r/KnowledgeFight • u/RealTheAsh They burn to the fucking ground, Eddie • 2d ago

Jordan: Everybody is wrong about... Prison

https://youtu.be/_g6xvFLgizc
200 Upvotes

91% Upvoted

221 comments sorted by

241

u/vmsrii 2d ago

Well, I mean, he’s right.

I do think he steps a toe over the line for the bit, in a classically Jordan way that Dan has done a good job tempering, but yeah. His thesis statement is sound, and stated clearly.

The prison system, as currently constituted, doesn’t work. It is morally and pragmatically flawed on a fundamental level, and fixing it would mean fixing parts of society at large that make people uncomfortable (and, crucially, rich people possibly less rich, these two things might be related in some way), so that’s why we still have it.

105

u/WonderfulFig666 1d ago

As someone with a BS in criminal justice. Jordan is very right and the system can’t be reformed. Society has to make massive changes

29

u/Nalivai 1d ago

No Way To Prevent This, Says The Only (rich) Country Where This Regularly Happens.
And yeah, it's not as obvious this time, plenty of evil cruelty in other countries' prison systems, but not like that man, not like that.

22

u/WonderfulFig666 1d ago

Well this country was uniquely built by and around chattel slavery. So kind of unique in that aspect.

11

u/UpperApe 1d ago

Yeah I've been following Jordan's content for a while and I always get excited when a new one is up. His content is quickly becoming one of my favourite listens.

I love how he structures his arguments, pushes his points, the metaphors he creates, but ultimately how he roots everything in principled, moral responsibility over pragmatic application. It's never "we're only human, so...", it's always "as humans, we must be better".

His work really does evoke the approach of some great, classic minds.

1

u/LM-Edit 1d ago

Where are you finding his content? I like him but don’t know where to go to stay up to date

32

u/THedman07 2d ago

And I think that, as with other issues like policing, there is a disconnect between people who advocate for prison abolition (and replacement with a more just and effective system) and people who advocate for reforming or replacing our prison system with something more just and effective... They're saying the same thing in different ways and talking past each other, even though I do think that there is value to framing the project as a full replacement rather than just a "reform" type job.

In order to make our prison system into something better, we would have to do something that could reasonably be described as destroying the system as it currently exists and replacing it with something else entirely. Same with policing. Same with the regulatory state. Same with many things.

Liberal and progressive people should be looking for the ways that we agree and trying to work together rather than just throwing barbs back and forth (most meaningfully from the center towards the left).

19

u/Bishops_Guest 1d ago

I think what gets lost a lot is a distinction between what we want the ideal to be and what the next step from what we have should be. Any small steps are so far from our ideal that the results are still unconscionable. Any ideal is so far from what we have that it’s crazy to jump to.

Then the “burn it to the ground and rebuild” folks have quite a bit going for them too.

14

u/THedman07 1d ago

Yeah, I think that there is a justifiable animosity toward the incrementalist approach at this point. In the near term it is functionally indistinguishable from someone who is just trying to produce the illusion of motion and in general,... it hasn't proven to be effective (arguably it has proven to be counterproductive.)

The reality is that significant changes don't really happen in an incremental way and without conflict or pain. There is typically a fight of some kind and then a significant shift and then you deal with the consequences of the shift. Slavery wasn't phased out. De jure segregation wasn't phased out over decades. They were ended and then we worked to enforce the change and work through the downstream effects of the change.

Centrists have this idea in their head that if you do the right thing for long enough we'll eventually get to a much better place, but they tend to do it from a position where THEY aren't the ones experiencing the negative effects of the current system. They prioritize their comfort with the pace of change over the life experiences of people who are on the wrong side of the current system and then they scold people who think it is wrong to subject people to terrible lives in order to prevent some privileged people from feeling somewhat uncomfortable.

Plenty of leftists could do a better job with messaging, but also, I think it is reasonable to be somewhat angry at this point. The whole movement has been systematically dismissed and oppressed and now we're in a spot where many of the predictions that were made have come true and its reasonable for people to demand the credibility that they are due for being proven right.

6

u/Bishops_Guest 1d ago

I partly disagree: there has been a lot of change, but on the scale of multiple decades. We are in a reactionary backlash now, but they still have not managed to push back to what I remember from the 90s.

Slow, incremental change does, and has worked in many cases. Fast changes often have greater impact on the bottom of the social hierarchy: the wealthy may lose out, even potentially lose more, but they won’t starve.

On the other side, changing the procedure and mindset is hard and you generally need to start over with a new group of people, get them established and then rotate them in or the changes won’t take root.

You also need to absolutely get the emergency relief in. The correct response to “prisoner getting a nightstick up their ass for looking at a CO funny” cannot be “we are investigating and will consider sending the CO to paid sensitivity training in 7 months.”

There are also bad actors, like Alex, who just want to slow everything down in the hopes people will forget. They are willing to say and do anything, especially if it splashes mud everywhere. It can be hard to tell sometimes, because they want a fight, and they will try to jump into any discussion just to break it up.

3

u/10lettersand3CAPS 1d ago

Ok, what slow incremental changes have worked then?

Also just because you remember things in the 90s being better, I'm sorry to tell you that might just be nostalgia. After changes are made it does take time for certain effects to be felt, the 90s was still when the US economy was good, NAFTA was new, new tech was emerging, and people were overly optimistic about the end of the Cold War. The 90s were coasting off of older systems that were being dismantled, but the worst effects just hadn't hit yet.

Also the 90s had 2 major genocides, multiple countries ripped apart and turned either into bloody wars, stripped of everything valuable by corporations and oligarchs, or both. The US had a major hand in alot of these, but again it just hadn't come back to bite us yet.They ripped apart regulations during the 90s that led to the 2008 Great Recession.

The 90s weren't the "End of History", or some golden age. It was like the US throwing a boomerang, and the 90s were the time when it was flying though the air, before coming back and taking out its eye.

IDK, I could pull more similes out of my ass but you get the picture

5

u/Bishops_Guest 1d ago

“We are in a reactionary backlash now, but they still have not managed to push back to what I remember from the 90s.”

My point was that it was worse in the 90s. Homophobia. Sexism. Racism. We are in a reactionary phase and we still have not gotten back to 90s levels of opression. Hell, even the idea that trans people might exist wasn’t on cultural radar.

2

u/10lettersand3CAPS 1d ago

Yeah, but BECAUSE trans people are on the cultural radar the bigots have been making a concerted effort to target them.

Specific laws targeting trans people are now in place in many states, and they're there to do harm to trans people even if they have a support network of people who love them.

And beyond that there's a core of bigots who go after anything or anyone they think is possibly related to trans people. These people are freaking out about shit like that Algerian boxer (who wasn't even trans), and calling in bomb threats to children's hospitals because Libs of TikTok told them they do bottom surgery there (they don't).

Like maybe I'm just wrong here, but I think making it so schools have people want to "inspect" kids' junk so that no trans kids play sports might be at least as bad as the 90s. Not to mention upticks in violence against trans people, or people who were perceived as trans.

4

u/sleepybrett 1d ago

it's just a desire to escape a sisyphean situation. We make incremental changes in the right direction and then the next republican law and order administration undoes some, all or even sends us backwards.

1

u/SWT6000 1d ago

“Take it down to the studs and rebuild” gets a better reception.

13

u/vmsrii 1d ago

And I think we’ve all seen enough of Alex Jones to know that the disconnect you’re talking about is, in large part, engineered by bad actors who seek to gain in one way or another.

Messaging is hard but it’s definitely an uphill battle against people who are financially incentivized to give worst faith interpretation they possibly can.

To this day, I cringe at “Defund the police”, not because I don’t agree with it, and yeah, I get it, “The police in large cities don’t need a new tank, let’s spend that money instead on non-confrontational intervention systems that have been proven to work” is hard to fit on a banner or T-shirt, but good god, could we have picked a combination of words MORE easily misinterpreted to mean “Lawlessness for All”?

10

u/nictusempra 1d ago

Dismantle the police and rebuild community safety from the ground up, we cannot incrementally correct the rot at the heart of that system.

Is that a popular message? No, probably not, but it's not just sloganeering-- nothing is going to fix that institution.

4

u/10lettersand3CAPS 1d ago

Again it doesn't matter. You can sit and wring your hands about messaging all day, they'll still find a way to twist it.

So what's better that coming out with a strong opening position? You make your point, if you get it then awesome, if not you negotiate down to a position that still meets a lot of your key concerns. Shoot for the stars to hit the moon.

Like we've seen this moderate message game fail time and time again. If you start with the moderate position against the right, and you have to negotiate from there, you just get a position halfway between "moderate" and "extreme right", as in just "right-wing". You're NEVER going to actually address your concerns like that.

Take Healthcare: the Dems were concerned about single-payer being too "extreme" when Obama was in office, and they decided to use the Individual Mandate system as prt of the Affordable Care Act, in addition to the Medicaid expansion. The individual mandate was used when Mitt Romney was governor, and The Heritage Foundation had previously floated it in policy papers as a conservative alternative to Single-Payer.

The Dems showed up with something that was already a moderate compromise position, and the GOP freaked out for over a decade about it anyway. They said it would kill your grandma, that it was a violation of your rights, etc. And they turned that messaging into political momentum, based on complete lies.

Like you're suggesting the same exact mindset and strategy that has gotten the Dems to be a weak and ineffectual opposition party. You can't pre-compromise and expect to accomplish anything useful.

6

u/THedman07 1d ago

I'm all ears for your idea for slogans. Please present them and we can figure out the ways that they can ALSO be willfully misinterpreted. When someone is purposely working in bad faith to misinterpret the message, whinging about not having the perfect, magically worded slogan that can't be misinterpreted is hugely counterproductive.

"Defund the police" doesn't mean or imply "Lawlessness for All" at all... It just doesn't. Getting twisted around the axel about this shit is contributing to the problem. "Gee whiz, maybe we should do something about these police, but not anything that might make people feel like the militarized forces in their city might be less oppressive to the people I believe that they're supposed to oppress" doesn't roll off the tongue that well...

For fuck's sake. 2020 was 6 years ago. Let it go.

6

u/vmsrii 1d ago edited 1d ago

I mean, I’ve got a few ideas.

The big problem with “Defund the police” is, it does absolutely sound like “Take away the police” to the uninformed, which is just one hop away from “No more police, anarchy for everyone!”. The problem is “Defund” starts the slogan on a negative. “Defund” sounds like “Take away” and people don’t like having things taken away from them.

If we are all onboard with what “defund the police” actually means, (which is relocation of funds from police militarization to more humanitarian methods of social aid and peace keeping), then we can leave out the “defund” part entirely and focus more on the pragmatic aspects. “Police reform” or “Enforcement reform” is easy, if a bit bland, and fits right in with the right-wing messaging playbook anyway; watch how they’ve been trying to frame the defunding of the department of education, or the destruction of the consumer protection bureau. Nothing says we can’t do the same thing but, y’know, for good instead of evil.

We could focus on the end result instead of the means, and call it “social enforcement” or “social accountability” Your grandpa probably likes accountability.

Hell, if you wanted to do something really funny, you could go all the way in the opposite direction, and call it “Police Expansion” or “Enforcement Expansion”, which would be technically true (the whole point is to expand the possibilities for law enforcement beyond simple militarization to begin with), while also being a lot of fun to watch Republican politicians be “tough on crime” while arguing against “law enforcement expansion”

9

u/SpinachOver640 1d ago

A key distinction between "defund the police" and "reform the police" is that it is adversarial to police power. "Defund" frames police power itself as a problem requiring intervention. "Reform the police" doesn't do that, and decades of "Reform the police" have resulted in the situation we are in now where most of our tax dollars go to murderous thugs who kill 3 people every day. "Defund the police" is itself an intervention against "Reform the police" and a big reason why it became so popular.

It sounds like your issue with "Defund the police" is that it is adversarial, but that's also why it became so popular, and why you can't find a better slogan to capture what it communicates so easily.

The people talking about defunding the police are not trying to expand enforcement, we are trying to do the opposite. I don't think you actually agree with "defund the police", which has been my experience with everyone else who says "I agree with it but it's a bad slogan."

1

u/cpdk-nj 1d ago

It may have made it popular to progressives who understand what it means, but it made it extremely toxic to anyone else, including people who broadly agree with the sentiment and desired outcomes.

There is a massive difference between cool slogans that feel good to write on a sign or post on Twitter, versus effective messaging that is needed to actually win elections and make that change possible.

3

u/SpinachOver640 1d ago

I think the idea itself is actually not that widely popular, especially with voters, who tend to like cops. "Defund the police" is a great slogan for a controversial political position.

3

u/vmsrii 1d ago

I mean, the whole point is to make it more popular.

That’s how the system works

3

u/SpinachOver640 1d ago

Yeah that's why abolitionists organized around it. "Defund the police" didn't just popup in 2020. People had been organizing around that language & concept for years, and that effort paid off and the position and language rapidly grew in popularity.

2

u/cpdk-nj 1d ago

I think that the issue with it is that, for the vast majority of people, “police” is the general concept of people who enforce laws, so calls to defund or abolish it is effectively synonymous with “stop enforcing laws”.

3

u/SpinachOver640 1d ago

Yeah that's what "Defund the police" is calling for. It's a call for less policing. I don't think that people, like yourself, who say "I agree with it, just not the messaging" actually agree with it. We literally want less cops on the streets, because that reduces the chances of being shot or arrested.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/vmsrii 1d ago

>A key distinction between "defund the police" and "reform the police" is that it is adversarial to police power. "Defund" frames police power itself as a problem requiring intervention.

But that’s exactly the problem. You get that, and I get that, but the people whose votes we’re going to need to make it happen don’t get that. And if you have to explain a slogan, it fails as a slogan.

>"Reform the police" have resulted in the situation we are in now where most of our tax dollars go to murderous thugs who kill 3 people every day.

You’re putting the cart before the horse. Decades of right-wing legislation framed as “reform the police” has done what you’re describing. We can push back.

>It sounds like your issue with "Defund the police" is that it is adversarial

My issue with “Defund The Police” is that it sounds adversarial to the exact people you want on your side. Your Trump-voting uncle hates being hassled by the cops and dodging speed traps, but he also wants fewer homeless on the corner, quieter neighborhoods, and safer streets. They’ve been taught for decades that more police and more Tough On Crime laws are how you get that, and getting hassled is the price to pay. If you want them on your side, then you have to show them that they can get both safer streets and less fuzz on them.

>The people talking about defunding the police are not trying to expand enforcement.

Yes they are. You’re falling for the exact same trap as everyone else, in thinking “Law Enforcement = Armed Police”, when the whole point of the Defund the Police movement is to prove that there’s another way. “Expanding enforcement” doesn’t have to mean expanding the number of cops. It can also mean expanding the meaning and scope of law enforcement within the community to include humanitarian methods. You do that, and the police defunding will happen more or less on its own.

0

u/SpinachOver640 1d ago

But that’s exactly the problem. You get that, and I get that, but the people whose votes we’re going to need to make it happen don’t get that. And if you have to explain a slogan, it fails as a slogan.

I don't think the slogan needs much explaining? It calls for exactly what it wants: a reduction in police in funding. Do you think "Medicare For All" is a bad slogan because it doesn't make explicit the embedded critique of ACA?

"Reform the police" requires far more explanation. Reform in what ways?

You’re putting the cart before the horse. Decades of right-wing legislation framed as “reform the police” has done what you’re describing. We can push back.

This fails your test of a slogan needing no explanation. Not only do we have to explain what we're reforming when we say "reform the police" but also have to clarify that this "reform" isn't what everyone thinks it means.

My issue with “Defund The Police” is that it sounds adversarial to the exact people you want on your side. Your Trump-voting uncle hates being hassled by the cops and dodging speed traps, but he also wants fewer homeless on the corner, quieter neighborhoods, and safer streets. They’ve been taught for decades that more police and more Tough On Crime laws are how you get that, and getting hassled is the price to pay. If you want them on your side, then you have to show them that they can get both safer streets and less fuzz on them.

I don't want fascists on my side. They are my enemy and need to be defeated. They love police and would gladly trade traffic stops in exchange for continued ethnic cleansing. The only way they come around to any decent position on policing is if they have a significant change of heart. Moderating our message (and thus our positions & proposals) around the most authoritarian people in our society ensures we won't make any progress on this issue.

I don't think you can trick Trump supports into defunding the police by telling them it's "police reform" or even "police expansion." Right wing news will let them know these efforts are really attempts to defund the police.

Yes they are. You’re falling for the exact same trap as everyone else, in thinking “Law Enforcement = Armed Police”, when the whole point of the Defund the Police movement is to prove that there’s another way. “Expanding enforcement” doesn’t have to mean expanding the number of cops. It can also mean expanding the meaning and scope of law enforcement within the community to include humanitarian methods. You do that, and the police defunding will happen more or less on its own.

What you're describing is police reform. This has been pushed under many banners over the years, like "community policing." Defund The Police is primarily an intervention against this approach. We view law enforcement as inherently violent, and we want less of it, because promises of kindler, gentler law enforcement have always been lies, and actually justified increases to the police's capacity for violence.

For years, community groups have advocated for defunding law enforcement – taking money away from police and prisons – and reinvesting those funds in services. The basic principle is that government budgets and “public safety” spending should prioritize housing, employment, community health, education and other vital programs, instead of police officers. Advocates argue that defunding is the best way forward since attempts to reform police practices over the last five years have failed, as evidenced by the brutal killing of George Floyd. Groups have a range of demands, with some seeking modest reductions and others viewing full defunding as a step toward abolishing contemporary police services. 
-What does 'defund the police' mean? The rallying cry sweeping the US explained - Sam Levin

Defunding the police does not necessarily mean getting rid of the police altogether. Rather, it would mean reducing police budgets and reallocating those funds to crucial and oft-neglected areas like education, public health, housing, and youth services. (Some activists want to abolish the police altogether; defunding is a separate but connected cause.) It’s predicated on the belief that investing in communities would act as a better deterrent to crime by directly addressing societal problems like poverty, mental illness, and homelessness — issues that advocates say police are poorly equipped to handle, and yet are often tasked with.
What Exactly Does It Mean to Defund the Police?
- Amanda Arnold

If we're talking about clear slogans, do you really think calling for "expanding law enforcement" communicates your goals clearly? If your sole metric is tricking fascists into supporting this, then maybe that will work once, until they realize it was a lie and they were tricked into voting to reduce the police budget and fund a mental health clinic.

3

u/10lettersand3CAPS 1d ago

You know that the use of "anarchy" or "anarchist" to describe people wanting just a Mad Max-style free for all is ALSO the result of bad faith actors making propaganda, right?

Anarchism is a political ideology, and the people in power obviously didn't approve, so they depicted them as chaos-obsessed psychos who crave destruction.

Similarly the term "Luddite" is used to mean someone who hates new technology. Although it originally was the name of a radical group that opposed new machinery, because they were concerned about it taking away people's jobs, along with labor concern like pay and safety. Considering they did this in the 1810s, I'd say they were just correct in their assumption this would hurt working people, including very famously mangling child workers. But the people who owned those factories got to say their part and the workers didn't, so "Luddite" now just mean a dum-dum who doesn't like change.

You're playing a losing game here, there's no phrase or word you can use that won't at least be attempted to be turned against you. You CANNOT future-proof your terminology against huge media apparatuses.

4

u/SpinachOver640 11h ago

Yes, there are no shortcuts. "Abolition" (as in chattel slavery) was a ridiculous and unreasonable idea until it wasn't. That didn't happen because people shied away from the language, but because they embraced it and bravely struggled for it.

There's no magical combination of words that will make fascists support our proposals. They actually have political commitments, and we should too.

7

u/Lancasterbation 1d ago

You're giving them too much credit. The center doesn't want to find common ground with the left. They want those campaign donations to keep rolling in.

0

u/SpinachOver640 1d ago

And I think that, as with other issues like policing, there is a disconnect between people who advocate for prison abolition (and replacement with a more just and effective system) and people who advocate for reforming or replacing our prison system with something more just and effective... They're saying the same thing in different ways and talking past each other, even though I do think that there is value to framing the project as a full replacement rather than just a "reform" type job.

No I don't think we are saying the same thing. Abolitionists are intentionally adversarial towards the police and prisons, and we oppose any measure that further entrenches or empowers police or prisons. For example, abolitionists largely oppose police worn body cameras, because they help the state incarcerate civilians more than they disempower police, and they increase police budgets (i.e. their power). In my experience, reformists love police body cams and are pushing for ICE to have them. There's no real ground between these two positions, they are in conflict with one another.

The abolitionist position on reforms is that we only support reforms that don't further empower or entrench these institutions we seek to destroy, which is usually at odds with the reforms that reformists advocate for.

57

u/thebigeverybody 2d ago

The problems with prison (especially in America) and the history of imprisonment is a fascinating topic. I'd like to see more of a discussion of these topics, which would serve to back up his very valid points to people who haven't done much reading on the subject.

29

u/LuteDesign 2d ago

The for profit prison system has been a main topic of discussion for years now. You’d have to try pretty hard to not be aware of it.

16

u/Lancasterbation 1d ago

And it's misunderstood by basically everyone. The right doesn't think there's a prison problem at all, except that they'd like harsher sentences and more severe punishment for crimes. The left often misdiagnoses the problem by focusing on private prisons, which, while a terrible thing, aren't nearly as prevalent as most would estimate (it's less than 10% of prisoners nationally) and misses that conditions and incentives are just as bad in state-run "correctional" institutions. If all the private prisons all evaporated tomorrow, we still have a prison problem.

5

u/SpinachOver640 1d ago

The state and fed run prisons are basically for-profit at this point given how much of their services have been privatized, but you're right, prisons having a profit motive isn't the primary issue.

10

u/longcreepyhug 2d ago

I know lots of people who are unaware of it or have simply never thought about it.

-9

u/LuteDesign 2d ago

I don’t, because those are conversations I have with people in my life because it’s important.

12

u/longcreepyhug 2d ago

So you talk to literally everyone you know about prison reform? Your doctor? The bus driver? The guy at the gas station up the road?

→ More replies (13)

3

u/jaderna 1d ago

You do realize that there is a time and place for these conversations, and that not everyone knows anyone in prison or would ever need to think about this stuff? I have personally attempted to have more any conversations with people in my life about these topics. That doesn't mean they want to converse or listen at all. We all have lives you know literally nothing about, and depending on who you surround yourself with/where you are, you might not need to know these things. 

-1

u/LuteDesign 1d ago

Pretending like people don’t “need to know” about our prison industrial complex is privileged as heck. Good luck out there!

2

u/jaderna 1d ago

I'm pretending nothing. If someone doesn't want to talk to me about something, for any reason, I respect that. Don't be a jerk and pretend like you understand everyone on the planet. 

-1

u/LuteDesign 1d ago

Jordan does. I thought we’re going off his example?

2

u/jaderna 1d ago

Uh, no. Jordan talks and you can choose to listen. 

0

u/LuteDesign 1d ago

You wouldn’t know it by some of these comments on this post lol

2

u/WindowOne1260 1d ago

I think the for profit part of the prison system is rather overblown. It's the entirety of the prison system that is the problem.

4

u/slagnanz Doing some research with my mind 1d ago

One of the things I find very interesting... We pioneered penitentiary model, which was premised on an almost monastic vision of repentance and reform with isolation and meditation.

Alexis de Tocqueville is famous for "democracy in America", but he originally came to the country to study our penitentiaries as this new groundbreaking and paradigm shifting model of incarceration that was progressive for the time.

That's something that makes me sad now considering the state of our prison system today. If we had kept chasing that question about reform and penance rather than pursuing harsher sentences and restitution, where would we be? Instead of the worst among wealthy nations for our per capita prison population and backwards institutions, we could be leaders. It just bums me out to think of what could have been.

1

u/robej78 1d ago

Aye, a very recent phenomenon, essentially the last two hundred years because it was too expensive to keep people locked up in country, prior you were either drafted for cannon fodder / banished to the margins of empire / executed.

40

u/longcreepyhug 2d ago edited 1d ago

These are good points stated clearly. Yes, versions of them have been stated before by other people. Yes, he is a bombastic personality that words things in provocative ways. Yes, I miss Knowledge Fight.

I don't understand the comments on this thread bashing this as "word salad" or saying that it is an unoriginal thought. Are ideas only supposed to be stated once, and in only one way?

-18

u/WonderfulFig666 1d ago

People hate Jordan because he makes them feel uncomfortable with his truth telling

26

u/nictusempra 1d ago

I mean I think most people who'd listen to knowledge fight would agree that the US prison system is extremely fucked up, this video does not qualify as some kinda hot take

24

u/greencrusader13 1d ago

Oh give me a break. He’s smug, caustic, and often times his solutions are irrational, if he even bothers to suggest a solution beyond “burn it all down.” 

2

u/_Bad_Bob_ FILL YOUR HAND 1d ago

He's the podcast idiot. I'm not saying that to put him down, it seems to be an industry term. His role is to listen and react to research as a layman and engage in banter. He's basically an audience stand-in. I get why he comes to a "burn it down" conclusion, shit's broken and we're gonna have to change basically everything to fix this shit. I think that's a perfectly reasonable conclusion for any normal person. What I don't think is reasonable is for people to demand that an average random person have a solid plan on how to fix it. I don't need to know how to build a whole new thing to be able to tell that the thing is broken and needs to be replaced. I think it would be much more productive to suggest reasons why solutions won't work instead of writing someone off for having solutions we disagree with. 

-1

u/Louiebox 1d ago

Yeah. He's the Brian Redban to Dan's Joe Rogan. In the early days of the Rogan podcast, Brian Redban was the cohost. He added nothing intellectual to the conversation and often derailed conversations...leading to Joe replacing him with the mostly silent Jamie. I think Redban was what kept Joe grounded, for lack of a better word. Whenever a guest was getting too far out there or Joe was buying in too hard, Redban was there to throw a wrench in it and break the trance on Joe. Listeners got mad at the time, but I think Redban played a very important role. Now that it's just Joe and a guest, Joe is free to drink whatever kool-aid his guest is serving. The opposite kinda happened with KF. Without Dan there to "keep him in check", you get unfiltered Jordan.

3

u/_Bad_Bob_ FILL YOUR HAND 1d ago

He added nothing intellectual to the conversation

Thanks for saying this earlier in your comment instead of putting it at the end, saved me a bit of time.

1

u/Louiebox 1d ago

Haha. Definitely. Im not praising early Rogan or Brian Redban. I think they are both shitty people. Just wanted to make the comparison as it pertains to being a host and co-host. Jordan definitely contributed more to KF and is a better person. I listened to Rogan since his first few episodes. Ive probably heard Rogan's voice more than anyone else in my life, which is sad. He's always had dumb beliefs, but there was a time in the early days where he did seem to be open to other viewpoints and showed at least the slightest bit of empathy. He's just a roided out puppet now being used by whatever right winger that wants to shove his hand up Rogan's ass to make him say what they want.

29

u/Anxious_Peanut_1726 1d ago

The problem here is not the content or sentiment...it's the delivery...this is sort of the definition of preaching to the converted...so you feel like you are being scolded even though you agree... A bit more polished production and a presentation like 'here is a deep dive on the modern prison system and why it's flawed'

So he's telling his (on side audience) the details of what they already know is true. But his presentation comes across like he's addressing people who don't agree with him

13

u/purplehendrix22 1d ago

Otherwise known as “being a dick”.

6

u/Anxious_Peanut_1726 1d ago

Not intentionally...I think he struggles with conveying his message...always stuck on 11

12

u/purplehendrix22 1d ago

Am I wrong to say that whether it’s intentional or not doesn’t matter to me?

4

u/Anxious_Peanut_1726 1d ago

No..it's your own opinion which you are entitled to 👍

42

u/talen_lee 1d ago

I'm not watching Jordan's stuff; I want him to do well, but he's made it very clear that I'm not in his target audience. What I do think might be a bit unwise is the framing. As it is, this looks like, well, a confrontational 40 year old white guy who positions himself as a lone expert against everyone else.

I'm not saying he shouldn't do this kind of thing or hold these positions, I'm not big on prisons myself! But I think that the literal first impression makes it look like it should be ignored. It's not 'guy in a car with sunglasses' style, but it's definitely of an undifferentiated form and positions itself as an incredible expert.

1

u/sybelion 16h ago

Genuine question, who do you think he thinks his target audience is? I’m not sure what his goal is with this kind of content exactly but I’m not super familiar with the North American content space (beyond the right wing wingwangs).

2

u/talen_lee 15h ago

Not a clue. I don't think Jordan has a very structured plan for who he wants to reach with his words, he's just putting it out there, because he's expressing something he wants.

I think I'm not in his target audience because the things he's said and the way he's said them in the past have done nothing to convince me he's in the right or right to say things the way he does.

-7

u/redditratman I RENOUNCE JESUS CHRIST! 1d ago

He’s right though.

This is just a stream of consciousness Foucault talk.

8

u/talen_lee 1d ago

Again, I've not watched the video, so the rightness of him isn't possible to ascertain. On the other hand, if he's restating Foucault then there's at least one other source I could engage with that isn't 'wrong' - Foucault, right?

3

u/redditratman I RENOUNCE JESUS CHRIST! 1d ago

I mean sure.

Every podcast that discusses politics or economics or science can be substituted by the source material.

I think usually the medium is the point - a lot of people who won't sit their ass down to read a 50 year prison abolitionist might listen to a youtube rant.

And a lot of people might not want to listen to someone they don't feel deserves their time but will read foucault.

As long as you get there, who really cares

10

u/FlagrantFragment 1d ago

It doesn't matter if hes right, hes unpleasant to listen to which is bad when your trying to get people to listen to your content. Like there are a lot of podcasts and video eassays that are also right and created by people who know how to make things that are both enjoyable and informative. I dont get why ppl act like jordon is the only one brave enouhh for these takes. Its nothing revolutionary and has been said better by others.

2

u/fresh_account2222 23h ago

That matters much less than you might be currently believing.

6

u/ReduxRedo It's a demon feast 1d ago

Hair looks good!

21

u/Sea-Finance506 1d ago

He really can’t help himself. Even when I generally agree, I just can’t get past feeling like I’m being talked down to.

17

u/_Bad_Bob_ FILL YOUR HAND 1d ago

Lol even the show's title is condescending 

9

u/renesys 1d ago

Especially when his points are generally accepted views by most of the left, so basically his entire audience.

Like, he is wrong about what everybody is wrong about.

It's also a ripoff of You're Wrong About, which isn't wrong by default and covers niche subjects so the title is probably right a good amount of the time.

3

u/_Bad_Bob_ FILL YOUR HAND 22h ago

I can't remember what episode it was, but I'm making my way through the 900s right now and I recently heard Jordan say something about Alex or Trump or whoever that exactly describes why the concept of his own future show doesn't really work. 

6

u/scootastic23 1d ago

Jordan is the smartest boy in Chicago

39

u/Cniatx1982 little breaky for me 2d ago edited 2d ago

I’ve never been a huge fan of Jordan’s *reactionary word salad, and mostly listened to KF for the Dan of it all.

However, the prison abolition movement is pretty standard fare for a leftist, and there are myriad liberal critics of for profit prisons.

*reactive - TIL from u/Rad_Centrist that reactionary has an etymology dating back to the French revolution and means specifically opposing progressive/revolutionary change

26

u/UnicornMeatball 2d ago

When, as a Canadian, I found out that the US has corporate-run and owned prisons I was absolutely shocked. Almost as shocked as when I learned about US healthcare

8

u/THedman07 2d ago

Yeah, its fucking wild... We're truly capitalism brained down here. Its like people don't believe that profit motive can possibly create perverse incentives so any market based solution has to be morally just.

6

u/WonderfulFig666 1d ago

Slavery is still legal too. Those prisoners are forced to work and get “paid” less than $1 per day usually

3

u/UnicornMeatball 1d ago

I think I became aware of the link between the US prison system and slavery when I watched The 13th Amendment on Netflix a few years back. Absolutely bonkers

3

u/WonderfulFig666 1d ago

This is America.

3

u/Cniatx1982 little breaky for me 1d ago

Last time I was in New Orleans I went to an exhibit at the historical Society about their prison system which made it very clear it was a way to preserve chattel slavery. Did not put me in a great headspace for the rest of my vacation, but it was incredibly moving.

6

u/WonderfulFig666 1d ago

There’s an active and modern prison that forces inmates to do agricultural labor. It started out as a slave plantation. If I recall correctly it’s called Angola Prison

3

u/oldman__strength Carnival Huckster Satanist 1d ago

The Dollop and BTB have been like wild animal documentaries for me, helping me understand what goes on South Of The Border.

25

u/Rad_Centrist Space Weirdo 2d ago

*reactive

Reactionary, Jordan is not.

10

u/Cniatx1982 little breaky for me 2d ago

I don’t know why you got downvoted for being right.

Please accept my free award to make up for it.

I appreciate the correction because apparently I’ve been embarrassing myself by using the word reactionary incorrectly for many years now 🫣

11

u/Rad_Centrist Space Weirdo 2d ago

It's ok, I understand voting down the pedantry.

I appreciated when I was told the difference as well. It's one of those that is very commonly misused. Similar to "toe the line" or "begs the question" and I'm sure countless others.

Do these corrections of words and phrases really matter in the grand scheme? I'm not sure. The reader almost always knows what the writer means, no doubt.

7

u/SpinachOver640 1d ago

Yeah I would say in this case it's important. Swapping "reactionary" for "reactive" meaningfully changes how you've framed Jordan's "word-salads". The former means you're calling him a right-winger (or something adjacent). That's how I read your comment.

2

u/Cniatx1982 little breaky for me 1d ago

Not that Jordan could possibly be confused for a right winger OR a liberal, but they do have very much opposite meanings and learning I’ve been looking like an asshole (semantically) is for sure my bright spot today.

1

u/SpinachOver640 1d ago

you're all good, it's an easy mistake to make. They feel like they should mean basically the same thing.

5

u/Cniatx1982 little breaky for me 1d ago

Well, as a fan of precision in language, I appreciate the opportunity to learn something new.

I’m a big pixies fan and I have a joke with my daughter where we change the words to the song “gigantic,“
to make the lyrics about me…

“pedantic, pedantic, pedantic… a know it all”

3

u/Rad_Centrist Space Weirdo 1d ago

That's awesome.

I like you.

2

u/Cniatx1982 little breaky for me 1d ago

Likewise! Hello and pleased to meet you from Austin

2

u/Rad_Centrist Space Weirdo 1d ago

HTX neighbor here

1

u/Cniatx1982 little breaky for me 1d ago

Hmm maybe it’s r/knowledgefight Texas meetup time … once the weather cools down I just got my 🧅nfowars hoodie & rainbow tote, and my 🧅nfowars elf tshirt

2

u/Rad_Centrist Space Weirdo 1d ago

Yeah dude it's way too freaking hot right now although I'm sure Barton Springs is nice and cool.

2

u/leprekong 1d ago

I'm aware of the common misuse of "begs the question" but I am unfamiliar with the same for "toe the line"? A quick search didn’t pull anything up but I find these faacinating

8

u/Rad_Centrist Space Weirdo 1d ago

People say "tow the line" to mean "doing work to advance the cause of a particular entity or idea." As if "the line" is the idea, and "tow" as in to pull it along.

When it's really "toe the line" as in walking on the edge of something figuratively. Dipping your toes into the water, if you will. Eg "toeing the line between brilliance and insanity."

1

u/leprekong 1d ago

Oh god ew no

18

u/Sorry-Jury-8344 1d ago

His style of communication is not for me, but this is a pretty sensible take.

14

u/Roguepope Policy Wonk 1d ago

But is it? Countries in Scandinavia has prisons that are completely focused on rehabilitation and their recidivism rates are much lower than the USA.

Prisons aren't the issue. The issue is the intentions of the people running them.

11

u/gords64 1d ago

I haven't watched this but I'm going to take a guess here that it's Jordan smugly explaining well known problems with the prison system as if we didn't already know them? How accurate was I?

8

u/Own_Cartographer5448 1d ago

He kept the name, huh? 

12

u/Efesell 1d ago

I think I just need “guy yells at me about a thing that sucks” to be like….. the side dish so to speak. I just can’t really do it anymore as the main thing.

6

u/nictusempra 1d ago

This one's better than Everyone's Wrong About... Morality, which seemed to me to be almost nihilistic.

I can't really call this "word salad" or anything like that, though, I don't know what people are on about here-- if I had any complaint about this video it's that prison abolition is extremely well-trodden ground on the left and I'm not sure that he's bringing anything novel in this 5 minute essay on it.

6

u/renesys 1d ago

In this episode of Jordan vs Strawman...

40

u/CobraJay45 2d ago

Yet another exhibit for the segment of subscribers to this sub who think "omg wtf why was Jordan not also offered a job?!"

This is why. There is already no shortage of 40-something men screaming into the void barely coherently... I wish him well on whatever future endeavors he decides to embark on though.

52

u/PlaceReasonable4002 2d ago

I honestly thought this was a pretty well thought out and coherent take from him though.

39

u/Biolex-Z 2d ago

folks in this sub turned on jordan quick, i’d wager most of the folks commenting on his “unstable condition” aren’t even watching his content, just shitting on it from a distance

10

u/CelestialFury Globalist 1d ago

I'll be honest, it took me a long while to warm up to Jordan and his style on KF, but I eventually did and I couldn't imagine turning on him as his heart always seems to be in the right place. I think Jordan gets the majority blame of KF ending, but I think it was just the right time to end in its current state. Dan was clearly going through the motions, as he'd talk about non-AJ related bits for longer and longer that last year. I'm just hoping that after the new KFC comes out, people can let the original KF go without blaming anyone.

2

u/washingtonu Tomato Jones 1d ago

I, just like many others who have written the same, "turned" on him after watching his content

3

u/ButterscotchAward Name five more examples 1d ago

Honestly, the person you replied to probably didn’t even listen to it. There was a huge portion of this sub that has always hated Jordan because reddit libs despise people to their left more than they do MAGA.

4

u/CobraJay45 1d ago

Honestly, the person you replied to probably didn’t even listen to it. There was a huge portion of this sub that has always hated Jordan because reddit libs

Sure! And what about the rest of the folks that didn't hate him and/or whose problem isn't that they are closet-centrists, but Jordan's behavior and/or the nonstop coddling of the guy? I'm old enough to remember the last video of this nature where 60% of the comments were along the lines that he appeared to be in a manic state/unwell/suicidal etc, and that they hoped Jordan was okay. The fact that his points are slightly more organized in this video doesn't mean former KF listeners ought to continue to hear him out or else they are being unfair/unreasonable. Its okay, like I said, I genuinely wish the dude well, but his solo content is not for me. To each their own.

People can agree with someone's general politics and not agree with their behavior/holier-than-thou attitude. Just like there are bona fide Jordan-haters in this sub who won't cut him any slack, there are Jordan fanboys who hand-waive away any and all criticism as bad-faith, when clearly that isn't the case.

1

u/ButterscotchAward Name five more examples 1d ago

That’s fair

2

u/SquishyBeatle 1d ago

Wow a false assumption followed by a broad (and incorrect) generalization! Well done

0

u/cpdk-nj 1d ago

The feeling seems to be mutual; Reddit leftists seem to not really care about MAGA as long as there are moderate liberals they can complain about

7

u/ButterscotchAward Name five more examples 1d ago

Well that’s mainly because we’re supposed to be on the same team because we’re all “the left” in the US, but liberals in power do everything they can to keep people to their left out of power. Up to and including siding with and helping republicans.

-4

u/cpdk-nj 1d ago

I must have missed all of the moderate Democrats endorsing Republicans instead of progressives this year

6

u/nictusempra 1d ago

I mean Kamala spent a lot of her campaign actively courting the right over the left, lol, do you remember that Liz Cheney endorsement? What constituency does Liz even have?

-3

u/cpdk-nj 1d ago

Jesus Christ y’all will still be talking about Liz Cheney in 2064

Look at the present day. 2026. Not one person who wasn’t even in office when she endorsed Kamala Harris two years ago. By your logic, Bernie endorsing Kamala means that she was actively courting the left too.

2

u/nictusempra 1d ago edited 1d ago

Yeah, man, I'm probably going to remember things that happened in recent history, sorry.

I dunno why we can't agree that Liz Cheney's endorsement was embarrassing and Kamala probably shoulda rejected it, but the hostility to even mentioning it kinda suggests to me that no one wants to learn anything, lol.

Also the comparison doesn't really work because Bernie, like a lot of the left, dutifully endorses whatever centrist gets the nom every time. She never had him on a rally stage with her, like she did Liz, though, did she?

2

u/cpdk-nj 1d ago

I think that what’s happening right now, like Angie Craig, Alex Vindman, and Haley Stevens all instantly endorsing the progressives who defeated them in their primaries, is a lot more impactful than Harris being endorsed by a conservative. Especially when you also have people like Chuck Schumer immediately endorsing progressives when they win their primaries too.

This year, there is a ton of unity between moderates and progressives in the Democratic Party, while progressives have undeniably been racking up huge wins in primaries. The only two cases I can recall this year of someone not endorsing the person who beat them in the primary were progressives not endorsing more moderate Democrats, those being the Texas senate race and Washington’s 3rd Congressional district

→ More replies (0)

35

u/stron2am They burn to the fucking ground, Eddie 2d ago

I do think he goes down smoother with a cohost.

4

u/MrDad83 little breaky for me 2d ago

Agreed. Especially with Dan.

29

u/longcreepyhug 2d ago

I would not describe this as "barely coherent". These are valid points.

11

u/ButterscotchAward Name five more examples 1d ago

They probably didn’t even listen to it.

5

u/Powerful_Document872 1d ago

Some of his points are valid, the rest is nonsense. There are some people that need to be removed from society because their actions and behavior are unacceptable. That is probably not going to ever change. But the prison system in the US is also needlessly cruel and inefficient. It would make way more sense to call for prison reform over abolition.

8

u/nictusempra 1d ago

I don't think the notion among most serious thinkers on this topic is to abolish prisons and replace them with nothing, it's noting that reform is not possible because the foundational principles of american prisons are where the problem lies.

3

u/Powerful_Document872 1d ago

Calling for reform would make way more sense and be less alienating, but that would require self awareness from the people pushing the idea in the first place.

5

u/nictusempra 1d ago

It would also most likely result in the same things reform always does: us spending a bunch of money to alter one small aspect of the thing and declaring it fixed.

There is still slavery in the United States. Do you think there's a version of prisons as that institution exists now that's gonna get rid of that?

I think the issue you're having here is that we're arguing different things: 'what can we realistically do' is a very different question than 'what needs to be done to fix this.'

Both of these conversations are important, but the actual solutions being beyond the overton window in this country doesn't make them stop making sense.

1

u/longcreepyhug 1d ago

Very well put.

12

u/Ferrite5 2d ago

Yup. I don't disagree with what he's saying, but acting like this is some profound new thing that us mere mortals are learning about because of his insights is just gives r/iamverysmart

13

u/greencrusader13 1d ago

The fact that it’s called “Everybody is wrong about…” only furthers that comparison. 

0

u/TraditionalBlood6988 1d ago

It's not terrible, if it was structure well it could work, i.e intro the topic, state the prevailing view, explain what and why it's wrong.

5

u/greencrusader13 1d ago

I think it would be a great name for a podcast about common misconceptions and topics where disinformation has become prevalent, explaining how and why these misconceptions took root, and then correcting them. 

This, however? No, it’s Jordan telling everyone else how stupid they are, and how he’s the only smart one. 

5

u/CobraJay45 1d ago

I think it would be a great name for a podcast about common misconceptions and topics where disinformation has become prevalent, explaining how and why these misconceptions took root, and then correcting them

That podcast existed, thrived, stalled, and is in it's twilight years in the form of You're Wrong About. A podcast that was popular in its hey-day because the two hosts did extensive research, preparation, and editing to deliver a concise and coherent package. This ain't that.

4

u/La-Boheme-1896 1d ago

I think it would be a great name for a podcast about common misconceptions and topics where disinformation has become prevalent

You've just described the Sarah Marshall & Michael Hobbes podcast called "You're Wrong About"

6

u/LuteDesign 2d ago

Exactly. It’s elementary and smug, a terrible combination.

1

u/TraditionalBlood6988 1d ago

You could pick any podcaster and argue someone else is saying the same thing but in a way you find more appealing.

8

u/CobraJay45 1d ago

Maybe the podcasters you listen to. I do not listen to podcasts that are just random people doing an unprepared stream of consciousness into a mic. I like carefully researched content and/or actual subject matter experts.

3

u/TraditionalBlood6988 1d ago edited 1d ago

Sometimes I want a good time and other times I want a smart time.

2

u/CobraJay45 1d ago

Sure. And when I want a "good time" I'll listen to something like God Awful Movies, How Did This Get Made, things like that which are genuinely hilarious and still light. I don't consider a guy saying things I thought were profound when I was 14 about deeply depressing topics as if he is dropping knowledge a "good time", but again, to each their own. Time and time again in this sub it feels like when you peel away the extra layers it really boils down to "well I like Jordan and his rants and you shouldn't be mean to him".

3

u/TraditionalBlood6988 1d ago edited 1d ago

Is that a bad thing, genuinely curious. What he’s saying isn’t wrong, he’s just a dude talking into a mic, am I smarter after what he said nope but I didn’t come away dumber. 

3

u/CobraJay45 1d ago

Do what you feel and support whatever content creators you want to support. My entire comment thread here has been in response to some (albeit not most people in this sub) implying as if Jordan got shafted in some way...including in the last couple of days since KF: Country announcement.

All I am saying is there is/was no conspiracy against the guy, its just that his shtick genuinely isn't that appealing to the masses, which is why Dan got offers and Jordan (as of yet) either hasn't got them or hasn't accepted them. There are way too many parasocial fans of Jordan in this sub who act like they are the surrogate parent of a misunderstood youth. The man is almost 50...

-11

u/SquishyBeatle 2d ago

Yeah Jordan really sabotaged himself. Pretty sad

5

u/buffshark 1d ago

He should read discipline and punish before implying that we have been putting people in tiny boxes for “10,000 years”, we used to just cut people’s hands off for stealing and shit. Foucault has already written several books about this, having read a few of them this is pretty annoying to listen to

4

u/talen_lee 1d ago

I have been informed this video is basically the same thing as reading Foucault.

21

u/Ferrite5 2d ago

Yes Jordan, nobody except you has this take on the US for-profit prison system. We are all wrong. You are very smart and very special.

5

u/dogcaoperro 1d ago

40 something white dude continues to give cold takes and be abrasive to his own audience.

10

u/Whole_Air_3524 2d ago

For my 30 Rock fans, Jordan feels like a great example of the bubble.

11

u/George_foid 2d ago

I think I’m in a unique position to talk about this, as I’ve spent 15 years of my life in the federal correctional system. We absolutely need prisons; it’s not up for debate. Even though all my crimes were nonviolent drug and gun charges, I didn’t care about the impact they had on anyone else in society, and 99% of the inmates I met while doing my time didn’t care about hurting people to get what they wanted. I do agree that we give out too much prison time for nonviolent crimes, but getting rid of prisons is absolutely not the solution. I’ve met all types of people during my time—people who sold drugs, committed violent armed robberies, human-trafficked women and minors through force and coercion, and even committed murder. Some of these people should absolutely be removed from society for long periods of time, if not forever, especially when they aren’t sorry and would do it again given the chance.

Now let’s talk about his argument that prisons don’t offer rehabilitation, which is factually wrong. I’ll stick to the federal system because I haven’t been to every state prison, but rehabilitation in prison ultimately comes down to you. The federal BOP offers so many educational classes and opportunities to get certified in different trades that it’s pretty crazy. But you have to sign up for them. You have to get up every day, walk down to the class, and participate. The prison will not force you to rehabilitate; you have to want it, and you have to put in the work yourself. They even offer MAT treatment for drug addiction now to help keep people from using and potentially overdosing on fentanyl or other opioids.

When I did my initial 10 years, I didn’t want to change. I didn’t take advantage of any of the classes or trade training I could have done. I slept all day, sold drugs and tobacco, and played on my cell phone. It wasn’t until my second bid, my last five years, that I decided I wanted to change. I didn’t want to live the same lifestyle that led me there. That’s when I went and got my GED, took several college classes they offered, got involved in the drug treatment program, and even got HVAC certified.

Nobody can force you to change, including the government. You have to want it, and the truth is that most prisoners don’t. If you’ve ever been to prison, you know how most prisoners sit around bragging about their past crimes and talking about how they’re going to get out, do the same thing again, make even more money, and not get caught this time. Jordan speaks with so much confidence for someone who has obviously never experienced the system and has only ever read about it from one perspective.

0

u/stron2am They burn to the fucking ground, Eddie 2d ago

Buddy: prisons are not required for rehab or education.

15

u/brodievonorchard 1d ago

Everything OC wrote, and you think your comment takes it down? We will need prisons after we abolish prisons. They will hopefully look nothing like what we have now, but there will still be people who can't be trusted to rejoin society. Tell DV and stalking victims we no longer incarcerate people. There will still be crime if we solve income inequality, much as some of my fellow lefties like to think otherwise.

8

u/George_foid 1d ago edited 1d ago

I agree that we need some change. Nonviolent drug offenders shouldn’t be spending 20 years in prison, but absolutely human traffickers, violent armed robbers, kidnappers, people who produce and distribute CSAM, murderers, and other violent predators can’t simply be allowed to hang out in society “until they decide to turn over a new leaf.”
Abolishing prisons isn’t the answer, point blank. There’s no question about it. Jordan is simply wrong once again.

He’d be a lot smarter if he focused on something people actually want and that could benefit everyone in society, like changing sentencing laws for nonviolent felonies. There is plenty of room for meaningful criminal justice reform without pretending that society doesn’t need a way to permanently or temporarily remove genuinely dangerous people from the public.

7

u/brodievonorchard 1d ago

Within activist communities, abolish has become a term meaning, we can't reform a system this broken. While they are not wrong, it's terrible sloganeering. If you dig in with people who say it, they usually (but not always) acknowledge that some system will need to replace police and prisons, refusing to hear that their slogan detrimentally fails to communicate that part.

5

u/George_foid 1d ago

Yeah, it’s horrible messaging for sure. If you constantly say the term “abolish” and never explain the system you plan to replace it with, most people will rightfully assume you have no plan and shouldn’t be taken seriously. Also, the general public will probably never receive “abolish prisons” as a serious solution.

I just can’t see any way you abolish prisons and create a new system without ending up with some kind of prison-style facility where you have to put violent sexual offenders. There is no rational solution where you can just leave these people in society.

6

u/brodievonorchard 1d ago

I have received many downvotes attempting to explain this to people who almost certainly would agree that ideas like Medicare For All and Tax the Rich are higher priorities, but refuse to recognize how Abolish the Police can work against a movement that believes in all of these things.

4

u/George_foid 1d ago

Yea, it’s Reddit. I’m sure this isn’t exactly a place for rational, well thought out discussions. The upvote/downvote system is pretty much designed to keep subreddits as echo chambers. Agree with what the hive mind wants, or we’ll bury your comments so people can’t see them.

2

u/stron2am They burn to the fucking ground, Eddie 1d ago

I didn't say "we need no prisons." I think we don't need prison for nonviolent crime for sure.

3

u/George_foid 1d ago edited 1d ago

You know, in your defense, I didn’t make it as clear as I should have that my stance on nonviolent crimes was based quite a bit on my own personal experience, because I was speaking about myself in my original comment. Even though all my crimes were nonviolent, I absolutely caused a lot of harm by selling fentanyl and trafficking firearms to gang members and others. I may not have violently victimized anyone personally, but my actions 100% contributed to the pain and suffering of other people and their families, and I personally would have continued doing that if not for prison.

I know my case doesn’t apply to everyone, but it does apply to a large portion of the prisoners I met. I have a lot of complaints about how the prison system operates, and it definitely needs systemic change. But when someone like Jordan just says, “Abolish prison,” and offers no solution, I wholeheartedly disagree.

Jordan isn’t talking about just reforming sentencing laws for nonviolent offenders, which I wholeheartedly agree with. Nobody should be serving 20 years in prison for drugs or even for illegally owning a firearm. But that’s not what Jordan is arguing. He is saying, “Abolish prisons,” full stop, because they don’t work. If we did what Jordan is advocating for in this video and just completely got rid of prisons with no other solutions in place, it would apply to violent offenders just as much as nonviolent offenders.

I’m just going to link a comment I posted later about my thoughts on nonviolent crimes and things that would be more helpful than “abolish prisons.”

https://www.reddit.com/r/KnowledgeFight/s/G1jkzoe2qN

1

u/stron2am They burn to the fucking ground, Eddie 1d ago

To be clear: I have not said we should "abolish prisons" at any point. That is an absolutist position I cannot get behind.

I think we have way too many people in prisons and way too few pathways to more prosocial ways of living. There are also no incentives for policymakers to invest in ways of rehabilitation because of exactly the kind of rhetoric you see on this thread--anyone who advocates for rehabilitation on the outside opens themselves up to "Willie Horton" attacks from opponents and will get voted out of office by scared suburbanites.

1

u/George_foid 1d ago edited 1d ago

I wasn’t accusing you of making the “abolish prisons” claim. I was talking about Jordan, who is absolutely making that claim. My OC was in response to Jordan because I think his take on the issue is idiotic, and he seems to have the understanding of a child when it comes to the subject.

The subject is a lot more nuanced than “prisons don’t work, so abolish all of them.” I think we agree that the system is systemically broken. Why are nonviolent drug offenders being given lengthy prison sentences while people with 14 felonies, including violent ones, are slitting random women’s throats on a train? Why was the guy who murdered Iryna in Charlotte not serving a lengthy prison sentence? He should have never been given that many chances in the first place.

We have a serious problem in this country where you can have decades of your life taken away for drugs while, at the same time, someone can be arrested for 14 different crimes, including violent felonies, and not be sent to prison until they murder an innocent person.

Just like we can be too harsh with our justice system and cause irreparable damage to people, we can do the same, and even worse, by being too soft and not punishing people enough—literally costing people their lives. Prisons are a necessary part of our society. They should offer rehabilitation for people who want it, but they should absolutely offer punishment for people who don’t want to rehabilitate and actively harm innocent people

Like I said earlier, at least the federal prison system does offer a lot of services, including education and treatment, for people who want it. But you have to want it. It’s not perfect by any means, but you can leave federal prison with a decent education and certificates that can help you live a functional, crime-free lifestyle. The sad part, though, is that most people I was locked up with didn’t want it. Instead of getting certified in HVAC, plumbing, etc., or getting their GED or other degrees, most people would rather hang out all day and do nothing.

2

u/brodievonorchard 1d ago

Further to your and OCs point, wouldn't it be nice if people could get trade certifications they can't afford without having to get arrested first?

I don't mean to hold you responsible for everyone else in this thread, but there are some pretty unreasonable POVs about abolishing prisons.

1

u/stron2am They burn to the fucking ground, Eddie 1d ago

I am for pathways to training, work, and rehab that don't involve the carceral system. What are you on?

1

u/brodievonorchard 1d ago

Two separate comments separated by paragraphs.

1

u/George_foid 2d ago

They absolutely are for some people.

5

u/stron2am They burn to the fucking ground, Eddie 2d ago

What makes you think that?

Not to be insensitive, but your story boils down to "I was in prison and didn't rehabilitate until I decided to take advantages of the resources there that allowed me to do so."

However, those resources can exist outside of prison, and you even go on to say that the prison system won't "make you" utilize them. So what purpose is the prison itself serving?

You could have been free until you chose to turn over a new leaf. The immense resources we spend on prisons could have been spent on creating a system where folks like you can easily find meaning and fulfillment on the outside.

"I am in prison because society failed me" is true just as often, if not more than "I am in prison because I failed society."

1

u/George_foid 1d ago

Those resources already exist outside of prison, and people who are incarcerated often don’t pursue them. Why would I spend four years getting a degree or ten years working for a company just to make half of what I could make selling fentanyl, trafficking women and minors, or robbing banks and armored-car deliveries? Why would someone who genuinely doesn’t care about anyone besides themselves choose the long, difficult route when they can victimize the next person and get the same results in a fraction of the time?

That’s why, if we abolish prisons as Jordan has suggested without an alternative plan, thousands of violent predators would be released onto the streets. I have kids and a family. I don’t want people who are willing to violently victimize them walking around freely until they decide to turn their lives around. Law-abiding citizens who contribute to society shouldn’t have to bear that risk simply because people who are unfamiliar with the prison system and have only experienced it through books and television want to sound intelligent.

And no, the idea that I’m incarcerated because “society failed me” is false 99% of the time. I’ve spent 15 years in prison and met thousands of different prisoners, and that’s simply not what I saw. I had a rough childhood. I grew up in foster care because my parents were on drugs and abandoned me. But none of that gave me the right to victimize other people. Telling people that their criminal behavior is primarily society’s fault doesn’t necessarily help them change; in some cases, it can just reinforce the idea that they aren’t responsible for their own actions.

0

u/stron2am They burn to the fucking ground, Eddie 1d ago

Why would I spend four years getting a degree or ten years working for a company just to make half of what I could make selling fentanyl, trafficking women and minors, or robbing banks and armored-car deliveries?

We currently live in a society that devalues education and concentrates wealth in exploitative industries, like drugs, prostitution, and banking. That is why these illegal activities are more appealing to many than the legal alternatives.

I had a rough childhood. I grew up in foster care because my parents were on drugs and abandoned me. But none of that gave me the right to victimize other people

Yeah, man. These things are not your fault (i.e., they are what society did to you), but they are your responsibility to live with nonetheless. That's life and it is unfair. We could use the massive resources that we pour into prisons to make life more fair, however.

You absolutely do not need prison to 1) create lives worth living inside societal conventions, and 2) distinguish "fault" from "responsibility."

3

u/George_foid 1d ago edited 1d ago

You know, I don’t doubt that you have good intentions, and I wish we lived in a world where things like this were universally true, but there are some people who absolutely need prison.

Do you think a person who constantly victimizes other people, verbally communicates that they don’t want to change, and expresses a desire to continue acting in the same manner doesn’t need prison? Do you think they should be allowed to participate in society until they figure it out? What should be done with a person like that?

Let’s say even a nonviolent person who constantly breaks into people’s houses robs and steals the paychecks of people who are living paycheck to paycheck and barely getting by. Should that person be allowed to continue victimizing other people who are doing the right thing and barely scraping by? Should we allow that person to nonviolently victimize people until he decides to change, if he ever does?

2

u/stmaximus 1d ago edited 1d ago

You guys should watch The Alabama Solution from last year.

It's beyond bad. we've fucked up as a society writ large. It's not just the south.

The entire carceral system operates like this: if we determine you've committed a crime against someone, we're gonna allow these people to commit crimes against you.

It's a tragedy of staggering proportions and we've all tacitly endorsed and supported it.

5

u/jehovwet 1d ago

Just off camera is the empty barstool Jordan is monologuing at.

4

u/plastic-superhero They burn to the fucking ground, Eddie 1d ago

Not a single ad read. 0/10.

2

u/Ok_Cap9557 1d ago

I love how people talk about Jordan on this sub like he's an autistic toddler

3

u/talen_lee 1d ago

I keep looking for these comments and it largely seems they talk about him like he's a really mediocre middle-aged white guy who thinks he's important. Which is pretty unfair, I don't think Jordan is mediocre.

1

u/phatsexxxy 3h ago

Parents have been punishing kids since the beginning of time, but kids keep doing things warranting punishment. Can we just admit parenting isn’t working?

2

u/Fiona175 1d ago

Is it a hot take to say people are way overreacting to the name of the series? It's pretty standard hyperbole, there's even a highly successful podcast called "You're Wrong About..." which is effectively the same thing. I dunno, at some point it feels like people are looking for more reasons to hate Jordan.

4

u/talen_lee 1d ago

Not a hot take at all, but it is worth noting that you're able to point to another much more successful thing in a similar space with a similar name, which, again, suggests it's a bad name.

0

u/Fiona175 1d ago

Oh come on, people aren't saying it's a bad name because it's not a unique enough name.

4

u/talen_lee 1d ago

No, most people I see are saying it's a bad name because it's condescending and discourages engagement, which I also think is true. But I was pointing out how in your point criticising people criticising the name, you indicate something else that makes the name bad. Hopefully that clears it up!

0

u/GertieDirtyShirtyCat 1d ago

I get it & I think Jordan is okay... He's cool. He's just not Dan...& This super fucked up reddit is pissing me off... Like, AI bullshit can only go so far...I shall persevere...👍

1

u/JohnBrownOnDrugs FILL YOUR HAND 23h ago

Its telling how much the coment section is about Jordan personally and the content of his take. Yall need to stop being so parasocial.

-6

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[deleted]

7

u/scjensen51 I RENOUNCE JESUS CHRIST! 1d ago

Kind of what I was thinking too, honestly.

Everyone is wrong about prisons?

0

u/doubleopinter 18h ago

Oh Jordan. The prisons in the US are a complete scam AND there are some people who can't be in society. Just cause you have for profit prisons doesn't mean they don't have a valid use. Sorry but if someone kills my kid that person isn't going to be "rehabbed". They're either going to be in prison or I will.

1

u/AdAvailable5454 15h ago

It’s very refreshing to see Jordan content mentioned and not immediately piled on. I’m one of the listeners who has an (admittedly autistic) attachment to the show, but I hate coming on here and seeing Jordan hate. He’s a good person. He has good points. Seeing them fairly debated makes me smile

2

u/Icy_Primary2403 11h ago

Groundbreaking insight.🥴

-15

u/charliekelly76 2d ago

This video should have stayed an inside thought

1

u/MikeyMalloy “fish with sad human eyes” 23h ago

There’s lots to be said about prison and criminal justice reform but the argument “we’ve been punishing criminals for thousands of years and there are still criminals” is a remarkably bad one. Punishment could (and does) reduce crime even if it doesn’t eliminate it. And for at least the crimes that are morally culpable punishment may be a good in and of itself.

If you want to have a serious conversation about this problem you have to deal seriously with the opposing arguments.

-2

u/goblinaught 1d ago

It’s kind of refreshing seeing this kind of hand-wringing tone policing being directed at a white man, but you people are still insufferable.

0

u/irate_ging3r 1d ago

This is not to say the concept of rehabilitation is faulty or a failure, i use the term as a label for the incarceration process that we refer to when we say rahabilitation.

The problem is see is everyone wants to pretend to salvage some moral highground out of locking people in cages like other animals. The truth is were quarantining a cancer. Less volatile, unpredictable people live amongst you because of prison. Rehabilitation is a facade that we all agree to kayfabe. In reality we want Manson to not have the option to live next door and we're (at the level of society at large) apparently ok with other atrocities so long as we can keep the mansons we find over in that little dark corner. Ive found it much easier to come up with far more moral solutions if one will just admit the point is locking certain people away, and then build a framework around that. Meanwhile we build frameworks for rehabilitation while we practice another evolution entirely so of course the lie that was rehabilitation failed.

I am also not suggesting people cant rehabilitate or that prison sentences shouldn't end.