I recently read an article in the New York Times titled “Wired for Justice.” You can find the link on the right side of this page. While the article focused on our yearning to punish those who were responsible for the economic crisis, I would like to discuss the themes of the article in a broader sense. (Actually, I just want to avoid talking about the economic crisis...)
The piece discussed the “public’s urge for punishment.” One experiment mentioned in the article identifies the psychological motivation for this urge not as deterrence, but rather as just-deserts retribution; people tend to want to punish just for the sake of punishing. The article also said that the need for punishment is instinctual to humans and other animals.
The article mentioned one downside of our urge to punish: that the punishments seem to be spiteful. I have been thinking about the negative impact that our instinct to punish can have, like when we support punishments that do not effectively address the crime, criminal, or victim; when we want to punish, or get revenge, rather than identify a solution to the problem. I immediately think of sex offender notification laws, which were created basically on a whim to calm down the public’s hysterical reactions to sex offenders living “undetected” in their own neighborhoods. The enforcement of these laws has been problematic, and there has not been evidence to show that they effectively reduce sexual offending, but they do make the public feel safer- and therefore the public continues to support them. Many laws seem to do nothing but allow the public to retaliate against the criminal. Maybe the offender deserves to be retaliated against, and the public deserves to get their revenge, but I am wondering: are we “wired for justice,” or wired for revenge- and what, if any, difference is there between those two concepts?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
You bring up such an important idea of how our society "demands justice", but is it justice or revenge? I feel that these concepts both go hand in hand. Because people in many cases want justice, but part of this justice is to have the person suffer for the injustices they did.It is our human nature to have them face the severity of the law and the shaming of society. I believe that we are wired for revenge depending on the type of law that the criminal breaks. (For example, a child rapist compared with an individual that was incarcerated for grand larceny) They are both crimes but they differ highly with the persons values of morality. The more henious and unmoral the crime is the more we as humans will feel the need for revenge. The real justice however, would be to identify the problem and the solution. Despite the fact that most crimes are unmorally wrong we need to address these issues rather than to seek revenge. Adressing these problems will work to eliminate the reasoning for these behaviors and decrease this cycle of crime.
Just to clarify, the link that goes along with my post is called "Citizen Enforcers Take Aim." For some reason that printed version of the article that appeared in the paper ("Wired for Justice")has a different name than the online version.
Thank you for this fascinating post, Amanda. I agree with Elizabeth that there is something fundamental that "justice" and "revenge" share: the biblical notion of justice, "an eye for an eye," is certainly as much about satisfying our hard-wiring need for revenge as it is about justice -- indeed, Gandhi's comment about that ("an eye for an eye would make the whole world blind") illustrates how short-sighted that notion of justice is (pun always intended!).
I'm struck by the very different idea of justice evinced in the post-apartheid idea in South Africa of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. (I'm tempted to put the Wikipedia link here as the official transcripts of the Commission are pretty clunk, but if you're interested google it.) While it has its critics, as I see it, it is trying to untie justice and revenge and substitute instead the healing effects of mercy and knowledge. Truth will set us free.
Society is definitely wired for justice as revenge. I can say this because there are countless situations I have been in where gaining revenge is the first idea that pops into my mind. Over the years, terrorist attacks in India have greatly increased with bombs going off in public parks or bombs hidden in toys. I read an article (which I cannot find anymore!) that interviewed a suicide bomber who was captured and is now serving a life sentence. She was carrying explosives on herself and she had planted them in every garbage can in a public park right next to an elementary school. If she was successful, the bombing would have been fatal. The public's reaction was to jail her and punish her. Her interview, however, revealed a life of despair and constant pain. She grew up as an orphan and later on tried to make a living as a prostitute. After years and years of torture she was recruited to join the Tamil Tigers (an active terrorist group) and was chosen to become a suicide bomber. This situation perfectly encapsulates the catch-22 we face. This women was simply looking for a way out of her painful lifestyle and the Tamil Tigers welcomed her with open arms. Finally receiving the acceptance she wanted, she agreed to do anything they wanted, including several bombings and murders. How do we punish someone like this? Does she deserve to live and be given a second chance? Or does justice only consider her actions and not what motivated her?
Amanda makes a really great point here; from a very young age we are all aware of term "revenge". I think, however, there is something very culturally specific about this divide between "revenge" and "justice".
We are not a nation that internalizes our short-comings; we are country of people that, in general, tends to blame another person when we fail to do the right thing (whether criminal or not). The reason I say this is because this argument brings me back to what I have learned about Chinese culture in one of my anthropology and law classes. Guilt and shame are very pronounced features of Chinese culture and this is reflected in their legal system. I am not saying that their system is flawless, just that in varies from ours in many key aspects. We cannot blame our extremely punitive policies on instinct.
I feel that overall, our wiring is very connected to our culture; as an American, I very often do not feel shame when I do something wrong. Had I grown up in China, I'd probably have a different perspective.
Our very American system of capitalism embraces the evolutionary theory of "survival of the fittest",as we are forced (almost literally) to compete with the person next to us... I could draw infinite difference between America and China, but the point is that I do not think we are "wired for revenge" and I think to agree to such would be a very American excuse for our irrational behavior concerning punishment.
For me, there’s a gap somewhere in the reasoning. Our justice system is designed with the language of “society”, but despite community involvement and civic action sharply declining “The People” still hold the right of bringing someone up on charges and sitting as a jury. In this sense, Americans seem pretty sadistic, rather than vengeful. If you are not a fully active participant in the society harmed by a crime, how can you claim the need for retribution?
By considering crime victims alone, we can more accurately measure how much retribution is needed. I wonder how significant the criminal justice system is in maintaining order simply by preventing victims of crime from taking vengeance on their offenders. I also wonder if there’s any data indicating that victims of crimes feel satisfied with the penalties their offenders received. I would guess that they don’t. Unfortunately, our system is one that leaves everyone feeling like they were mistreated which only perpetuates our desire for revenge.
Such evocative posts! I don't believe that either justice or revenge are hardwired. As our definitions of each are socially constructed, it would be difficult to find a genetic underpinning.
What the article seems to describe is something more akin to basic instinctual drives to survive, but then (in my mind) the author makes an unsubstantiated link between self-preservation and much more complex notions like justice and punishment.
Contemporary psychoanalysis posits, and much social research demonstrates, that people have a difficult, maybe next to impossible, time tolerating their own "badness" (aggression, deviance, etc.) and so extrude it, externalize it, project it-whatever language you want to use-onto others. Once you have created an evil other (your twin, perhaps?) you can rationalize your oppression, punishment, even annihilation, of them as self-defense. Hence are women stoned to death for the crime of having been raped in some cultures while a tiny coterie of sex offenders are ridiculously marginalized in ours; neither justice or revenge motivates. It's just a response to something that feels too threatening to tolerate (one's own wish to rape, perhaps, or the knowledge that one's close relative does rape) and so must be done away with.
Thank you Amanda!
Ridhi, I like your point. I'm going to stereotype. Emotionally, spiritually, financially broken people become suicide bombers. Folks who need love and support join gangs. Abusers are the abused.
Of course these are not absolutes, but I think we can also the see patterns in our own agencies develop. Who comes to Wildcat for services? Consistently, those who do not have a high school diploma or GED which makes legal, self-sustaining employment difficult. (That's the understatement of the year)
(Perhaps) prisons can serve legitimate functions: incapacitation (at least from offenses in the community for the duration of the stay); retribution (which may be spiteful, but it certainly advances government interests when the public knows "the bad guy got caught"); maybe deterrence; possibly rehabilitation.
Prisons have a social control function- and at the rate our country incarcerates its citizenry (us!), I have to agree with Elaine Brown's description of the institution as a warehouse for people.
I would argue that our "warehouses" are less about hiding the "bad" people away from the "good" people, and more about hiding from everyone else where society has fallen short of the "American Dream".
PS I am torn about the sex offender registry. I feel parents have the right to know if there is a convicted child sex offender living in their neighborhood. I feel I have the right to know what model cars I should be hyper-vigilant of when I am jogging at night. From the government's perspective, how could they not provide this information? If a child gets victimized by someone the state knew has harmed children in the past, the state is already perceived as a guilty party- imagine if there was no information given!
On the flip side I know folks whose lives have been torn apart by a sex offense conviction and have had to face debilitating (humiliating) consequences that are not relevant to the crime they were convicted of.
I think that our idea of justice is related to the biblical concept of “an eye for an eye”. Therefore, most of the time when we punish someone, we look to be compensated or get revenge for whatever that person did to us. However, not always when we punish people we are driven by revenge. For example, as children, we’ve all been punished for something we did wrong. In these cases, our parents punished us not to get revenge, but to show us that our actions have consequences. I find similar concepts in criminal justice. We punish some offenders only to show them that their actions have consequences, like the laws on drugs. More than that, as it’s been already said, to enforce public safety. The other offenders we punish being driven by revenge and in this category I would include most criminals. People we punish out of revenge did something to affect our lives or liberty.
The Truth and Reconciliation Commission is a particular case in Criminal Justice. The goal of the commission was seeking truth and reconciliation between the people involved in the conflict. I saw a movie on this subject and I was shocked. After I listened to the officers describing the crimes committed, I wanted more than just the truth. The victims’ families wanted the same. They believed that just admitting to a crime doesn’t serve the justice. Even though the truth was revealed, the perpetrators were never forgiven or reaccepted in the community. I guess in some cases there is no justice without revenge, because some criminal actions create too much anger and frustration.
Post a Comment