Prison Abolition in Practice

As a young adult, prison was never a concern of mine. I am white passing, speak English with no accent, and even when I was heavily involved in criminal activity (A result of poverty and seeking a way out of it), I was not concerned that I would be targeted. And so, I never thought critically about what happens in the prison system. To me, the people that ended up in prison must have been there as a result of their own wrongdoing rather than racial profiling, targeting, or systematic neglect. When people talk about prison abolition, the first question is always, "what are the alternatives?" People asking it sometimes think they've blown a huge hole in the argument - surely prison abolitionists have never considered this possibility? It's a good question, though, and one that no one can exactly answer. Prison systems are different country to country, and in the United States they have become a for-profit system that effectively uses slave labor by incentivizing the mass incarceration of peoples that can not afford alternate recourse. These peoples are almost always poor people of color who have been resigned to poverty through centuries of work by white hegemonic structures of power. Some may say that the incredibly high prison population in the United States is proof of the efficacy of our prison system to keeping crime rates low, but crime rates in the United States have no correlation with lower crime rates, but rather, the opposite. This begs the question: in other countries, is there a correlation between crime rates and prison populations? The proper answer is these correlations need to be studied before being presented as fact. Of Sweden, Holland, and Finland, Sweden has the highest crime rate (Nordic Criminal Statistics; Westfelt; Council of Europe). Across the last 50 years, Finland previously had the highest crime rates. Finland also had the highest prison population of the three until recently. This was achieved through the following: "The depenalisation of certain offense types (such as drunken driving and theft), the increased use of suspended prison sentences, and the introduction of community service as an alternative to unconditional imprisonment (Von Hofer, 31). This leads us to today, where the Finnish prison population is lower, the crime rate is lower, and certain rehabilitative elements are recognized to work. Of course, this is drastically different from the United States, primarily racially. Finland's population is largely homogeneous white. There are not deep histories of racial inequality to wrestle with in the prison system because they do not occur through systematic oppression. (This is not to say that people are not racially profiled, but rather, it's not the result of constant reaffirmed racism. So can these same means work in the United States? The answer is: possibly. The removal of penalties or sentencing for drug use or other non-violent/minor crimes would most likely lower the prison population. Angela Davis explains that this would not repair damage done or prevent damage that will be done to targeted communities. Prison as an ongoing system is the problem for these communities, and people that commit violent crimes are not helped by prisons, nor is the population at large. Without reforming gun laws, education, rehabilitation systems and more, perpetrators of violent crimes will likely not see futures aside from prison and death. These crimes will also continue to occur, with no work being done to address the root of their occurrences. We cannot look to other countries for successful prison reform when it is societal reform that is needed. Likewise, prison abolition cannot make progress until large parts of society have been questioned in their efficacy.