Once you start looking at misery that is built into structure, it can be pretty discouraging. Figuring out what can be done, and what part you can play in that is hard.
That may be one reason that so much of how we give can be personal. I have my specific resources, and I can broaden some things, but there are things that I definitely can't do, at least definitely not at this time. So maybe sometimes instead of fighting the structure I am just alleviating one thing for one person, and that is still valuable.
I'm not going to try and sort out Christ-like activism today, but if you want to do something helpful for those in prison, I can share some ideas for that.
First, broaden your mind. You might think this is a totally alien issue, but don't be so sure that you don't know anyone in prison. My friend went. Someone I went to school with is in now. Other people from school that I knew better have spent time in jail. A neighbor's son, whom I do know, is in now.
There is a lot of stigma attached to jail, so it is easy to avoid talking about it, and then to feel like it's something that affects other people.
I will even go a step beyond that and admit that some of them might not be great to communicate with, because there are some pretty manipulative and dangerous people in there. That is true, but it is not the whole truth. Use your judgment and discretion, but use it after you have learned more, and not as a reason to shut off your compassion before you have even thought about it.
First of all I go to Prison Culture again:
http://www.usprisonculture.com/blog/2017/11/15/help-criminalized-survivors-of-violence-for-the-holidays/
If you go to the Amazon wishlist for incarcerated survivors of interpersonal violence, it looks like there is only a need for one notebook now, but on the sidebar I see other lists, and the book drive for California prisoners could use some help too:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/342NY9MRYCWGB/ref=cm_go_nav_hz
Still from Prison Culture, you can donate to help reunite families for Christmas visits through STEPS:
https://egscf.crm.salsalabs.org/webDonation/
Just Detention fights prison rape. Donations can be helpful, and sometimes there are opportunities to send encouraging messages. You can learn more about them here:
https://justdetention.org/
Those are the only two that I have personal knowledge of, but Charity Navigator gave a high score to Hudson Link for Higher Education in Prison:
https://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=14635
That doesn't mean that there aren't more out there. There may be small charities that don't get rated, or still good work without meeting all of the criteria used by the rating system. The best thing you can do may be finding that person from school or church or family that needs to be remembered more.
I do believe that once you commit to helping, you find ways, and that it is fine if they start small.
Sunday, November 26, 2017
Sunday, November 19, 2017
Prisons - Profits over people
I just read this today, about how a prison sentence for deaf and hard-of-hearing prisoners can easily become a sentence of solitary confinement, partly due to a lack of resources and partly due to fear that sign language can be used for secret plans:
https://www.themarshallproject.org/2017/09/19/why-many-deaf-prisoners-can-t-call-home?utm_content=bufferf88c8&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
Remember that calls are already grossly overpriced for prisoners without disabilities affecting speech or hearing.
I imagine that there is a feeling that it is fine to make a profit off of the inmates, because as inmates they have committed crimes and troubled society and it's just payback. That's why jokes about prison rape are so common, with some people assuming that this happens to rapists and child molesters and that this is justice.
Given how many rapists never do any jail time, that form of punishment would be far too random to be justice anyway. However, a lot of prison rapes do happen. Let's take a closer look at that.
For staff-on-inmate sexual victimization, 67% of the victims were women, even though they represented only 13% of the prison population.
https://www.salon.com/2017/11/11/86-percent-of-women-in-jail-are-sexual-violence-survivors/
(Also worth thinking about that 86% of the women in prison are sexual violence survivors.)
From a California study, 67% of LGBTQ inmates report being assaulted while in prison.
Now, if we are looking at guards on inmates, greater victimization of women, and greater victimization of LGBTQ, that looks like abuse continues to be more likely to be afflicted on the marginalized, making it much like the outside world -- I can assert my dominance by hurting you.
It is not really surprising that those pathologies are perpetuated on the inside, but this seems like a good time to also remember how people end up in prison, like drug laws that were racially biased in both how sentences were decided (sentences on "crack" versus other types of cocaine) and where drug raids happened and who was searched.
This leads us to another fun fact: on any given day, 62% of inmates have not been convicted of any crime:
https://newpittsburghcourieronline.com/2015/02/26/report-60-percent-of-jail-inmates-unconvicted/
Crowded dockets where the right to a speedy trial becomes a joke is a part of that problem, but an even bigger problem is the lack of bail funds. You can't get out if you can't pay.
Of course you can argue about the need for bail with non-violent crimes, but is there a bigger issue with why so many people can't afford bail? There might be, if police specifically target poor communities for minor infractions that can be hard to fight if you are overworked and underpaid.
Information on for-profit policing often focuses on asset forfeiture, which is a problem, but a police force supporting itself on fines, and focusing on the part of the population that does not have the resources to fight unfair charges has been an issue for many communities, largely written about after Michael Brown's death in Ferguson.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/06/us/ferguson-missouri-racism-tickets-fines/index.html
If society doesn't care about you, it is much easier to end up in prison. You can be cared about even less there, which makes you a financial opportunity. That in turn can affect how people value you, like when the prisons are more dangerous due to overcrowding, but no one wants to lower the inmate population because it can affect firefighter availability:
https://www.themarshallproject.org/2015/08/19/prisoners-who-fight-wildfires-in-california-an-insider-s-look
But wait! Maybe a lot of people are in prison now because of drugs, and maybe they shouldn't be there, but now that the opioid crisis is affecting white people and we are being more compassionate, shouldn't that get better?
https://www.revealnews.org/article/they-thought-they-were-going-to-rehab-they-ended-up-in-chicken-plants/
https://www.rawstory.com/2016/08/work-therapy-how-the-salvation-armys-chain-of-rehab-centers-exploit-unpaid-labor/
Maybe not. Once you start realizing that you can profit off of the people you dehumanize, you keep needing a wider base, because you always need more profits. Of course, the opioid crisis has made some big bucks for people too:
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/10/30/the-family-that-built-an-empire-of-pain
I know, it's a lot of links, but there is a lot to say on this. There is a lot, and it flies against existing beliefs that are very comfortable, and I don't feel like I can manage to be coherent on this. Not only is it very emotional for me, but also it is this vicious cycle going around and around that is very demoralizing.
I will try to treat the demoralizing part over the next post or two, but for now, can anyone who truly believes in the New Testament, who truly wishes to follow Christ and end up on his right-hand side instead of his left when that separation happens -- not dividing sheep and goats, but dividing those who know Him and those who don't -- can you truly support this current structure?
https://www.themarshallproject.org/2017/09/19/why-many-deaf-prisoners-can-t-call-home?utm_content=bufferf88c8&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
Remember that calls are already grossly overpriced for prisoners without disabilities affecting speech or hearing.
I imagine that there is a feeling that it is fine to make a profit off of the inmates, because as inmates they have committed crimes and troubled society and it's just payback. That's why jokes about prison rape are so common, with some people assuming that this happens to rapists and child molesters and that this is justice.
Given how many rapists never do any jail time, that form of punishment would be far too random to be justice anyway. However, a lot of prison rapes do happen. Let's take a closer look at that.
For staff-on-inmate sexual victimization, 67% of the victims were women, even though they represented only 13% of the prison population.
https://www.salon.com/2017/11/11/86-percent-of-women-in-jail-are-sexual-violence-survivors/
(Also worth thinking about that 86% of the women in prison are sexual violence survivors.)
From a California study, 67% of LGBTQ inmates report being assaulted while in prison.
Now, if we are looking at guards on inmates, greater victimization of women, and greater victimization of LGBTQ, that looks like abuse continues to be more likely to be afflicted on the marginalized, making it much like the outside world -- I can assert my dominance by hurting you.
It is not really surprising that those pathologies are perpetuated on the inside, but this seems like a good time to also remember how people end up in prison, like drug laws that were racially biased in both how sentences were decided (sentences on "crack" versus other types of cocaine) and where drug raids happened and who was searched.
This leads us to another fun fact: on any given day, 62% of inmates have not been convicted of any crime:
https://newpittsburghcourieronline.com/2015/02/26/report-60-percent-of-jail-inmates-unconvicted/
Crowded dockets where the right to a speedy trial becomes a joke is a part of that problem, but an even bigger problem is the lack of bail funds. You can't get out if you can't pay.
Of course you can argue about the need for bail with non-violent crimes, but is there a bigger issue with why so many people can't afford bail? There might be, if police specifically target poor communities for minor infractions that can be hard to fight if you are overworked and underpaid.
Information on for-profit policing often focuses on asset forfeiture, which is a problem, but a police force supporting itself on fines, and focusing on the part of the population that does not have the resources to fight unfair charges has been an issue for many communities, largely written about after Michael Brown's death in Ferguson.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/06/us/ferguson-missouri-racism-tickets-fines/index.html
If society doesn't care about you, it is much easier to end up in prison. You can be cared about even less there, which makes you a financial opportunity. That in turn can affect how people value you, like when the prisons are more dangerous due to overcrowding, but no one wants to lower the inmate population because it can affect firefighter availability:
https://www.themarshallproject.org/2015/08/19/prisoners-who-fight-wildfires-in-california-an-insider-s-look
But wait! Maybe a lot of people are in prison now because of drugs, and maybe they shouldn't be there, but now that the opioid crisis is affecting white people and we are being more compassionate, shouldn't that get better?
https://www.revealnews.org/article/they-thought-they-were-going-to-rehab-they-ended-up-in-chicken-plants/
https://www.rawstory.com/2016/08/work-therapy-how-the-salvation-armys-chain-of-rehab-centers-exploit-unpaid-labor/
Maybe not. Once you start realizing that you can profit off of the people you dehumanize, you keep needing a wider base, because you always need more profits. Of course, the opioid crisis has made some big bucks for people too:
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/10/30/the-family-that-built-an-empire-of-pain
I know, it's a lot of links, but there is a lot to say on this. There is a lot, and it flies against existing beliefs that are very comfortable, and I don't feel like I can manage to be coherent on this. Not only is it very emotional for me, but also it is this vicious cycle going around and around that is very demoralizing.
I will try to treat the demoralizing part over the next post or two, but for now, can anyone who truly believes in the New Testament, who truly wishes to follow Christ and end up on his right-hand side instead of his left when that separation happens -- not dividing sheep and goats, but dividing those who know Him and those who don't -- can you truly support this current structure?
Sunday, November 12, 2017
Who is in prison?
I don't know how much people think about the parable, or the individual components. I do wonder, though, if when people do look at it they find ways to keep the "in prison" part from applying. After all, those are criminals in there.
Yes, John the Baptist and Paul both spent significant time in prison. Jesus was taken prisoner, though everything happened pretty quickly there; I'm not sure that he spent much time in a cell. Do we only visit good prisoners?
I have already mentioned price gouging on prison phone calls and not funding programs that appear to help, and there will be something eventually on how valuing profits over people becomes a problem. Before that, we need to remember that not all people are valued equally.
They should be. You may believe that for religious reasons, or humanistic reasons, or because you take the founding documents of the United States seriously, but there should be a belief in the equality of people and it is commonly stated. Practices often do not back it up.
Looking at the modern carceral state has many issues, which I will try and get to clearly and logically, but I am finding writing on this topic very difficult and if I break it down into small pieces to try and make it go by easier (because there is so much here), that's just how I have to be.
However, with these three model prisoners I think there are some points we can make.
John the Baptist was in prison because he accurately criticized the king's marriage. It doesn't even look like Herod took it that personally, but Herodias took it seriously enough to plot John's death, and that worked out.
Jesus was arrested for upsetting the social order. They had to change his blasphemy charge to sedition to make it stick, because Roman law and Jewish law felt differently about monotheism, but as revolutionary as he was, none of it was actually illegal, including his accurate claims. Determined people in power were still able to get him in jail.
Paul's imprisonments also involved false charges as well. As Saul he had thrown people in jail for practicing Christianity, so there was some logic in him being in danger for preaching it, but still whenever there was an actual hearing, the general result was that it wasn't illegal.
It was not only then that there were political components to who went to jail. This can affect the writing of the law, but it comes up even more in how the law is pursued: where is it enforced? against whom?
This is especially important now as we have an executive branch that leans toward totalitarianism and a legislative branch that does not seem interested in checking it.
Consider this case:
http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/01/politics/doj-woman-laughed-jeff-sessions-confirmation-hearing/index.html
Yes, the charges ended up being dropped, but the precedent of the charges even coming up is disturbing.
The United States has about 4.4 percent of the world population but 22 percent of the world's prisoners. Are we sure that is just? And if it's not, what do we do?
Yes, John the Baptist and Paul both spent significant time in prison. Jesus was taken prisoner, though everything happened pretty quickly there; I'm not sure that he spent much time in a cell. Do we only visit good prisoners?
I have already mentioned price gouging on prison phone calls and not funding programs that appear to help, and there will be something eventually on how valuing profits over people becomes a problem. Before that, we need to remember that not all people are valued equally.
They should be. You may believe that for religious reasons, or humanistic reasons, or because you take the founding documents of the United States seriously, but there should be a belief in the equality of people and it is commonly stated. Practices often do not back it up.
Looking at the modern carceral state has many issues, which I will try and get to clearly and logically, but I am finding writing on this topic very difficult and if I break it down into small pieces to try and make it go by easier (because there is so much here), that's just how I have to be.
However, with these three model prisoners I think there are some points we can make.
John the Baptist was in prison because he accurately criticized the king's marriage. It doesn't even look like Herod took it that personally, but Herodias took it seriously enough to plot John's death, and that worked out.
Jesus was arrested for upsetting the social order. They had to change his blasphemy charge to sedition to make it stick, because Roman law and Jewish law felt differently about monotheism, but as revolutionary as he was, none of it was actually illegal, including his accurate claims. Determined people in power were still able to get him in jail.
Paul's imprisonments also involved false charges as well. As Saul he had thrown people in jail for practicing Christianity, so there was some logic in him being in danger for preaching it, but still whenever there was an actual hearing, the general result was that it wasn't illegal.
It was not only then that there were political components to who went to jail. This can affect the writing of the law, but it comes up even more in how the law is pursued: where is it enforced? against whom?
This is especially important now as we have an executive branch that leans toward totalitarianism and a legislative branch that does not seem interested in checking it.
Consider this case:
http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/01/politics/doj-woman-laughed-jeff-sessions-confirmation-hearing/index.html
Yes, the charges ended up being dropped, but the precedent of the charges even coming up is disturbing.
The United States has about 4.4 percent of the world population but 22 percent of the world's prisoners. Are we sure that is just? And if it's not, what do we do?
Sunday, November 5, 2017
I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink
I'm going to back up from prison a bit and explore the parable from the thirst side, kind of how we looked at homelessness.
On a very basic level, this can be literally someone asking for a drink and providing it, but this is normally only going to happen with guests in your home. You can be surprised by circumstances: last week two witnesses to an accident were waiting for the police outside our house, and we offered them beverages. Perhaps it could involve offering to pay for someone's beverage on a social occasion to allow them to participate when funds are tight. It is still less likely that you will encounter thirsty people than hungry people or sick people or strangers who need taking in.That doesn't mean that thirst isn't a problem, just that it may be less visible.
So you may find that in warmer weather some people keep bottles of water on them and some specifically seek out people who may need that water and some set up cooling stations to try and alleviate that need.
Beyond that, you might look at more permanent options. Portland's fountains started with a gift from Simon Benson. Whether it was because he wanted to keep lumberjacks out of saloons or because of seeing a thirsty girl, they have been a benefit to many people and animals. It was a good thing.
It was also something that took advantage of an existing source of clean, fresh water, which is not always available. In light of that, communities that heedlessly tap deeper into groundwater without thinking about sustainability should think carefully. Communities should think carefully about letting companies come in and bottle water, encasing it in plastic and shipping it away for a profit. It may be hard to resolve thirst once you have created it.
Are the negatives worth the benefits and are those equally shared? Because the community may be getting some increase in jobs or rental fees, but those will probably be dwarfed by the potential profits going to someone else, or it would not be a good business proposition for the company.
Allowing fracking contaminates groundwater. It seems to correlate with cancer and birth defects. Even if you ship in drinking water, but people are bathing in it and growing plants in it, and local animals are drinking in it, is it worth it?
This brings us to Flint, Michigan. For 1290 days, they have not had clean water. Along with a permanent impact on developing brains of children and an increase in miscarriages, there are people have water shut off for not paying their bills, because apparently it is not required for the water to be drinkable.
There were options set up for helping people pay their water bills, which I participated in, and some people have received some help with shipments of water and filters, but the overall problem has still not been solved, and there is something important to look at here.
The change to the water system was not something that the citizens decided on to save money, or that the properly elected water board decided on to save money. In fact, there were better options that were less expensive. Cost-cutting measures were cited, but the choices were based on who could profit, and those decisions were made by an emergency manager imposed by the state.
There can be legitimate questions about whether declaring an emergency was necessary or whether the state's emended emergency manager law put in place earlier that year is good legislation, but there shouldn't be any controversy over whether the things you do in an emergency should put profit above people.
It still happens again and again. The initial contract for repairing the electrical grid in Puerto Rico is a good example of that, though it looks like that will not stand.
It is not easy to know what to do about this type of corruption. It may often be that as an individual there is not something that can be clearly done, so maybe you pay for five filters, and try and convince friends to buy more, or you contribute to a legal fight. There are many levels on which you can give.
What I think is most important here is the glory we give to riches, even as Christians, when they were pretty explicitly condemned by Christ. When we allow hunger, thirst, and illness to flourish so that someone can be rich, we are not followers of Christ. Individual charity may at times be the only means available, but we should not unquestioningly assume that.
I am not sure where looking at the larger structure will lead, but I am certain that we need to look.
https://www.nrdc.org/flint
On a very basic level, this can be literally someone asking for a drink and providing it, but this is normally only going to happen with guests in your home. You can be surprised by circumstances: last week two witnesses to an accident were waiting for the police outside our house, and we offered them beverages. Perhaps it could involve offering to pay for someone's beverage on a social occasion to allow them to participate when funds are tight. It is still less likely that you will encounter thirsty people than hungry people or sick people or strangers who need taking in.That doesn't mean that thirst isn't a problem, just that it may be less visible.
So you may find that in warmer weather some people keep bottles of water on them and some specifically seek out people who may need that water and some set up cooling stations to try and alleviate that need.
Beyond that, you might look at more permanent options. Portland's fountains started with a gift from Simon Benson. Whether it was because he wanted to keep lumberjacks out of saloons or because of seeing a thirsty girl, they have been a benefit to many people and animals. It was a good thing.
It was also something that took advantage of an existing source of clean, fresh water, which is not always available. In light of that, communities that heedlessly tap deeper into groundwater without thinking about sustainability should think carefully. Communities should think carefully about letting companies come in and bottle water, encasing it in plastic and shipping it away for a profit. It may be hard to resolve thirst once you have created it.
Are the negatives worth the benefits and are those equally shared? Because the community may be getting some increase in jobs or rental fees, but those will probably be dwarfed by the potential profits going to someone else, or it would not be a good business proposition for the company.
Allowing fracking contaminates groundwater. It seems to correlate with cancer and birth defects. Even if you ship in drinking water, but people are bathing in it and growing plants in it, and local animals are drinking in it, is it worth it?
This brings us to Flint, Michigan. For 1290 days, they have not had clean water. Along with a permanent impact on developing brains of children and an increase in miscarriages, there are people have water shut off for not paying their bills, because apparently it is not required for the water to be drinkable.
There were options set up for helping people pay their water bills, which I participated in, and some people have received some help with shipments of water and filters, but the overall problem has still not been solved, and there is something important to look at here.
The change to the water system was not something that the citizens decided on to save money, or that the properly elected water board decided on to save money. In fact, there were better options that were less expensive. Cost-cutting measures were cited, but the choices were based on who could profit, and those decisions were made by an emergency manager imposed by the state.
There can be legitimate questions about whether declaring an emergency was necessary or whether the state's emended emergency manager law put in place earlier that year is good legislation, but there shouldn't be any controversy over whether the things you do in an emergency should put profit above people.
It still happens again and again. The initial contract for repairing the electrical grid in Puerto Rico is a good example of that, though it looks like that will not stand.
It is not easy to know what to do about this type of corruption. It may often be that as an individual there is not something that can be clearly done, so maybe you pay for five filters, and try and convince friends to buy more, or you contribute to a legal fight. There are many levels on which you can give.
What I think is most important here is the glory we give to riches, even as Christians, when they were pretty explicitly condemned by Christ. When we allow hunger, thirst, and illness to flourish so that someone can be rich, we are not followers of Christ. Individual charity may at times be the only means available, but we should not unquestioningly assume that.
I am not sure where looking at the larger structure will lead, but I am certain that we need to look.
https://www.nrdc.org/flint
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)