The other side of the coin, though, is that if we prosecute these people they become martyrs in the eyes of conservatives and rallying points for the conservative movement. That movement remains dangerous and irredeemably evil; while Cheney, Rumsfeld, and the rest of them are out of power now and will grow old and die, the movement can easily come back when the political winds shift. We must drive a stake through its heart, and I don't believe prosecutions would be helpful toward that end.
If we don't prosecute, it appears to me that it is tacit approval of their actions and if there really are no consequences, it could be a lot worse next time. Conservatives are going to deify or present who they like as martyrs with or without our cooperation I think.
I didn't elect them. I spent what energy I could *not* electing them. Torture is not okay, ever. I can't tell you how angry I am that they got in that position and used that power to do so many awful evil bad things. I'm not okay with them going on with their lives as if nothing they did was wrong. Maybe there's something that can be done that I don't see that would be more effective or useful. I'm open to suggestions.
I'm not saying I'm okay with what they did; I'm just saying I'm not aware of any reason to anticipate that the response you're advocating will have the consequences that you're suggesting. I know you tried hard to keep Bush from being elected. So did a lot of people. And no, it didn't work. But that doesn't mean this alternative will, either -- it just means that this problem takes more than you or me or any other handful of well-meaning people to solve. Whoever you lock up, the problem's not going away unless an overwhelming proportion of the world's population is committed to stopping it when it happens. Meanwhile, we can continue to spend our efforts to try to get to that place (and perhaps the 2008 election is a decent sign we're closer to it than we were four years earlier), or we can divert those efforts to trying to scare people into submission. Maybe neither approach will stop torturers; maybe nothing ever will -- and maybe if we can't stop them, we can at least have the satisfaction of seeing them suffer. But if we're going to go after that satisfaction, we shouldn't pretend to ourselves that we're doing this for the benefit of future torture victims, not when we've so little basis for claiming it's actually going to help them. Especially not, I would think, while similarly unconvincing claims about deterrence remain the principal justification for a plethora of other human rights abuses (consider, for example, the incarceration rate among African American men). Is it really worth it to put our voices behind a flawed argument that's contributing to so much other harm, just to alleviate our own despair over how little good we've been able to do in this situation?
That said, if vengeance on Bush's cronies will make his victims feel better, I've got no problem with their having it. But where resources for fighting evil are limited -- and they're always limited -- we can't afford to overestimate what we're accomplishing with any given tactic. If people who aim to prevent torture from ever happening again let ourselves get caught up in pursuing non-solutions that we wish were solutions, instead of directing the entirety of that commitment into the hunt for and pursuit of real solutions, it could be a lot worse next time.
I certainly don't think that you are in favor of what they did either. I have probably left a stronger impression of a position than I have. My only real intent in posting the video is that I don't want nothing to be done. Even if it's just a statement of these people were responsible and it shouldn't have been done. I'm not completely sure we can solve the problem either (at least not without the work of lots of people over a lot of time), and maybe holding those responsible, responsible won't contribute to a solution. I still think that it is important to do something to point out their wrongdoing.
I gather from comments this is about not prosecuting the CIA torturers.
I think that leaves options open to punish their superiors for giving illegal orders. This might require an international court. It's early days yet - I'm inclined to wait and see what happens.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2009-04-18 10:19 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-04-18 10:30 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-04-19 04:28 am (UTC)An awful lot of criminologists and sociologists say there's no evidence that deterrence works.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-04-19 05:33 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-04-19 05:52 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-04-19 07:03 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-04-19 08:11 am (UTC)That said, if vengeance on Bush's cronies will make his victims feel better, I've got no problem with their having it. But where resources for fighting evil are limited -- and they're always limited -- we can't afford to overestimate what we're accomplishing with any given tactic. If people who aim to prevent torture from ever happening again let ourselves get caught up in pursuing non-solutions that we wish were solutions, instead of directing the entirety of that commitment into the hunt for and pursuit of real solutions, it could be a lot worse next time.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-04-19 08:48 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-04-19 11:25 am (UTC)I think that leaves options open to punish their superiors for giving illegal orders. This might require an international court. It's early days yet - I'm inclined to wait and see what happens.