I found this week’s book to be fascinating and really make me think about my own views on capital punishment. An issue that came up as I was reading the book (and was briefly mentioned in the discussion today) was the idea of the United States as a “retentionist” nation when it comes to the death penalty. However, when I think of a country that is traditional and retentionist I think of nations like the U.K., with a parliament and figureheads. I began to wonder why countries like these abolished the death penalty while the U.S., a promoter of democracy worldwide, would support capital punishment. Then, I came across Garland’s distinction between liberalism and democracy. While knowing the difference between the two from various courses, I always thought of the two synonymously. Garland stated otherwise: “Liberal institutions aim to restrain the coercive power of the state and to uphold the rights and freedoms of individuals (136)” while “Democracy’s central commitment is not to equality, nor to civil liberties, nor even to limited government, but to a form of rule in which ‘the people’ govern themselves (142).” Interesting comparison, especially when you think about the United States. Do we value the concept of liberalism or democracy? I would have to say the latter. The issue of capital punishment is in conflict with much of the liberal issues talked about today (social welfare, freedom, dignity, nonviolence), but as Americans we strive to give power to the people and focus not on these social issues. This is the difference between the U.S. and most of Western Europe – local level politics and what the people at the local level value. As Garland stated, “wherever popular majorities rather than liberal elites control law and policy, the death penalty is more likely to exist (142).”
I really liked to fact that the leaders created a question stemming off from the book about education and crime. The chart that they showed was crazy in the fact that prison inmates cost so much more money than a student. It can be argued that the less we invest in education, the more we are going to pay for imprisonment… and that really goes along with the stigma today. The view is that the less educated someone is, the higher they are at risk of committing crime; despite this popularly held outlook, what is being done to promote change? It relates to one of the first questions in the discussion and the fact that we, as Americans, are obsessed with headlines talking about the death penalty and not those urging for education reform. While a quality education does not mean that you won’t commit a crime or ever be sentenced to death row, it can give empowerment and a sense of responsible citizenry to people, helping them to make responsible decisions as well as upward mobility.
This whole issue can be used in a variety of classrooms and in a variety of ways. From working it into race relations, to discussing differences between the U.S. and Western Europe, to relating it to lynchings when talking about American history, to correlations to education, this topic covers such a variety of issues… and that is why it is so controversial!
Sara, your analysis of liberalism vs. democracy, with implications for the issue of capital punishment, is elegantly stated.
ReplyDeleteI think the founders of this country were aiming for a synthesis of the two. What do you think?
I imagine you have some valuable perspectives on capital punishment, considering your father's judicial experiences!
I strongly agree with you on the education issue and think you answered the question with great insight.
Hey Sara,
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed reading your section about liberalism vs. democracy and I think that this can easily be incorporated into a classroom. The distinction as you point out is not one that everyone notices or even fully comprehends, yet it is a very important distinction to be made. Furthermore, this distinction could help students understand politics within our democratic society. We can help explain liberalism by having students look at party politics, showing them that Democrats have a liberal point of view when they aim to get equal rights for all people, whereas Republicans take a more conservative route. As you noted, this book does an excellent job of differentiating between liberalism and democracy.
Lastly I wanted to note how insightful your question was about what we are doing to "promote change" within the education system. This is an excellent question and one that deserves more consideration. As a new generation of teachers we should take this into our own hands and promote change from within our classrooms, one individual at a time. By modeling how to be responsible, democratic citizens to our students we are doing our part in bettering society.