FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W1619287178> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W1619287178 startingPage "89" @default.
• W1619287178 abstract "Primary Challenge ABOUT FORTY YEARS AFTER THE PUBLICATION OF THE MAJOR ABOLITIONIST TEXTS, now celebrated criminological classics, Angela Davis (2008,3) suggested the primary challenge for penal abolitionists might be construct a political language and theoretical discourse disarticulates crime from This is exactly what Nils Christie, Louk Hulsman, Thomas Mathiesen, and Herman Bianchi have done since the 1970s, and their work becomes increasingly significant as processes of criminalization gather pace and prison populations grow across the world. In a climate dominated by penal populism, the scapegoating of the other (in Europe, normally a migrant), and the tendency to deal with problems through punishment, abolitionist thought is as refreshing now as it was in the 1970s. Abolitionism continues to pursue the strategy suggested by Angela Davis, and while disarticulating crime from punishment, it elaborates alternative conceptualizations of crime, critical analyses of law, and radical thinking around the very nature, function, and philosophy of punishment. This multipronged theoretical effort has allowed penal abolitionism to survive and continue to develop within contemporary debates. Examples are found in contributions displaying an array of damning evidence against prison institutions, and demanding it is the defenders of such institutions need to make the case for their retention (Ryan and Sim 2007,714). Punitiveness, particularly when associated with the poorly understood concept of dangerousness, has been described as a challenge to traditional notions of human rights, designed to shame and humiliate offenders (Bennett 2008,21). Following an abolitionist stance, it has been suggested only should we be asking questions about dangerous offenders, but we should also be asking whether the state itself is becoming dangerous to its citizens as a result of its penal policy (ibid., 22). Questions such as this, however, require the use of social imagination, which not only challenges official penal orthodoxies, but is also forever open to debate about new conceptions of relations and (Carlen 2008, xvi). Pain, as analyzed by abolitionism, returns in recent criminological literature in the form of violence and the threat of violence, along with the mechanisms of fear are embedded in the very fabric of prisoners' lives (Sim 2008). Punishment as mourning and crime control as cordiality (Ruggiero 2010) are given novel impetus through the proposal of models and practices of justice based on the idea of encounters with strangers and an ethics of hospitality (Hudson 2008). Crucial elements of abolitionism are found in the spawning literature on restorative justice (McLaughlin et al. 2003; Jewkes 2007; Wright 2008) and, last but not least, in high-quality postgraduate students' dissertations: Abolitionist thinking offers an important critique of criminal justice, one is particularly relevant in today's context, and deserves much wider recognition and coverage. Dismissing it because of its or underestimates its potential contribution (Roberts 2007, 23-24). It has been suggested the activist ancestors of abolitionism are the men and women who fought against slavery and the death penalty and its tenets are grounded in a variety of philosophies are primarily concerned with discussing processes of development can be viewed as pathological. Among these philosophies are those expressing the view societies should support a rich plurality of activities, each valuable in its own right, and each person should be treated as an end, not as a mere means to the ends of others. This Aristotelian and Kantian view would deny that a society can be flourishing as a whole when some members are doing extremely badly (Nussbaum 2000, 106). Contemporary debate focuses on how to link abolitionist radicalism and utopianism with views of crime and the law embedded in the Western cultural tradition and its concrete, reasonable, options aimed at the reduction of pain. …" @default.
• W1619287178 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W1619287178 creator A5078533102 @default.
• W1619287178 date "2014-01-01" @default.
• W1619287178 modified "2023-09-25" @default.
• W1619287178 title "Utopian Action and Participatory Disputes" @default.
• W1619287178 cites W1487279857 @default.
• W1619287178 cites W1562927445 @default.
• W1619287178 cites W1566672885 @default.
• W1619287178 cites W1572553204 @default.
• W1619287178 cites W1599581242 @default.
• W1619287178 cites W1966725435 @default.
• W1619287178 cites W1987751318 @default.
• W1619287178 cites W2020504722 @default.
• W1619287178 cites W2056173484 @default.
• W1619287178 cites W2753221422 @default.
• W1619287178 cites W644169503 @default.
• W1619287178 hasPublicationYear "2014" @default.
• W1619287178 type Work @default.
• W1619287178 sameAs 1619287178 @default.
• W1619287178 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W1619287178 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W1619287178 hasAuthorship W1619287178A5078533102 @default.
• W1619287178 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W1619287178 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W1619287178 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W1619287178 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W1619287178 hasConcept C2777385265 @default.
• W1619287178 hasConcept C2777930997 @default.
• W1619287178 hasConcept C2778770431 @default.
• W1619287178 hasConcept C2779295839 @default.
• W1619287178 hasConcept C2780652975 @default.
• W1619287178 hasConcept C2780656516 @default.
• W1619287178 hasConcept C73484699 @default.
• W1619287178 hasConcept C77805123 @default.
• W1619287178 hasConcept C94625758 @default.
• W1619287178 hasConceptScore W1619287178C144024400 @default.
• W1619287178 hasConceptScore W1619287178C15744967 @default.
• W1619287178 hasConceptScore W1619287178C17744445 @default.
• W1619287178 hasConceptScore W1619287178C199539241 @default.
• W1619287178 hasConceptScore W1619287178C2777385265 @default.
• W1619287178 hasConceptScore W1619287178C2777930997 @default.
• W1619287178 hasConceptScore W1619287178C2778770431 @default.
• W1619287178 hasConceptScore W1619287178C2779295839 @default.
• W1619287178 hasConceptScore W1619287178C2780652975 @default.
• W1619287178 hasConceptScore W1619287178C2780656516 @default.
• W1619287178 hasConceptScore W1619287178C73484699 @default.
• W1619287178 hasConceptScore W1619287178C77805123 @default.
• W1619287178 hasConceptScore W1619287178C94625758 @default.
• W1619287178 hasIssue "3" @default.
• W1619287178 hasLocation W16192871781 @default.
• W1619287178 hasOpenAccess W1619287178 @default.
• W1619287178 hasPrimaryLocation W16192871781 @default.
• W1619287178 hasRelatedWork W183182803 @default.
• W1619287178 hasRelatedWork W183699772 @default.
• W1619287178 hasRelatedWork W1965215640 @default.
• W1619287178 hasRelatedWork W1970802275 @default.
• W1619287178 hasRelatedWork W1999378404 @default.
• W1619287178 hasRelatedWork W2081232885 @default.
• W1619287178 hasRelatedWork W2144811853 @default.
• W1619287178 hasRelatedWork W2144874543 @default.
• W1619287178 hasRelatedWork W2269683611 @default.
• W1619287178 hasRelatedWork W271361625 @default.
• W1619287178 hasRelatedWork W2764140767 @default.
• W1619287178 hasRelatedWork W2891503699 @default.
• W1619287178 hasRelatedWork W2923007717 @default.
• W1619287178 hasRelatedWork W295262352 @default.
• W1619287178 hasRelatedWork W3121380791 @default.
• W1619287178 hasRelatedWork W3136350305 @default.
• W1619287178 hasRelatedWork W3146843193 @default.
• W1619287178 hasRelatedWork W645355369 @default.
• W1619287178 hasRelatedWork W81499986 @default.
• W1619287178 hasRelatedWork W2601258804 @default.
• W1619287178 hasVolume "41" @default.
• W1619287178 isParatext "false" @default.
• W1619287178 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W1619287178 magId "1619287178" @default.
• W1619287178 workType "article" @default.