These types of analysis start out the basic proposition that systems are designed for a specific goal from the start and that we should judge them based on thos

These types of analysis start out the basic proposition that systems are designed for a specific goal from the start and that we should judge them based on those goals. Our justice systems have emergent properties that have arisen after many years and are due to many historical accidents vs. a planned or purposeful approach. They should also be judged on their outcomes, not their professed goals. I will talk about the US, since that's what I have the most experience with and it's where MIT is located. The US does not adopt either of those strategies mentioned in the article, even if it does dress itself in the rhetoric of either moral justice or practical utility (the former is heavily favored). The outcomes of policing, legal system, and prisons is that poor and Black people are heavily oppressed and only the property rights of the weathly are taken seriously. White people's drug crimes are punished less than Black people's drug crimes. Heck, even the criminalization of drugs is oppressive against the already oppressed. What is wild is that we don't see the police and judicial system as an occupying force. Why do police departments need MRAPs, M-16s, and plate carriers? Why do we have to keep gasing, shooting, and beating our own citizens? Why does the NSA and CIA feel the need to monitor our every word? We can do better, but we have to admit that our system is not working for a lot of people. This is a blameless post-mortem, so all I want to do is fix our system, not assign blame. We have to make this better, for the sake of all.