It’s early 2020. A new and terrifying infectious agent is discovered. A mutation of a coronavirus has spread to the human population from a demented bat somewhere in the bowels of Asia. Probably somewhere in the vicinity of Transylvania where all the other mythological scourges emanate from. After some trademark disputes with the Mexican Corona™ ale company, the media settles on the name COVID-19. The virus turns out to be quite deadly. It affects the human respiratory system and quite literally suffocates people to death, not unlike some legendary ghoul.
Canada and the USA for the first time ever, adopt an international quarantine protocol to keep in lock-step with the global community. Unanimous implementation of safeguards is the only way a seriously beastly pandemic such as this one can be vanquished.
More advanced nations overseas already have such a concept ingrained into the culture. Certain protective measures are put in place during an epidemic or a pandemic. Mandated physical distancing, wearing of masks when within 6 feet of other people, meticulous hand-washing, sterilization of common use surfaces.
Western nations are a bit behind in normalizing these types of protective measures. Playing the catch-up game is a rather costly exercise but a very necessary one.
The west is behind in other areas of social advancement as well, prisons being of paramount importance. A wise man once said that the maturity of a society can be accurately gauged by the way it treats its most marginalized citizens. That would be those whose lives are led in confinement behind bars and prison walls.
Nowhere is the impact of these new pandemic “protective” mechanisms felt more severely, than in the prison population. Physical distancing in a crowded prison environment is simply not infrastructurally possible. To properly quarantine the population for the mandated 14 days after someone travels, or after a positive test result, or a suspected case of COVID-19, requires locking everyone down. This violates basic civil rights acts and the recently decided common law, which states that inmates have certain residual liberties, like the right to exercise and fresh air outside their cells each day.
The occurrence of a global pandemic is no surprise. Some nations have been ready for it for years. The impact to their citizens has surely been much less as a result.
In Canada, nobody was ready for such an intense change to daily life, least of all those who are institutionalized. The ability of prisoners to have sufficient meaningful human contact during normal situations is extremely limited. During pandemic times, the isolation is increasingly problematic.
The only way to contact anyone in the outside world is through postal mail (snail mail) or telephone. Almost nobody uses postal mail anymore. Many people do not use telephones either, only internet. Some even have abandoned traditional internet email for other more advanced forms of communications through social networks and such.
Yet, there is no way to contact anyone via the internet in Canada, not even by email. This can be a debilitating loss of connectivity to one’s support networks. A socially healthy person can appear to be devoid of friends, family, supports and most importantly in the hierarchy of survival needs as defined by Maslow, basic human intimacy.
Years of deprival of important human contact can take an extreme toll on the human mind. Apart from obvious developmental delays which are introduced, there can be actual physiological brain damage occurring from such a solitary existence. This is especially problematic for people who have pre-existing mental health concerns. Those with neurological conditions such as ADHD quickly find themselves in a crisis.
The entire country’s citizenry got a small taste of what prison life is like with the recent and sudden implementation of segregatory policy. Mental health concerns quickly blossomed into a mushroom cloud of tribulations. Empathy set in, ever so slightly, whether people realize it or not.
The treatment of “prisoners” is never going to be very good. The public seems to believe generally that unhealthy prison conditions are fine. That these people must have done something to deserve it. That the mistreatment of fellow human being is somehow normal. Apart from the obviousness of the criminogenic hypocrisy, this thinking is unskillful for several reasons.
The cost to society of housing people who are being physically restricted from normal daily life is extremely high. Estimates usually place the cost per inmate in the six-figure range. Not many people earn a six-figure salary. Just imagine if you had twice as much money available because you decided that there is a better way to handle the “war on crime” than to incarcerate and torture people.
Assuming we realize that locking people up forever is sadistic and a foolish waste of money, we then have to consider what happens upon their release. If we have tortured and abused a person for years on end, imagine the likelihood that she is going to emerge with kindness and goodwill toward man. Not everyone is Mahatma Gandhi. Most don’t even come close. Torture factories create socially unhealthy people who have vendettas against the inhumanity of uncivilization.
Even if one transcends beyond the emotional crusade of retribution, she is likely to be financially drained. This vulnerability makes it much easier to fall into a life of crime. The cycle has so many twists, turns, and branches, all of which lead back to some form of destruction.
These industrial human coops are actually making society less safe as a result. This is a good thing only to those whose careers rely upon a steady stream of crime and criminals. Justice officials earn substantial salaries from capturing, terrorizing and re-capturing their disadvantaged prey. They are skillful propagandists. Artists of psychosocial control, like the priests of yore. So they carefully and cleverly ensure the appearance of justice, the appearance of fairness, the appearance of a safer society as a result of what they do.
Meanwhile, in truly enlightened societies like Bhutan, they have made leaps and bounds towards actually improving public safety through seemingly controversial policies like prison abolition. This concept is more about changing the wording, changing the mindset, introducing a new cultural meme, than about actually tearing down any buildings.
By continuing to implement the exact same infrastructure, but renaming the terms, reshaping the perspective, one’s entire outlook can be changed. Instead of having prisons, and prisoners, we could have educational institutions and academics. The social learning could, and certainly should begin in elementary school. Recidivism to anti-social behaviour (it’s always recidivism because nobody was an angelic 2-year-old), would result in placement into an intensive adult education centre. Staff at this centre would be there to help unveil whatever traumas and hurly-burly led to the problematic conduct.
There is no need to punish or torture a person who genuinely wants to learn to be a better human being. In fact, punishing such a person can have only adverse results. Some have adopted this path throughout their lives. With an instilment of this mindset in early childhood education, nearly every citizen will be on board.
The few who strangely adopt a different dogma don’t need to be tortured to death either. They could be free to live in their own way, in their own neighbourhood, with others like them. Let’s face it, there is never just one person who wants to live a certain way. If you or I don’t accept the way someone else wants to live as a consenting adult, neither of us has any business invading her bedroom to enforce some other doctrine.
The only time intervention would be necessary is when different life philosophies clash in incompatible ways. The government’s role should be limited to detection and enforcement of these clashes. This is particularly important with vulnerable parties, such as children, or those with neurological conditions such as autism or other developmental delays.
By re-organizing social infrastructure in this way, the public safety improves dramatically. Roles for justice officials still exist. In fact, there may be a need for even more of them, in a personally psychologically and socially ameliorating function. Oftentimes, new recruits to correctional officer appointments become disillusioned and burnt out very quickly. In the new organization of the justice system, the roles will be genuinely helpful ones, as most people whom sign up for such a job envision.
This is the vision of a balanced society. A society based upon equilibrium. An equilism.