Justice: Bradley Manning and the Case Against Solitary Confinement

[If there is anything positive resulting from the torture of Bradley Manning by USMC carabinieri at Quantico, it is that it has raised public awareness about the shockingly routine use in United States state and federal prisons of the cruel but not unusual punishment of solitary confinement. Yesterday, for example, Robert Gibbs was asked about Manning by ABC's Jake Tapper and MSNBC featured an excellent interview about his treatment with FireDogLake's Jane Hamsher. Like the tragic shooting in Tucson and the issue of gun control, the government's brutal handling of Bradley Manning has encouraged the media to begin to shine a light on a dark corner of American justice.]

by Lynn Parramore (new deal 2.0; 2011-01-23)

The degree of civilization in a society can be judged
by entering its prisons.
~Fyodor Dostoevsky

In the earliest days of our Republic, a group of well-meaning Philadelphia Quakers set out to reform the prison system. The idea was to remove convicts from the mayhem and corruption of overcrowded jails to solitary cells where sinners would return to mental and spiritual health through reflection. In the Walnut Street Jail, no windows would distract the prisoners with street life; no conversation would disturb their penitence. Alone with God, they would be rehabilitated.

There was a small problem. Many of the prisoners went insane. The Walnut Street Jail was shut down in 1835.

But the word penitentiary became part of the language, and the idea of placing prisoners in solitary confinement did not die. It seemed so reasonable - so much better than chain gangs or public stocks. New prisons opened to test the theory that solitude might bring salvation to criminals.

Charles Dickens had a keen interest in prison conditions, having witnessed his father’s detention in a Victorian debtor’s prison. When he heard about the latest American innovation in housing convicts, he came to see for himself. At Philadelphia’s Eastern State Penitentiary, the wretches he found in solitary confinement were barely human spectres who picked their flesh raw and stared blankly at walls. His on-the-spot conclusion: Solitary confinement is torture. Dickens wrote:
I believe that very few men are capable of estimating the immense amount of torture and agony which this dreadful punishment, prolonged for years, inflicts upon the sufferers…I hold this slow and daily tampering with the mysteries of the brain, to be immeasurably worse than any torture of the body: and because its ghastly signs and tokens are not so palpable to the eye and sense of touch as scars upon the flesh; because its wounds are not upon the surface, and it extorts few cries that human ears can hear; therefore I the more denounce it, as a secret punishment which slumbering humanity is not roused up to stay.
A man who had seen his share of inhumanities, Dickens pronounced solitary confinement to be “rigid, strict, and hopeless…cruel and wrong.”

That was 1842. Since then, piles of scientific studies, along with the vivid accounts of victims, have confirmed what was obvious to Dickens. Solitary confinement is worse than smashed bones and torn flesh. When human beings are deprived of social contact for even a few weeks, concentration breaks down, memory fades and disorientation sets in. Eventually, many prisoners experience explosive rages, hallucinations, catatonia, and self-mutilation. Some become irretrievably insane. Far from promoting safety, the most commonly cited justification, solitary confinement often amplifies violent impulses, turning prisoners into ticking time bombs who are far more dangerous to human society upon release than they ever were to begin with (see National Geographic’s documentary on the subject, available on Netflix).

Human beings need social contact for normal brain function. Solitary confinement is thus a method of inflicting traumatic injury upon the human mind. “It’s an awful thing, solitary,” wrote former Vietnam prisoner John McCain in Faith of My Fathers. “It crushes your spirit and weakens your resistance more effectively than any other form of mistreatment.” Among its legion perversities, solitary confinement turns medical doctors into torturers; renders violent criminals more aggressive, and makes prisoners cut off from human society incapable of functioning in it.

In 1890, the United States Supreme Court nearly declared the punishment unconstitutional. It is banned by the Geneva Convention, condemned by the United Nations,  and either prohibited or restricted in most civilized countries. And yet today, as Atul Gawande showed in his revealing 2009 New Yorker article, tens of thousands of Americans are tortured in this fashion every day, out of sight, in the “Supermax” prisons that have popped up like poisoned mushrooms on the American landscape since the 1980s. Some prisoners are consigned to these Houses of Unholiness for violations - both major and minor — of prison rules. Some for gang activity. Others for trying to escape. Or for violent behavior. Some are placed there because they are mentally ill and there is nowhere else to put them - the equivalent of casting a sufferer of pneumonia onto an Arctic tundra.

Save for the death penalty, solitary confinement is the most extreme sanction allowed by law. Like slavery and every other form of institutionalized inhumanity, it should be banished to the dark annals of American history as an example of what happens when our humanity slumbers.

Instead, it is being used as a method of terror and coercion by the United States government upon a citizen who has not even been convicted of a crime.

As Salon’s Glenn Greenwald and several other courageous journalists have documented, Bradley Manning, the 22-year-old U.S. Army Private accused of leaking classified documents to WikiLeaks, has been detained in solitary confinement for the last seven months, despite not having been convicted of any crime, having been a model detainee, and having evidenced no signs of violence or even disciplinary misdemeanors. Manning has been kept alone in a cell for 23 hours a day, barred from exercising in that cell, deprived of sleep, and denied even a pillow or sheets for his bed. As Greenwald reports, “the brig’s medical personnel now administer regular doses of anti-depressants to Manning to prevent his brain from snapping from the effects of this isolation.” A court hearing has not been set.

The message of the U.S. government to its citizens in this activity is clear: blow the whistle and your brain will be mutilated before you even have a trial.

But it may be that much to the shame of the U.S. government, our slumbering humanity is awakening. The solitary confinement - the torture, for we must call it that - of Bradley Manning is ironically shining a light on this brutality and tipping us off to the danger of authoritarianism. A United Nations probe is now investigating the Bradley case, and the drumbeat of outrage in the blogosphere grows louder every day. Protesters are organizing. Whatever one thinks of Manning and his involvement in the WikiLeaks release of classified information, there can never be any justification for torture. As Greenwald argues, such practices weaken the position of the United States government, both abroad and at home. Other countries will think twice before accepting extradition requests to a place where inhumane treatment of prisoners is sanctioned. Our moral standing in the world suffers, while the American citizenry, already suspicious of post-9/11 governmental abuses of power, grows even more alarmed. What kind of legitimacy adheres to a judicial hearing when the accused has been subject to sanity-threatening conditions? Even exposing the accused to duress is a violation of justice and of the U.S. Constitution — which applies to both civilians and soldiers. Trust and faith in American justice will deteriorate as long as such damaging practices continue.

As we spend time and rejoice with our friends and family in the new year — enjoying the social interaction that human beings require - let us pause for a moment to remember the thousands of people being tortured in American prisons, including Bradley Manning, and let us send our own message back to our government: We are Americans. We will not accept the intimidation and coercion of our fellow citizens, even from the Pentagon. Most assuredly, we will not accept torture in our name. Not of the accused. Not of the mentally ill. Not even of convicted criminals. When our civilized society is attacked, no matter what the justification, we will rise up to defend it.

The placement of human beings in solitary confinement is not a measure of their depravity. It is a measure of our own.

Lynn Parramore is Editor of New Deal 2.0, Media Fellow at the Roosevelt Institute, and Co-founder of Recessionwire. This article originally appeared here.

See, also: U.S. can't link accused Army private [Bradley Manning] to Assange (NBC News 2011-01-25);
Salon's Glenn Greenwald on "disgustingly harsh conditions inside prisons" and related matters (Salon 2011-01-25);
US accused of inhumane treatment over Wikileaks soldier case (Amnesty International 2011-01-24).

Peace & Justice: A few thoughts from MLK this holiday weekend


"...three larger problems which grow out of man's ethical infantilism: racial injustice, poverty, and war." -- Rev. Martin Luther King, accepting the Nobel Peace Prize

Rants: The Founding Fathers hate you

Bill Maher went off on the Tea Party last night to good comic effect:

This is funny, and true as far as it goes. The members of the religious right who think the Philadelphia conventioneers intended to establish a Judeo-Christian version of Shari'an rule are wrong, of course. As Maher says, they were learned men whose study of history made them as wary of popes as they were of kings.

The irony, though, is that in one way the Tea Party does call back to the revolutionary era. Before control of the independence movement was seized by the worthies we now think of as The Founders, the merchants of Boston and other areas of the northeast secretly manipulated the fears and prejudices of ordinary citizens to advance their own financial interests, undermining respect for traditional authority in the process just as the Pete Petersons, Haley Barbours and Koch brotherses are doing now. If the merchants hadn't been overzealous in stimulating the mob, we'd probably be a nice commonwealth nation like Canada to this day.

In short, John Adams might hate the tea partiers if he was still around, but Sam Adams would love them.

Peace & Justice: Martin Luther King's Legacy

Peter Rothberg writes in The Nation:
In the mid-1960s, the Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. contributed an annual essay to The Nation on the state of civil rights and race relations in the United States. His last piece, from March 14, 1966, could have been written today: "Jobs are harder to create than voting rolls. Harmonizing of peoples of vastly different cultural levels is complicated and frequently abrasive."
Here are links to the essays:
A Bold Design for a New South, March 30, 1963
Hammer of Civil Rights, March 8, 1964
Let Justice Roll Down, March 15, 1965
The Last Steep Ascent, March 14, 1966
Thanks to YouTube we can also watch King's remarkable oratory like the I Have a Dream speech delivered on the national mall in Washington, DC in 1963, near the spot where Barack Obama took his oath of office two years ago.

Organizing: Responding to the Conservative Propaganda Machine

[For 40 years, the forces of reaction have dominated politics in the United States. If America is going to reverse the trajectory of decline they've set, their dominion must be countered by an organized movement that is ready to fight for peace, expanded democracy and economic justice.  Putting aside for a moment a discussion about who are the potential allies in this battle and what specific tactics and strategies might be deployed, we can find a starting point in Joe Brewer's summary of what's needed: "We have to be smart. We have to be organized. And we have to be strategic." The devil, as always, will be in the details.]

by Joe Brewer (truthout 2011-01-02)

So now you've seen the power of conservative propaganda for setting America's agenda. During the November 2010 elections, we saw the annihilation of progressive ideas by the most sophisticated, deeply funded and precisely orchestrated public relations system ever concocted.

And they are preparing to take things up a notch now that they've won. The gears are well-greased and the engine is humming. Prospects are slim for President Obama and the remaining progressives in Congress. If we don't act now, 2012 will mark the end of the progressive rise to power in American politics.

Now is the time to respond with force.

We have to rally together and stop the message machine that aligns corporate wealth with the American story. The stakes are too high for us to ignore this threat any longer. Our enemy is not a party. It is a system designed to manipulate public perceptions about what it means to be American - and it is unraveling the tapestry of our culture and destroying our democracy.

I've watched the progressive leadership closely in the last five years as they have repeatedly underestimated this oppositional force and overlooked its fundamental threat to America's future. They have invested nearly all of their time and money in candidates and policies, naively thinking that rational discourse would save the day despite a mountain of evidence to the contrary. Very little has been done to build the twenty-first-century communication infrastructure we need to counter the vast network of think tanks, media outlets and cultural myths that preserve the status quo.

To give you a sense of exactly what we're up against, consider how the Tea Party movement came into being:
  1. A group of billionaires organized by Koch Industries came together and designed the initiative.
  2. Spokespeople were planted in the mainstream media to suggest that it was time for a revolution reminiscent of the founding days of our country.
  3. A massive media platform, including Fox News and conservative radio, spread the meme to every corner of the country.
  4. Seed funding was provided to organize the first rallies, all the while painting it as a "grassroots movement."
  5. Narratives that had been planted by conservative think tanks throughout the last forty years were evoked as "traditional values."
  6. Real concerns by people suffering under corporate corruption were tapped to evoke strong anger and fear.
  7. People came out in droves to support Tea Party candidates who were actually in cahoots with their corporate benefactors.
All of the investments have paid off. The Democratic majority in Congress is gone. President Obama has been put on the defensive. And local initiatives across the country have advanced conservative policies into law at the city, county and state levels.

Put simply, we're getting our asses kicked.

Now more than ever, we need effective governance in the various sectors, including both public and private, to save our country from collapse. Yet what we have is a deep collusion between wealthy corporatists and a significant cabal in government. Their collusion is profoundly anti-democratic and even anti-market (as demonstrated by the devastating impacts of their policies on financial markets in 2008). So what we're getting is a group of financiers who set up communication systems to manipulate public perception and drive boom-crash cycles in the economy to siphon all forms of wealth into their coffers.

We can't let this happen any longer. Now is the time to act.

Are you concerned about the future of America? Would you like to finally see the American people have a stronger footing than large corporations in our politics? Then you should invest wisely in the infrastructure that is capable of elevating progressive ideas so that they can dominate public discourse. Stop dumping all your money and time into reactive campaigns to save progressive policy from the conservative hammer. Break out of the election cycle mold and build for the long haul. And start being strategically proactive by targeting the source of power our opposition holds – the conservative worldview.

When I was a fellow of the now-defunct Rockridge Institute, I saw the potential for decisive strategic action that reframes political debate. It was painful to watch progressive philanthropists turn their backs on this foundational work and pour all their money into the 2008 campaign. What would have happened if they had instead pooled a few million dollars to invest in the design of a communication framework that brings coherence to the progressive vision? How might this year's election have been different if progressives across the country were taught how to deconstruct conservative stories and challenge them in a manner that fundamentally weakens their influence?

It's getting late in the game and our side is way behind. Our only chance for a comeback is to respond directly to the conservative propaganda machine. Right now we don't have adequate capacity for getting our messages out to the public, and we rely too heavily on outdated tactics that repeatedly fail in the face of such a powerful opposition.

We have to be smart. We have to be organized. And we have to be strategic. It's now or never.

Are you with me?

Creative Commons License
This work by Truthout is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 United States License.
 
Related Posts with Thumbnails