Crime and Punishment

A bit heavy for a Saturday morning, but here's a question: Should 9/11 suspects be allowed to plead guilty, knowing that this carries a death sentence?  The Obama administration is considering that question as it moves forward with plans for Guantanamo Bay (see today's Times for the complete story).

In typical capital cases, defendants are allowed to plead guilty.  In the case of the Guantanamo detainees, though, it's not quite so straightforward.  Because these suspects are being held under a quasi-military legal regime, the prosecutors say that they cannot be allowed a guilty plea.  Apparently, for a court-martial that could carry a death sentence, prosecutors must prove guilt even if the accused wishes to be executed, the better to ensure that justice is being done.

Now this sounds like an easily surmounted obstacle.  Since these are uncharted legal waters, it would seem easy enough to add a proviso to whatever procedures are ultimately adopted, stipulating that the accused can plead guilty if he so desires.  This, in fact, is what the Obama administration wants.  And only the staunchest death-penalty opponents would argue that the crimes of which these people, including Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, stand accused do not merit execution.  The problem, though, comes down to the purpose (or purposes) of the death penalty--and of punishment in general.

Criminal punishment can reasonably serve certain (overlapping) purposes: restitution, retribution, and deterrence (rehabilitation, too, but not generally in death penalty cases).  What purpose(s) are being served in this case?

We can eliminate restitution: That's impossible.  Even if these people could somehow repay the economic damages caused by 9/11, there can be no restitution for the families of the victims.  Indeed, the only conceivable "restitution" that these families could possibly be offered would be some kind of admission of guilt followed by the sincerest acts of repentance (whatever those could be)--the former already accomplished, the latter not likely.

So what about retribution?  Society takes revenge on the people who have wronged it.  Certainly neat.  Straightforward.  There's a nice eye-for-an-eye feeling to the whole thing.  Indeed, most people would probably agree that the 9/11 detainees deserve nothing less than death, and, therefore, it makes sense to allow them to plead guilty and be done with the whole thing.

But then there's deterrence.  Now, the death penalty could conceivably act as a deterrent in two ways.  First, obviously someone who is executed is not likely to commit additional crimes.  And in this case, we could say this IS a consideration.  Sure, Mohammed and his co-conspirators are unlikely ever to see the light of day even if they are not executed.  At the same time, these are unrepentant people, who would probably not miss any chance to wreak havoc against the US, even if that havoc is unlikely ever to reach 9/11 proportions.

Second, the death penalty can be a deterrent if the fear of death prevents other people from following in the footsteps of the condemned.  If a would-be Al-Qaeda recruit sees the execution of Mohammed and thinks twice about signing up, then the death penalty could be said to act as a deterrent.  But there's the rub.  How could the threat of death dissuade a suicide bomber?

By granting these defendants the right to plead guilty, the US would be satisfying the need for retribution (and maybe in some small way restitution).  It would allow the country to move on a little more quickly from the trauma of 9/11.  But it would also be giving the terrorists what they want: swift martyrdom.

In the interest of whatever deterrent potential the death penalty could have, these people must be tried.  The evidence of their crimes must be presented--and presented to the world.  Only in this way can their essential inhumanity be realized.  And then, if and when they are sentenced to death, maybe at least one would-be jihadist will think twice about his role models.

Educational Free Agents

When it comes to education, you don't always get what you pay for.  So it will be interesting to see what happens at an experimental charter school in Washington Heights, New York, where each member of an all-star pedagogical team will earn $125,000 a year.  The school, "The Equity Project," is the brainchild of Zeke M. Vanderhoek, an entrepreneur and former Washington Heights middle-school teacher, whose heart seems to be in the right place.

The teachers were selected after a nationwide search; some 600 people applied for the eight spots.  The credentials are impressive: The PE teacher, for example, spent several years as the head strength and conditioning coach for the Los Angeles Lakers.  (Those who can, do; those who can't, teach; those who can't teach, teach Kobe?) Will they make a difference in a low-income neighborhood with struggling students?

The Solipsist is a bit torn.  We certainly value education, and we think teaching is a noble profession.  The Solipsist himself is a teacher, and he comes from a family chock full of educators.  There is something undeniably satisfying about teachers being paid almost as well as junior investment bankers--even if they don't get the eye-popping end-of-year bonuses (then again, most junior execs may not be getting those bonuses now, either). 

(Digression: What exactly is a chock, and why is it always full? EOD)

We have a problem, though, with the underlying assumption: If you pay teachers a lot of money, you get good results.  We're really not sure that's the case.  After all, these eight lucky winners were obviously considered excellent educators, even though they weren't making six-figure salaries.  And while it's nice to think that these folks will be dedicating themselves to a somewhat disadvantaged population, we can't help but feel bad for those students left behind, whose school districts couldn't afford to shell out the money to keep the stars.

This charter-school is like the New York Yankees, buying its way to a title at the expense of small-market schools.  (And if the Yankees' success over the last few seasons is any indication of the logic of such spending, then Mr. Vanderhoek may be in for an unpleasant surprise.)

The bottom line is that nobody becomes a teacher for the money.  People teach because they enjoy teaching.  They excel at it because they devote time to thinking about how to teach better.  It's wonderful for these eight people that they can convert their passion into decent salaries that will, one hopes, allow them to have comfortable lives.  But realistically, this is not going to become the norm for the vast majority of teachers, who will continue to muddle along with low t0 middle class wages.

All that will change with projects like this is that free-agency-minded teachers will continually scan job-search websites, looking to abandon the local team that really needs them for the big-spending school systems that want to buy their way to the pennant.

Seeds of Doubt

Today's word: Agnotology.

According to Robert Proctor, a professor of the history of science at Stanford University, agnotology is the "study of the politics of ignorance."  Proctor "look[s] at how ignorance is actively created through things like military secrecy in science or through deliberate policies like the tobacco industry's effort to manufacture doubt" (Discover, December 2008).

Today is Agnotology Day in China.

It was 20 years ago today. . . .

Do you know that the preponderance of college students in China today--educated young people--have no idea what happened in Tiananmen Square?  What is astonishing is not so much the Chinese government's desire to keep the events hushed up but their apparent success in doing so.  It's as if you were to walk around UC Berkeley asking students where they were on September 11, 2001, only to receive responses like, "How should I remember?  That was almost eight years ago!"

We are not so naive as to think the Chinese government unique in its desire to keep inconvenient truths from its population.  Speaking of inconvenient truths, after all, one of the most successful examples of governmental agnotology in the United States was the Bush administration's continued insistence that global warming was not established scientific fact.

Still, if the Chinese government can successfully keep such a massive event secret from such a massive population, it makes one wonder what other secrets are being kept by other countries.  What suppressed knowledge awaits Americans who travel to other countries, particularly countries that are less than sympathetic to our government's policies?

There may be more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in our philosophy.  But how many of those things are we just not being allowed to realize?

**********************************************

Also, in case you missed it, David Carradine was found dead in his hotel in Thailand earlier.  Apparently, he hanged himself (although considering that he was found naked, one wonders if this was suicide or some sort of accident).  At any rate, rest in peace, David.  While we were not fans of "Kung Fu" (a little before our time), we certainly enjoyed your work in things like "Kill Bill"--you definitely had a certain flair.

And Now a Word from Our Sponsors (DON'T SKIP THIS AD!)

Before we get to today's Solipsist, we're going to show you an advertisement for Depends undergarments.  Or, if you prefer, you can simply click on a little "skip this ad" icon and go right to the scintillating content.

Now, we at The Solipsist love our sponsors (which, sadly, do not include Depends undergarments, but, y'know, give us a call, guys!).  And we're sure that all you Sloppists would show due deference to those who pay the bills by sitting through any pre-content advertisements, should they come along.  But how many other people are so noble?

This thought struck us as we made our daily pilgrimage to the New York Times and were first exposed to an advertisement for SAP--or something; honestly, we were so busy flailing around looking for the "Skip this ad" button that we failed to take into account what was being advertised.  We cannot imagine that our reaction is unique--or even particularly rare.

Honestly, we felt a slight twinge of guilt.  After all, it's the good folks at SAP (or whatever) who are making it possible for us to enjoy the paper of record at effectively no cost.  Shouldn't we at least give them our attention for a few seconds?  Then again, they must be aware of the Times' "Skip this ad" function; presumably, readers like us are factored into their ad-buying decisions.  So, no.

Guilt only goes so far anyway.  Let's face it, one reason people avoid PBS is the tendency to broadcast boring shows about basket weaving and mollusks.  But another more relevant reason that people avoid PBS is that, on those rare occasions that PBS has something worth watching, like "Sex Lives of the Amazon Pygmies" (we're just sayin'), the programs are interrupted for long stretches by pledge drives!  And, yes, we feel guilty for not scrambling for the checkbook, but, at the same time, if there were a "Skip this ad" function on the TV (which, in these DVR days, there basically is), we'd be using it right then and there.  And if a noble non-profit can't convince us to sit through a word from the sponsors, what chance does any other organization have?

It's really not a bad deal for the audience.  We get to enjoy our content with a minimum of intrusive advertising.  We wonder, though, how long it will be before advertisers and content providers feel they have no choice but to hold us captive once more with near-unskippable ads.  Sure, the web allows for a great--seemingly infinite--variety of ad-avoidance strategies.  Nevertheless, we would advise everyone to enjoy it while it lasts.  Soon enough, canny admen will figure out more and more subtle ways to get their product before your eyeballs.

Now, if you'll excuse us, we've got to go.  It's lunchtime.  McDonald's sounds nice. . . .

Do Smokers Dream of Electric Cigarettes?

If companies like Smoking Everywhere, a distributor of electronic cigarettes (yes, electronic cigarettes), has its way, we may once again see people lighting up in bars, restaurants, offices--well, y'know, everywhere.

It'll be like "Mad Men" without the snazzy suits.

An electronic (or "e") cigarette is a battery-powered nicotine-delivery device that looks like your basic Marlboro but releases an odorless vapor (i.e., steam) instead of tobacco smoke.  Thus, smokers get the sensual and chemical "benefits" of smoking without polluting the air of everyone around them.

If people insist on smoking, this would seem to be a preferable method--at least from the perspective of the commons.  Of course, gadgetry always appeals to the young, so this may just prove to be a new way to get kids to start smoking.  Hell, you slap an "e" or an "i" in front of anything, and it automatically becomes cooler: e-mail, iPhones, e-towels.  OK, we made that last one up.

(Digression: Actually, that could be a great way to get children to eat their vegetables:  "No, Timmy, this isn't broccoli.  It's iBroccoli!  EOD.)

We say, let a thousand e-cigarettes bloom!  At least we won't have to smell 'em!

What's Good for America. . . .

Hey, Sloppists, how much cash you got on you?  No need to go to the ATM, just, how much do you have right now in your pockets or wallets or between sofa cushions?  Ten bucks?  Great!  The Solipsist himself has about five, so. . . we can buy 30 shares of GM!

Seems like a sound investment.  It was trading at $70 a share a little over a year ago.  If it ever comes back to even half that, we make (uh. . . hold on. . . carry the two. . . ) a lot of money!

Alas, it will be a while.

Yes, the venerable General Motors is bankrupt.  How should we feel about this?

We feel bad for workers losing jobs, as well as communities devastated by the closings of factories and dealerships.  At the same time, though, left-liberal sympathies conflict with a sense of pragmatism.  The fact is, GM is going under because they failed to make cars that people wanted to buy.  Last year, when the Solipsist's car (a Jeep) finally died, YNSHC promptly went out and bought a Prius.  Not because he has any antipathy toward American workers (let's face it, most Toyotas are probably built in America anyway, albeit at non-unionized factories), but because Toyota makes good cars that last a long time and get good gas mileage.  In years past, nothing other than stubbornness stopped GM from building similar cars.  How long should stubbornness be rewarded?

Look, we hope GM comes back, not because we have some misplaced sense of patriotism, but because we want Americans (well, all people, really) to have good jobs with good benefits.  Plus, we have a faint hope that a chastened GM will come back stronger and wiser--maybe harnessing that fabled American can-do spirit to create the next wave of automotive innovation: safer cars, sturdier cars, greener cars.

GM is dead.  Long live GM.

*******************************************

On a more serious note, a moment of silence for Dr. George Tiller of Wichita, Kansas.  Yesterday, Dr. Tiller, one of only a handful of doctors in the country willing to perform late-term abortions under certain circumstances, was murdered in the vestibule of his church (!).  No word on whether the god-fearing assassin was directly affiliated with any of the more prominent anti-choice groups.  Just one more example of the lunacy of right wing haters.  Pro-life indeed!

************************************

The answer is '13.'  The question is, "How many paragraphs into a story about the death of Millvina Dean, the last survivor of the Titanic, does the New York Times article mention the movie?"

Strikes us as a superb example of  journalistic restraint.

Sunday Paper Recap

Must be a slow news day.  Page 1, above the fold, we have "Obama's Face (That's Him?) Rules the Web," about the prevalence and popularity of images of the 44th president to be found all over cyberspace.  The article is not without its merits, though, chief among which is its mention of the website, Badpaintingsofbarackobama.com, from whence come the images in today's post.

             

In addition to the featured Barack "Tony Montana" Obama and the apparently radioactive president, the site also features images of the President as basketball player and as something resembling a giant smurf.  Check it out.

*******************************************

Today's actual lead story was "Contractors Vie for Plum Work, Hacking for U.S."  The President and military leaders are gearing up for cyberwarfare (for which it seems a little late in the game, don't you think?):

"At a Raytheon facility here south of the Kennedy Space Center. . . rock music blares and empty cans of Mountain Dew pile up as engineers create tools to protect the Pentagon's computers and crack into the networks of countries that could become adversaries.  Prizes like capuccino machines and stacks of cash spur them on, and a gong heralds each major breakthrough."

Your freedom.  Brought to you by geeks.

Another interesting tidbit in the article was that Lockheed Martin and other prominent defense contractors are building "a National Cyber Range, a model of the internet for testing advanced techniques."

So, the internet is getting its own internet!  One hopes that the main internet doesn't get all addicted to porn and Facebook, or nobody will be able to get anything done.  (Maybe the internet will start its own blog. . . . Now that's solipsism!)