First, here's an interesting study. https://www.scarymommy.com/decrease-spanking-higher-crime-rates/ Even though our parents were well-meaning, spanking is harmful to children and should not be used. Secondly, I've grown increasingly skeptical of violent solutions to problems. It seems more and more meeting force with force leads not to peace, but to more violence. But I'm not willing to become a "turn the other cheek" pacifist. Honestly, I think the movie 300: Rise of an Empire, well, broke me. Since then, I've been unable to stomach even the mildest depictions of violence. Then there's the fact the US is on fire.

Looking back to our warlike European Pagan ancestors, they weren't as violent as we think. Social institutions such as blood-price was used to settle disputes without resorting to killing in blood feuds. (Of course, the Sagas are not reliable as a depiction of actual life in Northern Europe anymore than soap operas depict actual American life. Real conflicts among the Celts and the Norse were probably closer to Judge Judy than Game of Thrones.) It is said the druids could stand between warring armies and bring peace. We also have the Goddess Rhiannon patiently enduring her mistreatment and forgiving her abuser. But she's a Goddess and we are not Gods.

So, the way I think of it, is that violence is rarely a solution. We need to first seek reconciliation and peace. Not returning insult for insult. Perhaps the better way to say it is to not let anger rule you. I do think there are times violence is called for, but should always be the last option. But what if violence does make things worse? We've spent thousands of years doing the eye-for-an-eye thing and it doesn't seem to be working.

Even with the statistic above, that corporal punishment tends to produce higher crime rates is counter-intuitive until you think about it. If children learn rules are imposed by force they grow up thinking using force/violence is appropriate. In fact, using punishment as a teaching tool might be an issue as the children are just learning to behave to avoid punishment which could be harmful to actual morality formation.

So, the question becomes, if we want to create a more peaceful world, what steps can we take? For example, shifting the criminal justice system towards reform and victim-offender reconciliation for example. Stopping our glorification of violent media. And really, not letting ourselves get drawn into the cycle. So many times on this site and real life I've seen fights get sparked. Ask yourself. If someone calls you an (expletive) do you really need to respond? I've wasted so much energy getting drawn into "someone is wrong on the internet" style fights and I've found just walking away and spending my energy elsewhere is a wiser solution and eventually the offending individual simply goes away.

7348973
Sometimes kids need to be spanked. I’m not saying we should beat the fuck out of kids, but a smack or two every now and then when they act egregiously out of line isn’t abuse. Hippie parents have gone on and on about how punishing kids is evil, and their crotch demons are the ones who grow up to be spoiled and insolent. They’re the ones out there rioting and burning shit. Violence is part of human nature. To go against it is to go against what we are. Reform isn’t possible with most criminals. Sure, a thief or a white collar crook might be rehabilitated but killers, rapists and abusers cannot. Violence in media and art is simply a reflection of ourselves. I will not support any attempt at censorship of art. Doesn’t matter if it’s “glorification,” art is art. Self-righteous moral guardians have been clutching their pearls about art and media for decades. Fictional violence does not cause real violence.

7348985
I'm not against all violence period. I'm just saying we might need to find alternatives before the next world war ends with our extinction. In addition, societies can be set up to have less violence. We're significantly more peaceful than we were in the Middle Ages.

As for spanking, it's effective for short-term behaviour correction. It's long term I'm worried about.

7348985
Parents who blame violent media for how their kids turned out had no business having kids.
Especially the ones who bought the damn music/games/whatev for their kids in the first place.

7348973

"Then there's the fact the US is on fire."

I think if the police were more violent with the rioters, the US wouldn't be on fire.

7349038
That may only lead to escalation.

7349050
They've already escalated things to the point of burning down buildings. If we really think that Black lives matter, we shouldn't stand by while BLM rioters burn down Black neighborhoods.

7349051
It's a powderkeg. Let's say the cops open fire on BLM/Antifa rioters. Now, they have martyrs the same way the 1916 Easter Uprising did and we all know how the IRA ended up. Someone needs to bring the different groups together so the issues can be discussed in a civilized manner.

7349013
Out of curiosity, how do you feel violence can or should be handled?

7349078
Bring the different groups together, so the issues can be discussed in a civilized manner? That's not going to happen. This isn't about George Floyd: The rioters are people who think that burning down buildings, and looting stores, is fun. They are adult-children.

To be fair: A lot of them didn't get a fair change to grow up. I think the rioters, by and large, are young men without fathers. Or worse, young men who's fathers encourage this kind of thing. If it were up to me: I might put them in prison, and then give them a family in the prison. Give them fathers, who can discipline them. Teach them right from wrong. Who can help them grow up, and become men instead of boys.

7349084
I'm not sure what you mean by families in prison, but, yes, if someone is a danger to the community they should be jailed.

7349090
What I'm saying is: If they're in prison, because they didn't have a father to help them grow up: Give them a father-figure in prison, so that they can grow up.

7349080
There isn't a solution that works for everything. Some people are violent because their entitlement mixed with their aggression. Some people are violent because of mental health issues. Some people just snap. Then you have others who firmly believe that they are acting out of faith, patriotism, or in the name of being socially progressive.
It's not reasonable, for example, to regard someone I beat the shit out of for grabbing my wife's purse (and myself if you want to humor the argument of excessive force) and an autistic man who just had a tantrum by the same standards.
I think the best solution is managing violence, but that's also a very far stretch.

7349084
So, if I understand you correctly, and please correct me if I'm wrong: you want to reform the prison system into re-education programs run by paternal authority figures?

7349099
What you said is reasonable. The truth is violence will never be fully eradicated, but it can be minimized.

7349099

"So, if I understand you correctly, and please correct me if I'm wrong: you want to reform the prison system into re-education programs run by paternal authority figures?"

Yes and no. I don't think that's one one-size-fits all answer, to reforming all criminals. I think some can't be reformed, and some can't be reformed that way. But for overgrown boys who have the potential to be men, who just need a good father to help them become men: Give them a father.

7349102
Unfortunately, as long as enough people regard the notion of minimalizing violence as weakness and that the answer is more violence: it won't catch on.
Like how in America everytime there is any discussion about what guns the public should have access to after a shooting, some people shout that the answer to end shootings is more guns.
Sure, in theory giving everyone a gun means everyone is a potential deterrent against violence; it only works if every law abiding citizen who has a gun is responsible, rational, and willing to act if need be.

7349104
Ah.
Then what is the answer for those who can't be reformed but are competent enough to understand that they broke the law?

7349142
Well, let's take an extreme example: Psychopaths are people who feel no empathy or guilt at all. They can never be reformed. Maybe you can train them to not break the law. But what's the point: They will always be bad people, there's no fixing them. People like that belong in jail (and even then, they should be separated from the normal prisoners).

7349153
I would argue that being unable to understand guilt or empathy doesn't mean being unable to learn the rules: it just means they have less motive to not break the law. Psychopaths can follow social conventions and do so when it suits them.
People with psychopathic tendencies thrive in positions of power and are therefore easily attracted to them, and are better 'equipped' to get there than the people with more ethics.
On top of that: in modern society, having psychopathic or sociopathic tendencies are easily mistaken got signs of being competitive, headstrong, self assured, etc.

To be blunt: a psycopath who sees value in 'blending in' is qualified to win an election, lead a church/business, ect, as long as it remains more convienent to hide their true nature than to just let the mask and dice fall.
I'll certainly agree that a lot of criminals are psychopaths but not every psychopath is a criminal.

But that aside, I do agree that you can't fix some people and that prisoner segregation based on severity of offence and mental state are necessary.

7349176
The last place a psychopath belongs is in a position of power! Do you really want society's leaders to be people who never feel guilty for anything?

7349185
I did not say I want psycopaths in positions of power.
I said that they tend to achieve positions of power, and their traits are too often mistaken as advantages and strengths.
Calm down.

Most people will say that Cult Leaders clearly look like Cult Leaders, unless you're asking a member of the relevant Cult.

7349192
Then I don't see your point. The wise psychopath will end up in a position of power, instead of prison, yes. But they will hurt people no matter what, because they just don't mind hurting people (they feel no guilt not matter what). I don't want the prisons training psychopaths on how to avoid going to prison. Because that's just training them on how to hurt people, without getting in trouble for it.

7349201
My original point was just me playing devils advocate in response to your choice of an extreme example. If you don't want people using your extremes as possible discussion points: then don't use them in the first place.

Now we've gotten into a very unfortunate circle of "Psychopaths get into Power" and "It's not good that Psychopaths get into power".
And to clarify: its absolutely abhorrent that they do and do it well.

The real question: is how do we stop psycopaths from getting the power and/or skills needed to avoid justice?
Our society and economy rewards people with these qualites.

7349208
Might I interest you in some literature?

https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/donald-rooum-and-freedom-press-ed-what-is-anarchism-an-introduction

7349433
Yes. Yes you may