Slavery exists today in many forms globally, but let's take a deeper dive in the use of incarceration, since it inherently violates someone's right to "liberty" and "the pursuit of happiness". Which are fundamental human rights.
The issue of incarceration is a difficult one.
Normally, people should only be incarcerated because they have infringed on the rights of others and because they constitute a threat to do so again. In other words, incarceration is to protect citizens from people who are inclined not to respect the rights of others. In other words, the only grounds based on our country's concept of human rights for incarceration is to protect the human rights of others.
An alternative to incarceration in the past was to expel people from society and ship them to penal colonies that operated almost independently with a stern warning that return meant lifelong incarceration or death. In other words, people were "banished" from society because they did not respect the human rights of others and banishing them preserved their "human rights" even if it excluded them from the present society. In many instances, these "banished" individuals found themselves in new societies that did not value human rights, but that seemed fair as they had not valued human rights.
However, in addition to protecting citizens from people who are prone to violate the rights of others, incarceration emerged as a means of punishment and place of "rehabilitation".
Two examples, Trump's recent conviction could come with over 100 years of prison, even though it is not clear what the crime was or who was harmed if indeed there was a crime. How does that make sense? If the goal is to punish someone for misclassifying an accounting entry, the punishment seems pretty severe. Even if the goal is to punish him for a campaign violation, a tax violation, or the host of other arguments, it seems ludicrous to confine Trump when he poses no risk to society.
The same is true of young black men sentenced to prison for selling small amounts of drugs as a result of Biden's Crime Bill in the 1990s. What was the purpose of incarcerating young black men, who posed threat to citizens even if they did engage in illegal activity. The illegal activity did not violate someone's rights, it simply involved selling illicit drugs, many of which were not life threatening, simply illegal.
In both instances, it is hard to justify incarceration on the basis of protecting people's human rights from being preyed upon by those being incarcerated. Instead, it is pretty clear, the individuals are being "punished" and in both cases, society has to ask does the "punishment fit the crime". A high percentage of Americans have engaged in some illegal activity and among those who do, studies show bias by judges, have led to discriminatory sentencing (traditionally, black and ugly people have drawn longer "punishments" than white and attractive people... I use the ugly and attractive attribute to illustrate that bias including racial bias at the judicial level is undermining our value of "equal justice". But far more importantly, when we take away someone's human rights... it should not be to "punish" people but protect society. There are alternatives ways to punish people that make more sense than to abandon our core values.
The other purpose of incarceration is to provide a place for "rehabilitation". I simply cannot see how "incarceration" alongside hardened criminals is an effective way to "rehabilitate" people. If the goal is rehabilitation, then the environment should be conducive for that.
We need to rethink our justice system. We need to look at the purpose of the crime. To protect citizens, punish, or rehabilitate. "Punishment" should be reserved to those whose "crime" is so hideous, that all agree, that punishment is justified... Incarceration should be limited to those people that are a threat to citizens. Rehabilitation should be done in a place outside the prison system and address the issues that caused the person to "do the crime" (addiction, mental health issues, lack of job skills, etc.). If a person cannot be "rehabilitated" then we have to find an alternative setting for them to live but throwing them in with violent criminals is not that setting.
However, as we address reforming the justice system, to be clear failing to enforce our laws and underfunding our police are not forms of social justice, those things lead to anarchy. We are a nation of laws and there are consequences for breaking them, but the "knee jerk" reaction should not be "lock them up".
