Buffalo Vetearns Court

[dieseltaylor]

A nice story I picked up from the "Economist". Here is a link to Reuter's article and a quote:

From the minute Judge Robert Russell walks into Buffalo Veterans Court, it is clear this is no ordinary courtroom.

"Hello everybody," the judge says.

"Good afternoon, Judge," everyone replies in unison.

The first defendant steps forward, and Russell asks him what branch of the military he served in.

"Navy, sir," he says, and the room bursts into applause.

Buffalo's Veterans Court, the first of its kind when it began three years ago, has proven so successful it is a model for the 46 such courts that have sprung up since in 20 states, largely to address the needs of veterans returning home from Iraq, Afghanistan and Vietnam.

Among the most recent, a veterans' court was started less than a month ago in New York City.

So successful is Buffalo's Veterans Court that it boasts a zero recidivism rate -- none of the participants have been rearrested and returned.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/01/09/us-court-veterans-idUSTRE7082U020110109

[Magpie_Oz]

Sorry as a service man you are entitled to a different form of justice?

Starship Troopers -> Nazi Germany anyone?

Rather than giving people the thing they need they wait until the commit crime and then help them? What about the people who aren't criminals?

Who thinks up this BS ?

[Charlie Marlow]

Starship Troopers -> Nazi Germany anyone?

I've seen the comparison of SST to Fascism a number of times, but I don't understand the link.

I do understand the idea that a limited franchise may be in conflict with full democratic principles, but how does that make such a system the equivalent of Fascism generally and Nazism in particular?

[Elmar Bijlsma]

People with drugs and alcohol problems tend to get aid tailored to their needs via most justice systems in order to solve the various problems. I reckon that for many veterans war ****ed them up every bit as good as narcotics.

The problems some seem to have with it appears based the principle of the thing. I prefer to see actual positive results rather then to stand on principle.

It does not do anyone any favours to make the moral highground too steep to climb.

[mike_the_wino]

Sorry as a service man you are entitled to a different form of justice?

My read of the article is that the Veterans have a different life experience and different issues.

Starship Troopers -> Nazi Germany anyone?

Que? First response is a 'Nazi' bomb. Awesome!

Rather than giving people the thing they need they wait until the commit crime and then help them? What about the people who aren't criminals?

There are groups out there; AA, NA, etc. The caveat is that you have to want to change. Too many people don't seek help until they really bugger their lives up. Often that means facing jail time.

Who thinks up this BS ?

Why? There are other programs set up for drug addicts to divert them from the justice system. How is this any different? The court system is trying to deal with the unique human failings which lead these folks into lives of crime? By the by, did you bother reading that it takes $32k to lock some one up versus $7k to clean them up? And with 100% success rate I think they may be onto something. Or we could follow your logic, keep treating them the same way, let them spiral down into a life of drugs, alcohol and other issues. Then, when they finally do snap, you have a militarily trained, anti-social, addict on the loose.

You didn't really think this one through did you?

[gunnergoz]

We already have family courts, courts for the mentally incompetent, children's courts, drug courts, traffic courts, drunk/disorderly courts - why not a veterans' court?

[dieseltaylor]

Peer pressure is perhaps the most potent item in changing behaviours.

[Tarquelne]

Sorry as a service man you are entitled to a different form of justice?

Totally unfair. As a WASP civvy I want my own special court. I mean, even more so than the normal ones are now.

Starship Troopers -> Nazi Germany anyone?

Is that the book where only war criminals are allowed to vote?

Rather than giving people the thing they need they wait until the commit crime and then help them? What about the people who aren't criminals?

Hear hear! We should find non-criminals with habitual problems and put them under a court's jurisdiction in an attempt to make them change.

Who thinks up this BS ?

You're welcome.

A separate court in indeed bad in principle. But like many things that are bad "in principle" you should look to the specifics, how far it's being taken, and whether or not in the given instance it's really doing more harm than good.

Voting is a good example of the sort of thing I'm talking about, or ice cream.

[-E]

Hear hear! We should find non-criminals with habitual problems and put them under a court's jurisdiction in an attempt to make them change.

Would they still be able to post here?

[Magpie_Oz]

We already have family courts, courts for the mentally incompetent, children's courts, drug courts, traffic courts, drunk/disorderly courts - why not a veterans' court?

Because all of those courts are for the type of law involved not the type of person. A separate court for ex-service personnel suggests they are entitled to a different form of justice or are subject to different laws.

How do you have a court for the mentally incompetent? If they are incompetent they cannot be in a court.

Starship Troopers had at it's heart the notion that military service was a prerequisite for citizenship i.e. you had to take up arms to defend the country before you had a right to be part of the country. There are a lot of fascist notion in the writing. But you are correct fascism does not necessarily mean Nazi, but one can lead to the other hence the ->

"We should find non-criminals with habitual problems and put them under a court's jurisdiction in an attempt to make them change."

That is exactly why this is a total farce and blight on the US legal system. The courts are not the place to deal with habitual problems. Courts deal with law, end of. Habitual problems need to be dealt with a different mechanism.

"I reckon that for many veterans war ****ed them up every bit as good as narcotics."

So get them before they become criminals. Fix them before casting them on the street, support them when they return, heal their wounds.

"There are other programs set up for drug addicts to divert them from the justice system. How is this any different? The court system is trying to deal with the unique human failings which lead these folks into lives of crime? By the by, did you bother reading that it takes $32k to lock some one up versus $7k to clean them up? And with 100% success rate I think they may be onto something. Or we could follow your logic, keep treating them the same way, let them spiral down into a life of drugs, alcohol and other issues. Then, when they finally do snap, you have a militarily trained, anti-social, addict on the loose.

You didn't really think this one through did you?"

Neither did you.

You don't get my logic at all as you seem to assume that I, like you, expect these people to end up in court and that that is the best place to deal with them.

I am saying fix the problem before it starts. If your cost analysis is correct then spend the defence budget on the fix not the social welfare budget. Forgo 1 F22 and you can give an entire Corps the help they need.

[Charlie Marlow]

There are a lot of fascist notion in the writing.

That is the part I am having trouble with. Not that you may not be right, but more is needed. Limited franchise based on service is not fascism.

[Stalins Organ]

There's not really a lot of fascism in the book - the Govt is actually democratically elected, and it is also OBLIGED to give service to everyone who wants it.

There's a section on the fascism allegations on wiki - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starship_Troopers#Allegations_of_fascism

Note Sircar's Corollary of Godwin's Law

[Magpie_Oz]

The Wiki Article above does give a brief run down of the Fascism allegations in SST, I have read a more comprehensive article elsewhere.

I am not completely sold on it myself, but you can see there are undertones of Fascist notions in the book.

[Michael Emrys]

Heinlein was pretty conservative, to say the least, and seems to have become more so as he aged. Consider The Moon is a Harsh Mistress or even more Farnham's Freehold. Whether or not he deserves to be called a fascist, it's not too hard to see why people started thinking that way, especially at the time those two were written. In the '60s and '70s that term got tossed around pretty freely.

Michael

[Magpie_Oz]

Even those two copped some flak, Farnham's Freehold was touted as being rasicst and I have to admit I did think a bit that way when I first read it.

I think the main thing was that Heinlein wrote most of his tales as political comments and whenever you do that you tend to attract a bit.

Like when you suggest a perceived "fix" for a problem is misguided BS

[Charlie Marlow]

Heinlein was pretty conservative, to say the least, and seems to have become more so as he aged. Consider The Moon is a Harsh Mistress.

Michael

The Moon is a Harsh Mistress is not really a conservative book. Much more libertarian leaning than conservative.

[Charlie Marlow]

but you can see there are undertones of Fascist notions in the book.

Not seeing it. Perhaps your definition of Fascism would help me out.

[Magpie_Oz]

Fascism is a radical, authoritarian nationalist political ideology. Fascists advocate the creation of a totalitarian single-party state that seeks the mass mobilization of a nation through indoctrination, physical education, and family policy including eugenics.

Fascists seek to purge forces, ideas, and systems deemed to be the cause of decadence and degeneration and produce their nation's rebirth based on commitment to the national community based on organic unity where individuals are bound together by suprapersonal connections of ancestry, culture, and blood.

Fascists believe that a nation requires strong leadership, singular collective identity, and the will and ability to commit violence and wage war in order to keep the nation strong. Fascist governments forbid and suppress opposition to the state. Fascists promote violence and war as actions that create national regeneration, spirit and vitality. Fascists exalt militarism as providing positive transformation in society, in providing spiritual renovation, education, instilling of a will to dominate in people's character, and creating national comradeship through military service.

Most of those concepts are present in the general background of the world in which Starship Troopers is set. Give me a week or 2 and I will dig out and re-read the book if you want specifics but for now you will need to rely on a 30 year old memory.

The notion of Federal Service being required for suffrage and public office can be seen as an effective mechanism of maintaining a single party state.

Allowing only those who have completed Federal Service to be the History and Moral Philosophy teachers can be seen as indoctrination as the state has direct control over not only the history that is taught but the attitude towards it.

Waging war to keep the nation strong is an obvious component.

There is a strong undertone of the "exalt militarism as providing positive transformation in society, in providing spiritual renovation, education, instilling of a will to dominate in people's character, and creating national comradeship through military service."

I dimly recall something tied up in the romance side of the novel that might have hinted vaguely at a eugenics programme but I could be confusing that with other books. Or it could be my own bias of preferring Dina Meyer over Denise Richards.

[Charlie Marlow]

Your definition leaves out the economic component of Fascism (which was significant component), but we can work with what you provided.

SST has a society that absent the right to vote gives full rights to its members who don't choose service. IIRC there was no suggestion of suppression of opposition to the state, and that all (voting citizens and no voting folks) had full human rights including free speech.

Also, war for control was not an issue. In SST it was war against a hostile alien species that had attacked humanity. More of US v. Japan after Pearl Harbor.

Now on to service to gain the vote. Is that in your mind more or less Fascist than countries that require manditory military service or have a draft system? In those systems you have no choice but to serve. In SST, you get a choice. Sweden has manditory service I believe. Does Sweden have Fascist tendencies?

[Charlie Marlow]

To my mind, what irks a lot of folks about SST is Heinlein's views on individual responsibility. Fascism is all to often tossed around as an attack against "something we don't like, but are too lazy to clearly articulate. We will call it Fascism, because everyone knows that Fascism is bad." Sort of like the way many people toss the word Communism around.

[Magpie_Oz]

Your definition leaves out the economic component of Fascism (which was significant component), but we can work with what you provided.

Just a little bit condescending there ol' mate.

There is no economic component mentioned in SST as I recall.

SST has a society that absent the right to vote gives full rights to its members who don't choose service. IIRC there was no suggestion of suppression of opposition to the state, and that all (voting citizens and no voting folks) had full human rights including free speech.

In that very sentence you encapsulate it. If you serve the state you have greater rights than those who do not.

Also, war for control was not an issue. In SST it was war against a hostile alien species that had attacked humanity. More of US v. Japan after Pearl Harbor.

The whys and where fors of the war with the bugs is irrelevant it is the attitude towards it that is important. Rather than a horrible thing we have to do because we are under threat, it is seen more as the glorious undertaking the very pinnacle of what a person can do for their country.

Now on to service to gain the vote. Is that in your mind more or less Fascist than countries that require mandatory military service or have a draft system?

Of course not many countries across the globe from all political persuasions have a National Service Scheme, as well you know. NONE of them require it to be able to vote.

In those systems you have no choice but to serve.

Many of them do have other avenues for those who do not wish to.

In SST, you get a choice.

Yes be a citizen or not.

Sweden has mandatory service I believe.

No it doesn't

Does Sweden have Fascist tendencies?

You haven't read "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" have you? Sweden was not your best choice for that analogy they did fly pretty close to the wind in WW2.

Draft, conscription call it what you wish it is totally beside the point and irrelevant to the notion of fascism in SST. In fact conscription is not a core principle of fascism at all, quite the opposite in fact, the notion is that the military represent an elite class in society.

Fascism exalts the military and the state as does SST. If you want to become a full member of society, you have to earn what is a fundamental democratic right, suffrage and the right to run for office, by serving the State apparatus.

[Charlie Marlow]

You haven't read "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" have you?

Yes, found it overrated. I couldn't finish the follow-up.

Your arguments are not persuasive. I don't see the society in SST exalting the military at all. In fact, it seems that much of the society looks down on the military. (witness Johney's father's view of the military, and Johney's own view of the MI prior to joining. Also the view of the bar patrons in Seatle). I think you are operating under the movie version.

[Charlie Marlow]

No it doesn't

OK. It did until last year.

So, to vote you need to serve (in the military or some other capacity) is more of a restriction on your rights than serve or go to prison?

If that is Fascism, I can tell you that a lot of folks during Vietnam would have preferred it to what they got under the draft.

[mike_the_wino]

Throw another line out, Magpie.

[Magpie_Oz]

OK. It did until last year.

So, to vote you need to serve (in the military or some other capacity) is more of a restriction on your rights than serve or go to prison?

If that is Fascism, I can tell you that a lot of folks during Vietnam would have preferred it to what they got under the draft.

You are still equating Fascism with conscription. As I said it is more Fascist if the military is reserved for a "privileged elite" (Waffen-SS for example) and that service entitles you to a different place in society.

Draft dodging and going to prison is merely breaking the law.