[hammerzeit]

I applaud this article for challenging the received wisdom in libertarian communities that our prison problems are a function of drug laws -- indeed, if there's one thing this article does well, it's establishing that we cannot solve our problems solely by dealing with nonviolent crime.

That said, this article makes a large number of controversial claims that it fails to support on anything other than a rhetorical level, including:

* The moral crisis in prisons is so severe that effectively any social burden should be borne for it to be fixed.

* In time, the increased public money from eliminating prisons will turn violent felons into peaceful individuals.

* The differences between the US and UK's social situations is a function of our prisons.

Ultimately, this article's vigor outweighs its coherence; it seems to oscillate between making ontological claims and moral claims, between libertarian claims and authoritarian claims (note the advocacy for more CCTV).

[whiddershins]

It is not inherently authoritarian to have cctvs. It can just as easily be an anarchist or libertarian concept. It really depends on who pays for and controls the cameras, who has access to the recordings, and what punishments can be given to those recorded while committing a crime.

[pokpokpok]

I agree with your other points, but I'd like to point out that there's absolutely nothing wrong with supporting multiple ideas that are usually found in different ideological cages