Exploring over the Internet I recently landed over the subject of incarceration around the world and rather landed myself into trouble of loosing two consecutive nights in sleeplessness. For here I am (we are) selling Open Governance, Social Media, Government 2.0 to a generation with social consciousness, and thinking how sweet the generation would be tomorrow when our kids could possibly talk to the premiers, and there in some dark cellar is a man, disconnected even upto 23 hours everyday round the year without any contact to anything living. And the number is not few thousands or even few hundred thousands. There are an estimated 9.5 million people put under incarceration under different international or national laws of various off-line silos that we call countries.
That’s the size of entire Haiti put behind
America ranks number one in rate of incarceration with an average of 756 imprisonments in every hundred thousand inhabitants. It houses the largest inmate population in the world, with more than 2½ million within its prison walls. Also note that American prisons are arguably better equipped than anywhere else in the world and the figure of 9.5 million inmates above does not count the number of humans serving terms in countries which are not open about sharing incarceration data. For example, China.
While I am sure there might be substantial reasons for the
incriminated to be behind bars, but it is hard to assume that more often than not such “pariahs” are not a product of policy force-fitting or misuse of power by those who are incumbent. And with figures like 9.5 million, is there any estimate on how many innocents are behind bar at this point of time? In a discussion with my friends last night, it came out that it’s because of the example set by such an incarcerated population does the remaining 6 billion outside function with integrity.
Or almost with integrity. But an unanswered question was “do we really refer to the number of prisons, or number of inmates” before signing checks on behalf of our organization? Isn’t this model from an old school of thought.
Are we close to an Answer?
Prisons are primarily meant to
quarantine dangerous individuals who can either potentially harm the society in future or have already done harm and serving a term to avoid further damage. So is it okay to keep them inside and yet open an internet based social connection so that they can keep up with the world? For example allow a twitter connection to those who want to use the channel to communicate with people outside. While it is not tough to imagine the ruckus that such an idea would lead to in the short term, but there seem significant reasons to believe that in long term giving prisoners a chance to interact with the world through new forms of
social media should do the mankind good. All communication can be monitored, which actually happens for everyone else afterall!
Government 2.0 is about evolutionary, then why continuing to deny such a significant percentage of human population from a threshold of neat social media where stresses could be lowered simply by passing time reading views and contrariwise. Why completely kill a chance of recovery for some who were originally not made of a criminal mind. Another angle that one must not overlook is that fact that laws of the land, legal frameworks and constituents of punishments are the slowest of systems to evolve over centuries purely because of
the nature of such an infrastructure and a need of fine print to be in strict compliance. Where as things like technology, life style, fashion and social intelligence evolves much faster with every passing generation. Why to subject a thief of evolving modern social era to a primitive theory of torture by subjecting social denial.
Lastly, is it out of place to raise a question to the Govloop Community that treatment to inmates can really be considered for a review in the light of Government 2.0?
Besides resorting to imprisonment – an extreme end of social media does not seem to be watertight. How else can we ensure integrity from a common man. Any answers?