Really, Professor? Is it your experience that as a nearly white, high yellow, fair skinned Negro woman white men see you as an object of sexual exploitation?  Is it your exotic looks that convince you that the sexual attentions of white men are as inevitable as, well, as proximity?

Funny, I rode the Number 23/13 Atlanta Transit bus daily for nearly a decade, as a observant prodigy, and seldom noticed other than dark ebony women, tired from work, not trysts, riding with me, and with me they rode, for I was always in the back with them. Let’s see, in Atlanta they rode the bus early, early to work, arriving as early as 6:30 or 7:00 AM, and then they worked through the day, preparing meals, washing dishes, making the beds, cleaning the rooms, doing laundry, making lunch for the Massa’s wife, ironing clothes, greeting the children, starting dinner, and just when may I ask, among all this work, did they and the Massa have time to do the nasty?  You, dear professor, are the child of privilege, the daughter of an educated woman who sought to teach you self-reliance and independence. Is your poor opinion of white men based on abandonment, were you or your mother ever subjected to abuse or abandonment by one such predatory white man?

Let me tell you a story, Professor Guy-Sheftall, distinguished alumnus and Professor at Spelman College. The woman who raised me, Carolyn Manning, as black and big and beautiful as any renaissance Madonna, was subjected to such abuse, but by a black man who impregnated her as a child, and then abandoned her to her own means. She was bright and wise, and good in a way no intellectual could ever fathom, and she made her way up from South Georgia to Atlanta, and took to doing domestic work. She came to my family, not as Dr. Cobb suggested, as a “status symbol,” but to help my mother who was pregnant with her fourth child. She remained with our family until her death. Now, my mother was a liberated woman for her time, a combat air evacuation nurse veteran of WWII, and was at the time, beginning a real estate brokerage career. Fifteen years after the birth of her fourth child, well after I had left home, my mother returned to school and earned a degree in Law. My mother is an accomplished and successful woman, but make no mistake, Carolyn was the pillar of our home, the one essential person that made life as we knew it, possible. And that lifestyle, it wasn’t so terrible, millions of Americans, including you and every other cited commentator in the above referenced article, sought it, the comfortable life of the Middle Class American. Carolyn Manning was abused by one other man, the black doctor, a graduate of Meharry Medical College,  who failed to properly treat her high blood pressure, and whose carelessness lead to her death by a hospital borne pneumococcal infection. The small Catholic West Atlanta Hospital where she died has long since closed, but as a member of a JCAH evaluation team in the early 1970’s, we found the hospital appallingly filthy.

Julian Bond was a hero of mine, defier of convention, intellect behind SNCC, legislator of courage. He too, suffers from a childhood of privilege, we will never know if he felt shame that his childhood was free of most of the passing insults and pernicious discrimination that blacks through America suffered. His actions however, always spoke to truth; his words in this article remain truthful. He understood that the film “The Help” wasn’t meant to be a documentary, or to reveal some yet unpublished insight, it was a work of fiction based on the memory of one woman, of one childhood. More importantly, it was intended to be entertainment. Just as Alfred Uhry’s “Driving Miss Daisy” was not perfectly factual, or all encompassing of the “Negro in domestic service” experience, neither is “The Help.” Succinctly, Mr. Bond sums up the truth of much of the experience as “There’s nothing to be ashamed of for being paid for a honest day’s work.”  Thank the Good Lord Mr. Bond never became an “academic.” A PhD is obviously four or more years spent in studying a topic; all too often that topic is “Why I became important.”

The last two of the commentators more accurately express the true nature of domestic service, then as now. Anyone can understand the need of a job, of work to pay for necessities, to hopefully bridge a “now” to a better “future” time. In Black Culture, then as now, males were often absent from the family. At the time the novel takes place, men had a better excuse than now; for the Negro male, respect, dignity, self-worth were all hard to acquire in the post war years, and the frustration was exacerbated by the war time service of hundreds of thousand black men, returning to a Nation that had no place for them. In these circumstances, black women became, by default, breadwinners, and often sole providers of their children’s needs. In the South, it was especially difficult for woman, mothers, whose children’s father often had left for the North or California, or someplace, anyplace better than a racially divided South. Had they found such a place, I am sure many of those displaced men would have sent for their family; unfortunately, all too often they found out that discrimination wasn’t just a “southern” thing. The nascent post war prosperity coupled with expanding traditional southern families provided opportunities for domestic employment, and a generation of black women availed themselves of that opportunity. Mattye Sanders’ mother, Leola Green, was such a woman. It is, in my opinion, sad that Ms. Green’s daughter failed to understand much about her mother’s relationships, even as she benefited and eventually received her degree in economics from the University of Missouri. Several of her comments say much about her lack of understanding. I suspect her mother said little about whom she worked for due to a process of compartmentalization,  a behavior in which many of us lead two lives, a public and a private existence. Also, someone in service hears many things which are frankly not appropriate to discuss with others, Ms. Green may well have been the soul of discretion. As to her mother calling the women she worked for by the appellation “Miss,” had she, as her mother had, heard what the women her mother worked for called the women they respected, she would know it was a sign of respect, not homage, to address such persons as “Miss”. Why not respect the people who make it possible for you to feed and clothe your family? Why not keep their secrets and do the best you can? “Miss” Leola seems to me to have worked diligently to see her children accomplish more in life than circumstances allowed her, and she deserved the gifts her daughter and siblings later bestowed on her, and certainly their love and their respect for her doing what ever it took to assure them a better life.

Much is made of how hard these women worked, but consider this, most women, white or black, who kept their own house, did exactly the same tasks, and for no pay at all. Ah, the joys of wifery and motherhood! The fact is most women did not have a maid. And what of the women who did? Did they lounge around in their pajamas as often portrayed?  Not those I knew as a child. They volunteered in prodigious numbers in schools, libraries, and hospitals. They worked tirelessly in churches, community theatres, in the Red Cross, in the PTA, in social and public service groups, and many worked with their husbands building businesses that survive and thrive today. Others practiced medicine, dentistry, and law. Yes, this was true then in Atlanta, and even then in Mississippi. These women also raised their families, albeit with the help of their maid, and their contribution to society was possible only because of the trust, respect and affection they had for their maid.

It would be wonderful if every domestic servant, every maid and mammy had the experience of Wynette Blathers, the last of the five commentators. I could not assert that such was the case, and must agree that often the times made such an experience unlikely. But I feel that Ms. Blathers understands that to serve is not to submit, that her service to the family that employed her was of great benefit to both parties, and that the affection and respect she felt while in service to them was real and mutual.  Professor Cobb obviously thinks such a relationship is an affectation of class, Professor Guy-Sheftall asserts it as demeaning and Ms. Sanders doesn’t quite understand it. Mr. Bond accepts such relationships can exist, but monetizes those relationships. Only Ms. Blathers, the only one who has experienced a time of service to others, truly understands the joy that comes from doing any job well, and in the case of her family, the tight bonds that grow between the family and those who, through mutual affection and respect, become “one of the family.”

 

 

 

 

 

Posted in Human Interest, Southiron Politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on “On the Atlanta Journal-Constitution Commentary on the Movie “The Help”

On Declaring your Candidacy… July 4th 2011

I really hoped you would return my call, as I believed you would. Our brief conversation earlier this evening was ill-timed, I had much to say to you, on this our Country’s 235th Birthday. You were at dinner with your family, awaiting the fireworks display,  I had to help someone near and dear to me. I thought you understood my excitement and desire to share my thoughts of this day with you. So I send them to you publicly, and hope that my thoughts may inspire others besides you;  perhaps a young girl in whose eyes the reflections of her country’s birthday fireworks kindle a fire to know, to understand politics; perhaps a college coed who wonders what she can do, how she must prepare, to serve her country in the best political sense.

I am an old political war-horse, but the ground on which we joust is fresh and new. I am very proud of you, of your academic achievement, of your will to define and seek success, and of manner in which you parse problems and seek the simplest answers. And now, as you go off to seek a legal education, with a love of the Constitution in your heart, and an understanding of freedom’s cost in your mind, I have a few words to share with you.    You have come from an outer island in the stream of the American Dream. You are a single mom of three children,  you are the first of your family to receive a university degree, magna cum laude no less, and your life has not been easy, often because in the past you made choices that fit your culture, not your talent.  To say you have overcome great obstacles, crossed a great gulf is an understatement. Through all of this, you have always known that you would find a better way, build a better life, and affect, in a positive way, the lives of those who you love.

If you do no more than earn a degree in law and put that knowledge to purposeful use, to the good of the common weal, you will have done far more than ever was expected of you, and frankly far more than most of your fellow legal practitioners will ever accomplish.

But you have said, you want to do more, you want to serve your country, you want to seek a seat in the Congress of the United States. Today we celebrate the birthday of America’s Independence. As a native-born Georgian, you no doubt know of our three state citizens who proudly and perhaps foolhardy signed the Declaration of Independence on July 2, 1776. Lyman Hall, a minister, Button Gwinnett, a Planter and George Walton, a lawyer, all risked life and limb to secure the right to live freely, to choose how they were to be governed, and to worship God as they pleased. What is interesting is that Georgia had been settled for only 43 years, and yet it was among the most vociferous in demanding Independence.

July 4th is a day of great celebration, but let me remind you of a day of far greater importance to you and me, to us all. Each September 7th passes with little fan fare, no fireworks, no speechifying, no real notice; but on that day in 1787, The Constitution of The United States of America was signed, and because of those signatories (albeit with some amendment),  you are now able to consider that the act of governing yourself by representing others is possible.  Georgia had 4 delegates to the Constitutional Convention, 2 of whom signed the document, Abraham Baldwin and William Few. Two other framers from Georgia, William Houstoun and William Lee Pierce, we unable to sign. (This is interesting in that your two sons are named similar to these two recalcitrant framers, and without your knowledge of this fact until the moment you read this essay!)

Who were Georgia’s first Congressmen? Abraham Baldwin, James Jackson and George Mathews were elected to the House of Representatives; William Few and James Gunn by the Legislature to the Senate. Remember these names, these Americans brought honor and credit to their positions, and evermore their families could claim with pride that an ancestor had served in the Congress of the United States.

If you work diligently and persist, some day your family’s name will be entered on that Roll of Honor, and your children and their children and their children’s children will speak of you with admiration and we hope with a desire to emulate your participation in government and politics.

I had hoped to share these thoughts with you personally tonight, but I see why so few people ever return my calls. The History , the History, the History of it all! It is so easy as a student of political science to follow in the footsteps of your teachers,  to speculate, to study the philosophy of great thinkers, to marvel at their cleverness or be entranced by their words.   But very few of these “political scientists or philosophers” ever ran for office in a representative democracy, even fewer ever paid the personal price, ever suffered the political attacks, ever was subject of invasive journalistic scrutiny. All of which you will experience when you run for Congress. These university professors, these idols of the undergraduates,  they have talked the talk, but very few have ever walked the walk! Thinkers are mostly braggarts and blowhards, I know this as a personal, a very personal fact. As a candidate, you will be challenged not only on your political positions, your life’s work, your marital situation and previous marital status, but on your gender, on the very fact that you are a woman. Quick, which amendment gave women the right to vote, and in what year?  The 19th in 1920.

Women today remain grossly under-represented in State and Federal legislative bodies, and here I will impart wisdom with which I hope you agree, and use it well to become elected. Almost every woman running for Federal office, from the Presidency down, suffers from a lack of understanding of how to be elected to the office they seek. Palin, Bachmann, Clinton, Ferraro, all fail to “project electability” to the media and thus to mainstream voters. Their failure? They all act like cheerleaders, not coaches!  As an old ball player, I am wont to use sports analogies, but the truth is, you will not be elected in Georgia if you are noisy, overly  enthusiastic and run on sound bites and photo-ops. Here you are most fortunate, for you have always chosen, other than with husbands,  substance over satiety, and with husbands, you had little culturally to choose from. You have even now a most valuable political asset, a characteristic that the media wags and talking heads have long admired but seldom found in candidates, you have “gravitas.”  You are not loud, but you will be heard; you are not ponderous, but you are thoughtful; you are not pretentious, but self-effacing, yet not overly modest. If you run for office on a platform (who uses that term anymore) built on your experiences and resultant beliefs, if you present yourself as a Coach who will win for the voters the results they desire; if you talk about how you will lead your constituents and where they will always find you, then you will fulfill the promise you so plainly manifest today. Cheerleaders are wonderful to watch, and certainly entertaining, but coaches, leaders, win the games. Call me some time and I’ll tell you who the players are, and how to pick your team. After all, to my everlasting yellow dog democrat disgrace, I helped start this right-wing republican Juggernaut in the South, and I’d like to help end it. We don’t need parties, we need people committed to America, to Georgia, to the family, and to individual opportunity. And that is what July 4th and September 7th is all about!

 

Posted in Georgia Politics, National Politics, Southiron Politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on On Declaring your Candidacy… July 4th 2011

(alternatives to) CRIME and (capital) PUNISHMENT

In my earlier commentary, The Right “Right to Life,” I strongly disapproved of capital punishment, citing vengeance as the only possible justification for its use by the State. Capital Punishment does not remediate, rehabilitate or restore. It does not serve to punish the convicted felon, death for such criminals as convicted of a capital offense is relatively rapid and pain-free.  It has absolutely no deterrent effect on other persons, as the sentence is carried our in private, unseen by those inclined to commit capital offenses. It provides no “closure” to those who will ever remember the faces, voices, personalities and bodies of those murdered, and it will restore to the State no secrets lost, nor undo any treasonous act.

Capital punishment is only an act of revenge, the approval of which is an immature, primitive and churlish response of an undeveloped conscience and retarded intellect.

Let’s talk about REAL punishment. Let’s discuss the propensity of Jurists to define for the body politic what are the conditions under which punishment violates a convicted felon’s rights under the US Constitution:

Amendment 8 – Cruel and Unusual Punishment. Ratified 12/15/1791.

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

First, it is important to note the simplicity of the Eighth Amendment. Twice the term “excessive” is used, conditionally, by which the Framing Fathers acknowledged the escalating severity of criminal behavior, or put more succinctly, the notion that the punishment should fit the crime.  Bail may not be “excessive,” extended as it is to those presumed innocent, nor can excessive fines be imposed on those found guilty of criminal activity. In the first case, the Framing Father’s were aware of the burden placed on both those charged or indicted and their families by the common English practice of incarcerating, at public expense, not only the arrested, but often their family as well.  In the second case, The Framing Fathers were well aware of the use by English magistrates of excessive fines to seize and transfer property, to dispossess tenants from land and home, and to imprison “troublemakers” and social misfits through the use of fines exceeding the capacity of the convicted to pay.

The Eighth Amendment dealt simply with these offenses against citizens, leaving to the discretion of Jurists the reasonable definition of excessive. It is reasonable to infer that the Framing Fathers understood the nature that the punishment for criminal behavior was also conditioned on the nature or severity of the crime. To these men, “Cruel and Unusual Punishment” surely meant an end to physical torture. not corporeal punishment, but torture inflicted in retribution of any transgression. Further, they no doubt had in mind prohibiting the practice of keel-hauling, public flogging, and other punishments that caused physical harm. The notion that to deny a felon such as the comforts of “home,” social interaction with other felons, receipt of contraband and connubial visitation would never have occurred to the Framing Fathers to be in any form or fashion, cruel and unusual punishment.

Our system of criminal justice is deeply rooted in the tradition derived from both Roman and Anglo-Saxon Law, a modern interpretation of which is found in the vernacular phrase, “Do the Crime, do the time.”  Criminal Justice in American has three major components, determining criminal behavior, convicting criminals of that behavior, and punishing criminals appropriate with the severity of the crime.  The greatest impediments to these components are, of course, lawyers and judges.

The varying notions of what constitutes “cruel and unusual punishment” is a reflection of the  cultural divide, what some would call class differentiation based on socioeconomic values, which exists in America today. For example:

Say I took a screwdriver and pair of pliers to a Jurist, to all most any jurist in America, but for illustration purposes,  say a particular current US Supreme Court Justice. I believe that within an hour, I could have them telling me any secret they knew. I do not believe this would be true of all of the sitting Justices, but it certainly would be true, in my opinion, of a majority. As a corollary, any of them who I treated this way, any one of them who talked, would for the rest of their life feel guilt, live in fear of having the same experience repeat itself, have vivid nightmares and sweaty palms, seek psychotherapy, and from the day after, and evermore, constantly relive the horror of the experience. More over, when given the opportunity, they would project that horror into the lives of every other citizen, and certainly rule in favor of banning screwdrivers and pliers.

Now, say I took a screwdriver and pliers to one of the good ol’ boys I know in North Georgia who hunt and fish, log and clear the land, live an authentic life. I believe that most of them would, after a day or two, tell me all the secrets they know.  As a corollary, almost all of them would feel shame, accept that the experience was over, internalize their feelings, and would, within a relatively short period of time, return to the life they know so well. Their thoughts would not be on the horror of their experience, they would not project fear and weakness, their hidden thoughts would most likely reflect a hope for a time and place to meet me once again, and even the score.

Now, say I took a screwdriver and pliers to a hardened urban gang-banger. The chance of having that person talk within a day or two are, in my opinion, about equal to a coin toss. What is pain to a human being who lives experiencing pain everyday, who is surrounded by pain everyday, whose very existence feeds of the pain of others? If they didn’t talk or if they did, their thoughts, if they could be called thoughts, would be of anger and gratification. They would want to take my screwdriver and pliers and use them on me, not to make me talk, but to make me die.

Hyperbole, you say? You are clearly from the same class as most modern American jurists. You no doubt believe sociology is the science that should most inform penal practices and codes.

My point is simple. Punishment, like pain, can be tolerated differently by different humans. Punishment is the only purposeful result of a criminal conviction. Rehabilitation, re-education,  socialization, behavior modification are not the appropriate result for a criminal conviction. It is the fear of pain, the weakness of character, the Euro-American nature of modern jurists, and of most of academia who study criminal behavior, which  have led to accepted “necessity” of Capital Punishment.

To the majority of Americans, life in prison, even a life sentence, means talking, walking, watching TV, having sex, enjoying contraband such as drugs, cell phones, cigarettes, marital visitation, family visits, free medical care, free food, educational opportunities, clothing, laundry, and of course, parole and probation.

Capital Punishment is morally wrong. For a Christian, supporting or condoning the use of it is a sin. It was viewed by the Framing Fathers as a punishment of the last resort, as they clearly understood its use as a violation of the rights and privileges with which the Creator has endowed all of us, all human beings, world-wide.

Capital Punishment is civilly wrong. It does not restore the victim, remove the victim’s family’s memory or pain and suffering, it does not heal the wound or the heavy heart.

Capital Punishment is criminally wrong. It does not punish the crime, in point of fact, it removes the criminal from punishment. It does not deter, prevent other criminals from heinous crimes, it does not make an example of the criminal executed, or serve to educate the public on the value of human life.

Capital punishment is patently unconstitutional. Much literature reflects the uneven and discriminatory application of capital punishment; current literature reveals its common application to citizens later found to have had no part in the crime. Innocent citizens have been murdered by the states, only later to have received posthumous apologies.

Capital Punishment is stupid and counter-productive. As practiced in America today, under the guidance of soft skinned, weak-minded,  pseudo-intellectual jurists, there is no relation between any crime and punishment, most certainly there is no cause and effect relationship between the time of criminal behavior for which the death penalty is demanded, and the time some black-robed, teeth gnashing, gut wrenched, pasty-faced, pointy headed intellectual judge allows the execution to be carried out.

What must be done to rectify this abhorrent miscarriage of American virtue? What must be done to insure punishment for crime?

It should be clear to all from my comments that I am no enthusiast of the current state of American Jurisprudence. The commentary is not about the tragically needed and constitutionally demanded reforms of that system, but rather, it is about Punishment. In Georgia, punishment is influenced and affected by two areas in desperate need of reform, The Criminal Code, and The Department of Corrections. Two branches of our incredibly fragmented state government, the Legislative and Executive, are thus involved in determining the nature and length of Punishment,  along with the Judicial Branch, which, in Georgia is an amalgam of the executive and judicial functions. If this seems confusing, you should see, no really you need to see, the Organization Chart of Georgia State Government.

Would anyone reading this not agree that the Death Penalty as implemented in Georgia has absolutely no demonstrable effect. Neither you nor I can cite a single example of someone not being murdered as a result of any criminal’s consideration of the inevitable result of their act of murder being a death sentence. I admit that such an assertion is facetious but it is not fatuous. The point it makes is first that deterrence  is impossible to measure, and second, that criminal behavior is unlikely to be affected by rational thought involving the consideration of crime and punishment.

Deterrence only occurs as a result of an absolute knowledge that an action will be followed an undesired result. The finest example of this hypothesis is MAD, Mutually Assured Destruction, best attributed to the scholars at the RAND Corporation. Deterrence works, apparently, on a global scale, how can it be made to work on a “penal” scale?

Here is how deterrence can work, would work, without the interference of Jurists whose most important decisions are made weekly in “club” selection for their golf game at their private enclaves. The experience of imprisonment must be made to be intolerable, and this is only possible if we agree that prisoners must be isolated from society, including contact with each other, the outside world, and all but a few well-trained para-professionals.

Life without parole should mean life without society, life without companionship, life without any but eternal hope. Such criminals as are convicted of “capital”offenses and sentenced to life without parole should enter a facility where they will, in all but flesh, cease to exist.  23 hours a day in a 6’x8’x16′ cube, 1 hour a day to shower and exercise, 1 day a week to shave. 1 hour a month of audio-video visitation. That is punishment that no criminal, no sociopath would want, or long tolerate, and it would be for the rest of their life. What I propose is not cruel and unusual, it is fitting and necessary to serve justice, and to serve as a deterrent of criminal activity.

More importantly, all persons convicted of major crimes would serve 3, 5, 10 or 20 years under the same conditions. When a criminal is sentenced for 3 years, he or she would literally “go away” for three years.

I will further comment on the nature of penal confinement, behavior modification and deterrence in another commentary.

To summarize, supporters of the “death penalty” want to spend time and treasure to mollify Jurists who have no idea of what real punishment entails. They want to wait years only to give the felon a free pass from worldly pain. I want to punish these same reprobates by humanely confining them away from all of the rest of humanity. I want their family, their friends, their fellow gang-bangers and  criminal associates to understand what the felon has taken from the person they killed, a life, and what the felon no longer has, a life.

That, you sniveling do gooders, you pompous progressives, that is real punishment. You know it, and you are horrified by it. But it is the rare instance of all you ACLU denizens, you liberal thinkers, having the same fears as the common human in America. Neither group can imagine living out life, or even spending one year alone. I’ll bet you’ll fill out your 1040 a whole lot more accurately if you were faced with REAL PUNISHMENT.

For the rest of you readers, conservative, church going, supporters of the Death Penalty, simply ask yourselves, “Does the punishment described above fit the crime? Wouldn’t it be more just to use the murder of one to prevent the murder of others? Why not resolve to reform a broken, ineffective and costly system with one that accomplishes better results, and conforms to the teachings of Jesus, Christ. Go on ask your self: “Would that murderer be better off dead than alive?” Of course he or she would be better off dead, and that is the problem with our system of Capital Punishment. The death penalty is the ultimate “GET OUT OF JAIL” card. Think about it. Which is the greater punishment, the greater deterrent, which will protect you and those you love the best? Swift and painless execution, or a the remainder of life in solitary confinement, no TV, no cable, no music, no conversation, no visitors.  Which would you prefer, death or an absence of everything that gives life meaning? Which frightens you the most? Which would affect your behavior, your choices, that is which consequence would most affect those choices?

I knew you would agree. Let’s start together to campaign for REAL punishment, for real reform, for an end to living in fear of some sociopath harming those we love. Let’s put an end to Capital Punishment, and start Punishing Criminals.

 

 

 

 

 

Posted in Georgia Politics, Human Interest, National Politics, Southiron Politics, World Politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment