• KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    ok so technically, this wouldn’t be the US regime, this wouldn’t even be a regime at all judging by modern contemporary definitions.

    The dude was executed under state law. In the united states.

    Can we stop referring to the US like this? I get that we have problems but jesus christ it feels loaded calling us a “regime” we’re not all that oppressive, and we’re not all that anti-democratic. Calling it a regime probably makes it more of a regime than it is by itself.

    we could’ve had a productive discussion on the problems with capital punishment, but nope. here we are, not even talking about it at all (aside from the comment threads)

    • doubtingtammy@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      this wouldn’t even be a regime at all judging by modern contemporary definitions.

      I’d like to see the definition you’re talking about. The dictionary definitions definitely fit. Sometimes the definition doesn’t even have negative connotations. You’re just offended because someone used a word reserved for enemies of the US to describe the US.

      • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        ok so technically, regime is just a sort of generic term more often than not used to talk about a “government leadership” for ex. “stalins regime” or a “dictators regime” beyond that it’s use is usually specifically with reference to how the government operates.

        An “anti rights regime” for ex. The problem that i have, is that not only does this, just not really apply, because we’re talking about a specific state, exercising independent rights over capital punishment, arguably illegally and immorally, considering the evidence we have doesn’t demonstrate him to be the murderer in this case.

        The title frames it as if the “US” “regime” whatever that means, idk if it’s implying the president, the federal government, or the federal government and the state government, or that specific state government, there are so many levels of government in the US it’s really not appropriate to call it a “regime” you could call the trump admin or biden admin specifically a regime i guess. Though i’m not really sure what the point of that would be.

        The title reads as if the “US government” (an entity, which is not an appropriate description) solely and single handedly murdered a guy who was not actually a criminal (which to be fair, did happen) and then it says “another” like it happens extremely regularly or something. Which while it happens more often than not, there aren’t that many to begin with? There have only been 18 so far as of this year. Even in the last like 50 years, only 200 people have been “exonerated” for their crimes. (only about 1600 people executed in that time as well) Most of those have been black, a majority even, the next highest is white and Hispanic, which make sense. So that seems to follow the populous of the jails at least from what i would expect. It looks like there have been about 20 “very likely innocent” people that have been executed in the same period.

        https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/ most of my info has been from here and memory, don’t take it as gospel.

        Like with all due respect, i just think this is an incredibly irresponsible and flagrant way to phrase the title specifically. Data doesn’t support it, the sheer numbers don’t support it either. Like the actual number is 0.000004% percent of the US population have been sentenced to death, and executed in the US since 1976. The VAST majority of that coming from the south.

        Again, i don’t support capital punishment, i think it should be illegal, although i think if we’re going to keep it legal we should make them public, that way people actually have to deal with the consequences of the law. But It’s so miniscule to other problems like healthcare access, and obesity, that i really don’t think it warrants the title that implies the government is literally executing people on a whim as it pleases with no regard for anything at all.

        TL;DR the title is extremely generous and i think rather inflammatory for something that simply doesn’t warrant it given the stats and figures, as well as the political structure of the government, and the clear public sentiment on the problem at hand.

        • doubtingtammy@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          just think this is an incredibly irresponsible and flagrant way to phrase the title specifically. Data doesn’t support it, the sheer numbers don’t support it either. Like the actual number is 0.000004% percent of the US population have been sentenced to death, and executed in the US since 1976.

          You’ve completely lost the plot, mate. Nobody is saying that a significant percent of the population is being executed.

          How many people have been executed on Putin’s orders? A hundred? So that’s only like 0.00007% of the Russian population. no big deal then.

          The VAST majority of that coming from the south.

          I wonder why.

          because we’re talking about a specific state, exercising independent rights over capital punishment,

          Independent rights granted by the supreme court. AKA the federal government. The 9 robed, tenured individuals are part of the regime. You’re just uncritically accepting the federalist society’s position here.

          Did you know there was once a moratorium on all executions in the US? But you seem to think of it as a natural law that Missouri has the right to execute whoever they please.

          The title reads as if the “US government” (an entity, which is not an appropriate description) solely and single handedly murdered a guy

          You’re inferring way too much here. Nobody said or implied that the US federal government was solely responsible for this execution. When a headline reads that the Russian regime assassinated a political dissident, do you take the time to point out the federated nature of the Russian government? Would it matter that the evidence points more to an official act of the Dagestan government instead of a direct order from the Kremlin?

          Obviously this isn’t a perfect analogy. But the “US government” (the entity, which is an appropriate description) has given the greenlight for these executions. The supreme court has approved these punishments, and the executive and legislative branches have done nothing to prevent it.

    • Fidel_Cashflow@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      not all that oppressive

      not all that anti-democratic

      under a post about an innocent person being executed despite mountains of exonerative evidence

      you are not a serious person

      • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        not all that oppressive

        so far the worst thing that’s happened is an abortion ban, which is highly unpopular. As far as oppression goes, that’s pretty good, not great obviously, but it’s not killing people for protesting levels of oppression either so.

        not all that anti-democratic

        we literally live in a country with a democratic republic system, and multiple levels of government with independence. The worst thing to happen in the last 10 years was trump trying to over throw democracy, which i will remind you, didn’t work. Some people might point to kamala harris being on the ticket but that’s stupid, you can’t expect a primary party vote this close to locking in politicians, kamala was also the VP of the previous admin, so it’s not that different, and she also has her name on the super PAC funding as well. There just aren’t many options there. And even then, that doesn’t prevent you from voting, somehow. You can still vote for kill stein if you like supporting russian agents i guess. Or trump, if you hate democracy i guess. Or just some other dude.

        under a post about an innocent person being executed despite mountains of exonerative evidence

        i was complaining about the title and the wording of the title?

        • The Cuuuuube@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 days ago

          so far the worst thing that’s happened is an abortion ban

          lol. we torture minorities in our prisons for being impoverished and refuse to prioritize the value of water over the value of oil executive profits. torturing women for daring to try to be equals is single head on our hydra of exploitative torture. it was 160 years since emancipation last year. there are people alive still who had peopl in their life who were owned.

          The worst thing to happen in the last 10 years was trump trying to over throw democracy

          the worst thing about the last ten years that incetivizes people to rupture the system for profit rather than to address the potential for someone to do that because the people holding power would rather rely on precedent than lose a single iota of power

          • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 day ago

            lol.

            i too laugh about torturing people, it’s very funny.

            we torture minorities in our prisons for being impoverished

            i don’t know anything about this, any sources for reading?

            and refuse to prioritize the value of water over the value of oil executive profits.

            i’m not sure what these have to do with each other, this is true for most countries. If you’re trying to say that we prioritize profits over secure access to water, i guess that might be true, but one of those is a problem, and another one of those is an economic goal. Those aren’t related. Compared to a lot of countries, the US has really good access to clean potable water.

            torturing women for daring to try to be equals is single head on our hydra of exploitative torture.

            what does this even mean, this isn’t english. This is a poor bastardization of english.

            it was 160 years since emancipation last year. there are people alive still who had people in their life who were owned.

            yeah and it’s like 70 years since stalin ruled over the USSR. Cool story bro, should i bring in the nazis also? That was only 80 years ago. Perhaps we should consider maos china, about the same time period 70 or so years ago.

            the worst thing about the last ten years that incetivizes people to rupture the system for profit rather than to address the potential for someone to do that because the people holding power would rather rely on precedent than lose a single iota of power

            you unironically think abuse of capital is a worse problem than stripping the rights of a countries own people?

    • crapwittyname@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      It’s not a productive discussion that’s needed though. The death penalty has been going on for four centuries in the US. That’s an awful lot of time for an awful lot of productive discussions, and yet innocent people are still being put to death by the machinery of the state. At this point we’re just tired of it.
      For the innocent victims of the death penalty, I imagine it feels like a regime. Like an inscrutable, bureaucratic behemoth, unable to change course even in the face of logic. It’s inhumane, it’s unreasonable. It’s a regime - an immovable set of arbitrary rules where no single individual has to take responsibility, and no individual human being’s decision can save you, even if you’re innocent. It’s a regime.

      • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        well yeah the productive discussion is “stop doing the death penalty, it’s stupid”

        For the innocent victims of the death penalty, I imagine it feels like a regime.

        well i mean yeah, that would be the second definition of regime, even doing shit like renewing your license feels like dealing with a regime. Dealing with any government is technically “regime” like if you think about it for long enough.

  • rbesfe@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    He wasn’t executed by federal order, it was a state AG being a total murder-hungry dick head. Calling it “the US regime” is some tankie bullshit

    • Revan343@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      So the Missouri regime.

      Remind me of a one-off line from a kids show, involving Tom Sawyer; “I ain’t going back, it’s Missouri in there!”

  • Philo@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    The last thing I will say on this topic is that the US is divided on abortion rights. Only 14 states have total abortion bans since Roe vs Wade was overturned and I doubt anyone here would be foolish enough to claim that those states speak for the entire population of the US. Yet when it comes to the execution by the state of Missouri of a black man, suddenly, that lone state speaks for an entire population of 330 million people.

    • doubtingtammy@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      suddenly, that lone state speaks for an entire population of 330 million people.

      When someone calls a government a “regime” they’re usually implying that the government doesn’t accurately reflect the will of the people.

  • Redcuban1959 [any]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    Marcellus Williams was charged with the murder of Felicia Gayle. Prosecutors based evidence mainly on alleged confessions Williams had made, including one alleged by a jailhouse snitch.

    In August 2001, Williams was sentenced to death. On appeal, he raised several issues, including claims of errors in evidentiary rulings, jury instructions, and victim impact testimony. He also challenged the use of his prior criminal history and alleged improper prosecutorial comments during closing arguments.

    The death sentence was controversial, as DNA evidence had been claimed to prove his innocence, and the family of Gayle repeatedly stating they did not want Williams executed.

    Despite pleas from the public and the family of Gayle stating they were opposed to the execution, on September 24, 2024, 55-year-old Williams was executed by lethal injection at 6 p.m. CT.

    So, even the family of the victim was against it. An innocent man died while the real criminal is out there.

    • RinseDrizzle@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      Shit like this is why we cannot be trusted with death penalty. The day we execute an innocent person, we all get blood on our hands.

  • menemen@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 days ago

    Reading about it I am not completly convinced that he is innocent, but I think that there is 100% plausible reason to doubt that he is guilty. This should defintly be enogh to stop an execution.

    • Backlog3231@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      It doesn’t matter if he did it or not, honestly. If the state can’t be 10000% certain the person they are about to murder is guilty of a heinous crime then it shouldn’t be possible to fucking murder them.

      This isnt about innocence. This is about the state denying this Black Muslim man due process and constitutional protections.

      And on that note, its impossible to prove guilt in these cases, which is why the death penalty needs to be abolished. Are you comfortable with the idea of bring executed for a crime because you were in the wrong place at the wrong time? Because I’m sure fucking not.

      • menemen@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 days ago

        Maybe you should have read my whole statement before writing this wall of text?

        • Backlog3231@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 days ago

          I’m agreeing with your conclusion but not with your reasoning.

          You reason that since it looks like he might be innocent, he shouldn’t have been executed. Extrapolating from this yields that you also believe that if you felt he was definitely guilty, he should have been executed.

          I’m saying that because this uncertainty exists at all as a concept the death penalty should be abolished. Its impossible to prove someone’s guilt 100% in these cases, therefore the death penalty is immoral. Not just in this case but in every case.

          • menemen@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            I am just arguing about his case within the local law. Not about the sanity of the local within moral boundaries. So we two are having two different arguments here.

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      That’s fine with a sentence of a couple years. But for how hard we’ve seen it become to commute a sentence, we need to be 100% sure for the death penalty.

      • menemen@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 days ago

        I basically said that it is not okay, maybe you should have read the second sentence as well. But even with a “sentence of a couple years”, guilt has to be profen, not innocence. If there is plausible doubt of guilt, there shouldn’t be a guilty sentence.

    • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      I’m convinced he is innocent. If he was not they would have evidence instead of paid testimonies against him.

      • Mango@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 days ago

        Is “almost” anywhere in your definition of conviction? If so, you lack conviction.

    • frauddogg [they/them, null/void]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      Reading about it I am not completly convinced that he is innocent

      After the reams and reams of verifiable miscarriages of justice against Black people, after 160 years of carceral slavery being the law of the land, after 50+ years of the school-to-prison pipeline disproportionately affecting Black people, you still trust the settler’s ‘court of law’???

      That’d be laughable if it wasn’t so damn typical.

        • frauddogg [they/them, null/void]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          No. You opened with white moderate, frankly blatantly-supremacist bullshit in service of the “legal” system, you can fuck right off, peckerwood. It’s super-cute how you settlers keep ignoring my ‘no’ to try and make me accept supremacist thought, btw. Even more shameful that you’re apparently not even white and doing that; do you realize whose shoes you lick?

          Every single possible person from the screw on his prison row all the way up to the FAMILY OF THE VICTIMS were out here saying “well I don’t think he did it”, the DNA said he didn’t do it, and waterbearers like you will still sit there, fixing your face the whole time to play the “well, he was no angel” card why on Allah’s green creation would any self-respecting Black person continue listening to your fuckery???

          You. Cape. For. Dead. Black folk. Get the fuck out of my inbox. Get the fuck out of it twice for not even fuckin being from here and thinking you have a right to opine on innocent dead Black men, or run defense for the crackers who murdered them. Piece of shit.

        • frauddogg [they/them, null/void]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 days ago

          “Not completely convinced of his innocence” even in the face of DNA evidence invalidates everything else they said. Like, you do not get to couch white moderate “oooooh, I don’t know” bullshit when the DNA already exonerated mans. Fuck outta here.

          • jsomae@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 days ago

            Bro said “I think that there is 100% plausible reason to doubt that he is guilty,” you don’t get to just pretend like they wrote “I still think he did it.” Maybe practice listening to people. Typical toxic masculinity.

            • heggs_bayer [none/use name]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 days ago

              Reading about it I am not completly convinced that he is innocent

              This implies there is a non-zero chance he was guilty. In reality, there is a zero percent chance he was guilty. Even implying there is a small chance he was guilty is white supremacy.

              Typical toxic masculinity.

              Typical liberal grasping at straws when your bigoted worldview is challenged.

              • jsomae@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                3 days ago

                Reading about it

                Looks like they did more than you. There is indeed quite a bit of evidence that suggests he was guilty, which you’d realize if you weren’t just discounting all of it as surely sprouting from white supremacy. But our justice system works on the presumption of innocence, or at least it’s meant to. That it failed to, that our justice system is structurally flawed, that’s what’s racist – not the real possibility he might have been guilty. Lol, literally nothing in this world has a zero percent chance, and if you think it does, you’re honestly blinded by your fucked up pseudo-ideology.

                Learn what structural racism means, and until then don’t call yourself a leftist.

                Anyway I g2g have a life. Peace out.

              • frauddogg [they/them, null/void]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 days ago

                English doesn’t have a word for how much I despise condescending, know-nothing dogs like them. Whether settler or minstrel, there is not a word, slur, or malediction in this language to properly encompass the contempt I feel for them.

            • frauddogg [they/them, null/void]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              3 days ago

              Nope. They opened with white moderate bullshit. I don’t give the first fuck what they have to say after that; I do not humor white moderates or those who disregard the evidence that 100% exonerates a Black man to still fix their face to “mmmmmmh…”; especially not when it’s in defense of murderous carceral slave-masters.

              Typical settler tryna talk over actual abolitionists.

      • FunkyStuff [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 days ago

        I think there’s an interesting phenomenon where even white normies understand how demonically racist the American institutions are. Ideologically committed racists don’t, but everyone else sees at least part of it. However, because this only gives you a negative assertion (don’t trust what the courts say) and the isn’t really a normative, absolute system we can trust in the absence of any reliable rulings from the hegemonic institutions, we’re just left with a wide space of viable interpretations of reality, which lets people get off the hook for assuming reality must be close-ish to what said racist institutions uphold. That closeness between imagined reality and the reality white supremacy wishes to impose is what allows for people who aren’t ideologically committed racists to passively accept the brutalization and murder of marginalized people. “Oh, I can’t support those cruel acts, but the sad reality is they probably didn’t happen for no reason either” is the refrain of the embarrassed white moderate.

        • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 days ago

          “Oh, I can’t support those cruel acts, but the sad reality is they probably didn’t happen for no reason either” is the refrain of the embarrassed white moderate.

          I’m ashamed to admit that specifically with regard to police brutality, I was in the “they must have had a reason” camp (without looking any further into it) for many more years than I had any excuse to be. Rodney King put a crack in that, but I was still pretty young then, and surrounded by my own privilege. It was many years later before I realized that sort of shit and worse was happening constantly.

          • frauddogg [they/them, null/void]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 days ago

            I was in the “they must have had a reason” camp (without looking any further into it) for many more years than I had any excuse to be.

            At least you understand why it’s fucked up that you were, unlike a couple other settlers and their waterbearing emigré lapdogs in this thread.

            • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              3 days ago

              Thanks, but the unfortunate problem I see among many of my white peers is that’s a deep valley. You don’t get to the other side of “they must have had a reason” without exposing yourself to multiple instances where they clearly had no such reason.

              And it’s not exactly something you can force on people. A couple people I know have started paying a bit more attention when cop videos float across their tiktok feed based on comments I’ve made, and they are coming around too, but folks need to want to see to the other side of that valley, and it’s a very comfortable valley to live in - but more importantly you’ve always got a fresh batch of people moving into the valley.

  • Don Escobar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 days ago

    For the record, the super majority of pro-life Christian, patriotic judges in SCOTUS voted against stopping this on a 6-3 ruling.

  • Christian@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 days ago

    This kind of thing makes me go into denial. I hate my country, but this absolutely cannot be real. It’s horrible clickbait, or propaganda supporting my existing beliefs about how inhumane it is here.

    I struggle to imagine someone administering a needle for an innocent man to die, rather than quitting on the spot. I struggle to imagine someone certifying paperwork to appove this to happen. But I am entirely incapable of imagining the number of human cogs that would need to be similarly compliant for this to be followed through to completion. I am not interested in trying to imagine. This story is fiction because admitting otherwise will break what’s left of my sanity.

    You can show me horrors and get me to admit and speak of them as reality, but you can’t get me to believe them.

    • GarbageShoot [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 days ago

      Arendt is one of the more overrated authors in America short of the founders, but she has a point about how, when you are removed from the brutal nature of the violence, you can just sort of shuffle it into your day-to-day activities. Sure, you can certify the paperwork, it’s just letters on a screen. Hell, you can even administer the needle, as it’s not your job to concern yourself with his innocence or guilt, it’s your job to use this specific set of injections to kill him in a visually benign way. Separating arbiters from brutalizing and brutalizers from arbitration makes the flagrant injustice much more palatable to both parties.

      • Christian@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 days ago

        Separating arbiters from brutalizing and brutalizers from arbitration makes the flagrant injustice much more palatable to both parties.

        Fantastic one-line explanation, I don’t think I’ve thought about this before but now that you’ve said it it feels like something obvious that I really should have understood already.

    • Dessalines@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 days ago

      A stunning number of people in the links of that chain could’ve stopped it, and none of them cared to risk their employment over it.

      I’ve seen it said that if you live in the US, you can ask yourself a question: “If you lived in Nazi Germany, what would you have done to oppose that state?”

      The answer: You’re doing it right now. Nazi Germany’s leaders explicitly stated that its model of colonialism and expansionism in eastern europe, eugenics practices, and its racial state, were all based on the US model, which nearly successfully carried out everything Nazi Germany failed to do: eviction and genocide of its indigenous inhabitants, stealing a continent, and erecting a white-supremacist state on top of it.

    • funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 days ago

      I’ve come to realize that a significant portion of people just think other people should die and that’s fair and they’re OK with being the ones to do it.

      I saw an Instagram reel the other day of someone in the military describing the best way to decide who to kill and who not to as you storm a civilian building, plus the latest Behind the Bastards about Yarvin’s affect on JD Vance and their belief that violence / killing and enforced poverty / slavery and not only necessary but desirable methods of governmental change - not as a reaction to oppression but as administrative.

      • anarcho_blinkenist@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        I’ve come to realize that a significant portion of people just think other people should die and that’s fair and they’re OK with being the ones to do it.

        It has always been this way. Particularly because there are people and groups who actively materially benefit from the enforced poverty/slavery and oppression of other people and groups within the social organization of our societies. The enforced poverty/slavery will never stop without sufficient and sufficiently organized, centralized, disciplined violence to overcome those who actively benefit from the enforced poverty/slavery by means of the same; and then maintaining that authority over the exploiters until their interest and strength are no more.

        It’s the same reason why there’s never been a “peaceful bloodless decolonization.” Why would the colonizer ever willingly permit that? They would be, from a standpoint of their own material interest as a societal class, complete morons to do so and make such a willing choice. Which is why (and this is historically borne out) they must be not given a choice by an organized militant anti-colonial resistance. This is also why the “authoritarianism” criticism of the doctrine and practice of revolutionary groups like Castro’s revolutionaries or Lenin’s Bolsheviks is laughable; the liberal peanut gallery can only have that criticism because they succeeded and survived to be criticized; having overcome the oppressors who, in the event of the revolutionaries’ failure (historically borne out in how every failed revolution played out including the previous ones in those countries); would show the truth of themselves as 1000x more vicious, having honed that capability for 100x longer.

        Look up any countries’ “Red Terror” in history, then look up their corresponding “White Terror.” You will see [wiki:NSFW images if you click on them]. Or read about any decolonization struggle. Like in Algeria, where every uprising that killed 10 Frenchmen resulted in a colonial reprisal with hundreds of butchered Algerians.

        We live in a material reality with material interests which are enforced by people who will use your pacifism as a means to exploit you easier, and kill you easier if you even are seen as inconvenient or ‘in the way’ of those interests, let alone if you resist and struggle against them. And that argument has been happening since Marx and Engels’ time in the framework of materialism; and was exactly the realm of rationale behind the policy of terror with the Jacobins before that in the French Revolution; from which many later revolutionaries took lessons and learned from the mistakes and refined within their contemporary material conditions and circumstances.

      • shalafi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 days ago

        someone in the military describing the best way to decide who to kill

        Read a book by a Navy SEAL who was in Afghanistan. He said if they were wearing black Reeboks they were fighters, shoot to kill on sight.

        I’m betting he was right! But Jesus, using that as a hard criteria to execute someone?!

    • NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      The Innocence project is real and they do incredible work. They rarely take cases that don’t have new DNA evidence due to the difficulty in overturning a conviction. They could probably use your financial support.

      –The site which we don’t speak of had a mainstream news article to this story monday night explaining that the state was already refusing to grant a stay of execution even with prosecuting attornies new doubts.

      • Gorillazrule@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        If the prisons are focused on rehabilitation and reintegration instead of just keeping people locked up and treating them like they’re not human? Yes. Do I believe prisons in the US are like that? No.

          • Gorillazrule@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 days ago

            Genuine question. What do you think should happen with people that have committed violent crimes? If they have no interest in voluntary rehabilitation, imprisonment with the goal of rehabilitation seems to be a better alternative to just letting them roam freely and do as they please. And it seems a lot better than the death penalty. Specifically for reasons like what we’re seeing here. You can release someone from prison if evidence comes later that casts doubt on their guilt. It doesn’t prevent the harm that has already been caused, but it gives them an opportunity to take back their life. You can’t un-execute somebody.

    • selokichtli@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 days ago

      There are a lot of governments in the world that agree with you. Not the US government, not at all.

      • FunkyStuff [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        doubt show me a state in the entire world that doesn’t exist because it has captured a monopoly over legitimate violence. The best the subjects of a state can hope for is that state violence is only ever implicit, but if there was no threat of being put to death or seriously harmed for individuals that threaten the continued existence of a state, that state would cease to be.

        However, it is true that America is particularly brutal with regards to executing civilians. Something that stands out is that, compared to other countries that regularly execute their citizens, there’s a pretty obvious skew in terms of who’s getting the death penalty. Compared to China, for example, the US hasn’t executed anyone for white collar crime in a long time (hopefully someone can find a reference to the last time it happened, I’m not sure where to check) but appears to be killing Black and Muslim folks awfully often. Really makes you think, right?

        • selokichtli@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          You are deflecting from the issue here. Legitimate violence, whatever you and I understand for “legitimate” is not the issue, since I guess we can recognize, that violence is gradual. We are talking death penalty and it’s derivations in the US judicial system. There are a lot of states that won’t just systematically kill their citizens and citizens from other countries. A type of zealot entitlement is needed by their governments to keep doing it in cases like this.

          • FunkyStuff [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 days ago

            I’m mostly just going to disengage because I think we’re really on the same side here and I’m just being a pedant on a thread about an innocent man being murdered, but I think you’re kinda missing the point too. Social murder happens literally everywhere constantly, even socialist countries.

        • The Cuuuuube@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 days ago

          I’ve spent a lifetime traveling the united states. i originate from Appalachia. bad and racist judgements come all across the country. any state with the death penalty on the books will eventually do this, and any state that doesn’t have the death penalty on the books has around 30% of people minimum who think it should be. you’re deluding yourself if you don’t think everywhere is like everywhere else just with different ratios of who is around

          • Philo@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 days ago

            This would also mean California is like Alabama which is like New York which going even farther because borders are man-made, exactly like London which is exactly like Israel, Gaza, Yemen…see how your argument is stupid or do I need to go on?

            • The Cuuuuube@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 days ago

              no actually. i don’t see how my view that people are all people and the things we do is all in response to the context we grow up in is stupid. so please keep listing places that we have both the potential to improve or to degrade into depending on what actions we take and if we can learn to empathize

    • TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      The fact that the US federal government has the power to outlaw this but doesn’t, that this specific execution was brought before the Supreme Court and they voted against blocking it 6–3, and the fact that the majority of US states (27) and the federal government have this on the books speak for the US now, yes.

      Taken to an absurd extreme, let’s imagine that the US federal government and 27 of its states explicitly had statutes on the books stating “you can legally rape puppies”, and you stepping in and saying “Well that doesn’t speak for the entire US! Stop trying to make it sound like everyone condones puppy rape just because Missouri allows it!” Would you say that then? Because I feel like any rational person would be asking “Why does the US allow this to happen?” If not, why would you say it here?" The US is simply backwards in this regard.

        • TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 days ago

          Would you come to the US’ defense in the same way that you are right now over state-sanctioned murder in the situation I outlined? It’s a very simple yes/no question that you’re tiptoeing around for seemingly no reason.

          • Philo@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 days ago

            In saying that one state doesn’t speak for the entire country, YES. That was said in my first comment, maybe you should reread it.

            • TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 days ago

              Damn, last I checked, 27 plus the federal government was more than 1. Maybe the federal government expressed as an integer actually comes out to negative 26 and makes your ridiculous defense make any sense.

              • Philo@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                4 days ago

                I didn’t mention numbers but you mentioned puppy rape. Stop drinking so early, it’ll rot your liver.

                • TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  4 days ago

                  I didn’t mention numbers

                  One state

                  I think you got lost on the way to /c/preschool where they teach you what numbers are.

  • DemocratPostingSucks@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 days ago

    Some context:

    Williams had an extensive criminal record.

    Lara Asaro, the girlfriend of Williams at the time of the crime, gave testimony that Williams had confessed to her and detailed what had happened. This is after she discovered evidence from the crime scene in Williams’ car.

    Unlike Cole’s deposition, which was compatible with news reports, she is said to have provided details that had not been mentioned in the public accounts of the crime,[13][14] a point contested by the Innocence Project.[2][15]

    A witness testified that Williams had sold the victim’s laptop to him.[16]

  • NotAnotherLemmyUser@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 days ago

    Misleading title, this was a Missouri State case, not a federal one.

    That being said, there are way too many innocent people getting killed for crimes they did not commit.

    The only purpose of the death penalty is revenge. It has no place in a modern society.

    • Dessalines@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 days ago

      Both the death penalty, and a system of slave labor camps, are allowed at the federal level:

      • The US currently operates a system of slave labor camps, including at least 54 prison farms involved in agricultural slave labor. Outside of agricultural slavery, Federal Prison Industries operates a multi-billion dollar industry with ~ 52 prison factories , where prisoners produce furniture, clothing, circuit boards, products for the military, computer aided design services, call center support for private companies. 1, 2, 3
    • TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      How is this a misleading title? On the one hand, yes, the fed can carry out state-sanctioned murder too (and it’s something Trump resumed), but 1) it’s absolutely the case that the death penalty should and could be banned nation-wide but isn’t, and 2) this went before the SCOTUS for an emergency block, but it was voted 6–3 not to block (I’m guessing you know that all of the six were the treasonous fuckwits nominated by Republicans and all three were sensible jurists nominated by Democrats).

      What happened here is absolutely still the fault of the federal government. Of course I still agree with the rest of your comment. I just mean to say that even if you somehow totally divorce a US state from the US itself, it’s still the US’ fault.