6 ms·

I have worked a few times in Riyadh (one time for an 8-month stint!) and one thing that rather shocked me is that capital punishment is done publicly, and it dr

by ksaj 3y ago

I have worked a few times in Riyadh (one time for an 8-month stint!) and one thing that rather shocked me is that capital punishment is done publicly, and it draws huge crowds. Literally you can't even drive by the square because the entire area is packed with spectators there only to see the hand and head choppings. Also, if you fight for this one person, you have to realize there are several put to death or getting their hands chopped off (for theft, etc) every week that are not being rallied for. I believe it was Mondays, but it's more than a decade ago now, so I may not remember the specific day. But yea, it was a family entertainment event. I myself never went because I find the whole idea abhorrent. A number of people I was working with there wouldn't miss it for the world. Working there gave me a whole perspective on totalitarian societies that I had not expected. I'm glad I don't live in one.

spookie 3y ago
That's... I don't have words. It's saddening. I really don't understand why one would go see such a thing, it's clearly meant to input fear on the people.
- somerandomqaguy 3y ago
  IIRC executions for traitors on Tower Hill in London were oft public as well. The way the Beefeaters tell the story, it was partly as warning but it genuinely is just as a day for family entertainment as well, similar to how ksaj is saying. Come out as a day for a picnic or buying snacks from various vendor and to watch a head roll. How true it is, who's to say. I find it rather plausible though.
  - hotpotamus 3y ago
    There's a song in the operetta "Candide" called "Auto Da Fe (What a Day)" that expresses the joy of the crowds in watching the Auto Da Fes (Acts of faith) of the Spanish Inquisition wherein people were forced to perform public acts of penance for their religious sins or heresies, up to burning at the stake. It's a funny song in its irony, and I'm sure Votaire would have appreciated the treatment that Bernstein gave it. That is to say that this sort of thing is not particularly unheard of. The cultural software of some modern countries may be a bit more progressed than others, but the human hardware of at least a significant portion of the world seems inclined to delight in punishment of those perceived as sinful.
  - spookie 3y ago
    It's plausible, of course. But, even then, there must have been people that found them as horrifying displays of power. It certainly has entered the minds of some, given how their popularity has decreased in some parts of the world.
- Fluorescence 3y ago
  The public execution is probably more common in human history than it's prohibition so from a human nature point of view, we are probably the odd ones. However, look at the popularity of clips coming out of the Ukraine war - grenade drops and such - snuff film entertainment - it's not too out of reach. Humans are fascinated by seeing death - modern squeamishness might have gone a bit too far such that we are in denial of our mortality and have a poor/immature conception of life and death. > it's clearly meant to input fear on the people I heard a Muslim who had attended these describe them. It's pretty interesting to understand there are some different concepts of justice at work. It's under control of the victim's family and various mullahs and even the executioner begs them to spare the life of the condemned. I think if you asked many people through history which was the better death - by sword or after 30 years of solitary in a supermax, most would say the the first is humane and the latter monstrous. A beheading, especially by sword was really quite prestigious and painless back in the day.
  - spookie 3y ago
    Your last point is understandable to a degree. That is, it really depends on the nature of your "crime". I wouldn't consider stating your opinion 30 years solitary worthy. But I do agree that such a system may be less humane in some cases. In others, where your time is shorter, it allows you to have another chance. It's difficult, and interesting where one draws the line. As for the victim's family "control", are they really in control? Where they the ones condemning the victim? Concerning the war in Ukraine. Personally, I find it worrisome how easy it's for someone to dehumanise the other side. And, seeing those clips, I understand the brutality that Putin brought into that country. If anything, it's more of a reminder of the brutality of war, and how these men (from both sides) are forced into killing eachother. One side defending their country, and the other, defending the will of a madman.
    - skissane 3y ago
      > As for the victim's family "control", are they really in control? Where they the ones condemning the victim? Sharia law distinguishes three types of crime – hudud, qisas, and tazir. A hudud crime is one where the penalty (whether death or some lesser punishment) is mandatory under the law, and so must be carried out (although there are various mitigating principles which can be used to justify not doing so in a particular case). A tazir crime is where the penalty is up to the discretion of the judge (and the ruler of the state as lawmaker). A qisas crime is one where the punishment is "eye for an eye" retribution, and hence the victim (or their family) has the legal right to commute the punishment. Murder (in most cases) is a qisas crime, so the family of the victim has the legal right to commute the death sentence to a lesser punishment, and no execution will be carried out without the consent of the family. This is different from hudud or tazir crimes, where the victim (if there is one) has no legal entitlement to a say in the punishment. An exception is something like a murder committed as part of a terrorist attack, which is simultaneously a crime against the victim (murder), but also a crime against the state (terrorism). Although the family of the victim still has the right to waive the death penalty for the qisas crime of murder, the state has the right to carry out the death penalty for the (tazir or hudud) crime against the state, so the offender will be executed irrespective of the family's wishes. Honestly, although I am personally opposed to the death penalty, I actually think in some ways the Saudi system is less wrong than the US system. Under the Saudi system, an ordinary murderer cannot be executed if the family unanimously opposes their execution (in cases of disagreement, I believe Saudi law follows the wishes of the identified senior next of kin); in the US system, the prosecutors/courts/government are under no legal obligation to respect the wishes of the victim's family, and a murderer can still be sentenced to death and executed even if the victim's family are unanimously opposed to that outcome. Also, although people denounce Saudi public executions as barbaric, I don't think private executions are any less barbaric than public ones. If anything, I think private executions are more barbaric, in that hiding what you are doing is a sign of a guilty conscience which knows it is really wrong. If voters can't stomach watching executions, they shouldn't be allowed to vote for them. (Saudis don't get to vote, at least not in any way that really counts–but it seems on this particular issue the Saudi government are doing the popular will–if you gave the Saudi people a free democratic vote on whether to retain the death penalty, I'm certain retention would win.)
- rayiner 3y ago
  Not in the way you probably think (like “V for Vendetta”). Dispensing justice is a core function of the state. The spectators are there to witness the punishment of people who are said to have transgressed against the group.
belter 3y ago
[flagged]
- ignoramceisblis 3y ago
  > exactly that type of society Every day, I'm impressed with how detached from reality people like you are. A society where public capital punishment is a weekly family event? I guess I missed that policy bullet point under "secure the border." Your absurd fear-mongering only produces more totalitarian outcomes for the US--due to justifications for totalitarian actions based on lies. If you seek the destruction of the US, as many do, that behavior would make sense. If you're a US citizen, you're creating your own hell.
  - hotpotamus 3y ago
    It can't happen here.
  - belter 3y ago
    A US president lost an election and tried to overthrow a democratic elected government, people died defending the rule of law. Is that what you call fear-mongering?
    - 1MachineElf 3y ago
      So instead of justifying your assertion that Trump voters want to make the USA exactly like Saudi Arabia, you changed the topic to a matter of election security. You haven't done much to assuage the parent comment's claim that these fears are delusional. Asking for an investigation to ensure the integrity of the election does not equal an overthrow of a democratically elected government. Don't think that your careful wording around "people died defending" helps conceal the reach you're making. ONE "defending" police officer died of a heart attack - no court of law would hold someone responsible for a death like that. The three other deaths were pro-Trump protesters fighting for a fair election. I watched members of a certain political party mock the deaths of Trump supporters while they happened live on January 6th - who was it you were saying wanted the US to be more like Saudi Arabia?
tj-teej 3y ago
FWIW in the American south it's common for Fraternities to hold BBQs and party outside of executions

by ksaj 3y ago

spookie 3y ago

That's... I don't have words. It's saddening. I really don't understand why one would go see such a thing, it's clearly meant to input fear on the people.

somerandomqaguy 3y ago
IIRC executions for traitors on Tower Hill in London were oft public as well. The way the Beefeaters tell the story, it was partly as warning but it genuinely is just as a day for family entertainment as well, similar to how ksaj is saying. Come out as a day for a picnic or buying snacks from various vendor and to watch a head roll. How true it is, who's to say. I find it rather plausible though.
- hotpotamus 3y ago
  There's a song in the operetta "Candide" called "Auto Da Fe (What a Day)" that expresses the joy of the crowds in watching the Auto Da Fes (Acts of faith) of the Spanish Inquisition wherein people were forced to perform public acts of penance for their religious sins or heresies, up to burning at the stake. It's a funny song in its irony, and I'm sure Votaire would have appreciated the treatment that Bernstein gave it. That is to say that this sort of thing is not particularly unheard of. The cultural software of some modern countries may be a bit more progressed than others, but the human hardware of at least a significant portion of the world seems inclined to delight in punishment of those perceived as sinful.
- spookie 3y ago
  It's plausible, of course. But, even then, there must have been people that found them as horrifying displays of power. It certainly has entered the minds of some, given how their popularity has decreased in some parts of the world.
Fluorescence 3y ago
The public execution is probably more common in human history than it's prohibition so from a human nature point of view, we are probably the odd ones. However, look at the popularity of clips coming out of the Ukraine war - grenade drops and such - snuff film entertainment - it's not too out of reach. Humans are fascinated by seeing death - modern squeamishness might have gone a bit too far such that we are in denial of our mortality and have a poor/immature conception of life and death. > it's clearly meant to input fear on the people I heard a Muslim who had attended these describe them. It's pretty interesting to understand there are some different concepts of justice at work. It's under control of the victim's family and various mullahs and even the executioner begs them to spare the life of the condemned. I think if you asked many people through history which was the better death - by sword or after 30 years of solitary in a supermax, most would say the the first is humane and the latter monstrous. A beheading, especially by sword was really quite prestigious and painless back in the day.
- spookie 3y ago
  Your last point is understandable to a degree. That is, it really depends on the nature of your "crime". I wouldn't consider stating your opinion 30 years solitary worthy. But I do agree that such a system may be less humane in some cases. In others, where your time is shorter, it allows you to have another chance. It's difficult, and interesting where one draws the line. As for the victim's family "control", are they really in control? Where they the ones condemning the victim? Concerning the war in Ukraine. Personally, I find it worrisome how easy it's for someone to dehumanise the other side. And, seeing those clips, I understand the brutality that Putin brought into that country. If anything, it's more of a reminder of the brutality of war, and how these men (from both sides) are forced into killing eachother. One side defending their country, and the other, defending the will of a madman.
  - skissane 3y ago
    > As for the victim's family "control", are they really in control? Where they the ones condemning the victim? Sharia law distinguishes three types of crime – hudud, qisas, and tazir. A hudud crime is one where the penalty (whether death or some lesser punishment) is mandatory under the law, and so must be carried out (although there are various mitigating principles which can be used to justify not doing so in a particular case). A tazir crime is where the penalty is up to the discretion of the judge (and the ruler of the state as lawmaker). A qisas crime is one where the punishment is "eye for an eye" retribution, and hence the victim (or their family) has the legal right to commute the punishment. Murder (in most cases) is a qisas crime, so the family of the victim has the legal right to commute the death sentence to a lesser punishment, and no execution will be carried out without the consent of the family. This is different from hudud or tazir crimes, where the victim (if there is one) has no legal entitlement to a say in the punishment. An exception is something like a murder committed as part of a terrorist attack, which is simultaneously a crime against the victim (murder), but also a crime against the state (terrorism). Although the family of the victim still has the right to waive the death penalty for the qisas crime of murder, the state has the right to carry out the death penalty for the (tazir or hudud) crime against the state, so the offender will be executed irrespective of the family's wishes. Honestly, although I am personally opposed to the death penalty, I actually think in some ways the Saudi system is less wrong than the US system. Under the Saudi system, an ordinary murderer cannot be executed if the family unanimously opposes their execution (in cases of disagreement, I believe Saudi law follows the wishes of the identified senior next of kin); in the US system, the prosecutors/courts/government are under no legal obligation to respect the wishes of the victim's family, and a murderer can still be sentenced to death and executed even if the victim's family are unanimously opposed to that outcome. Also, although people denounce Saudi public executions as barbaric, I don't think private executions are any less barbaric than public ones. If anything, I think private executions are more barbaric, in that hiding what you are doing is a sign of a guilty conscience which knows it is really wrong. If voters can't stomach watching executions, they shouldn't be allowed to vote for them. (Saudis don't get to vote, at least not in any way that really counts–but it seems on this particular issue the Saudi government are doing the popular will–if you gave the Saudi people a free democratic vote on whether to retain the death penalty, I'm certain retention would win.)
rayiner 3y ago
Not in the way you probably think (like “V for Vendetta”). Dispensing justice is a core function of the state. The spectators are there to witness the punishment of people who are said to have transgressed against the group.

belter 3y ago

[flagged]

ignoramceisblis 3y ago
> exactly that type of society Every day, I'm impressed with how detached from reality people like you are. A society where public capital punishment is a weekly family event? I guess I missed that policy bullet point under "secure the border." Your absurd fear-mongering only produces more totalitarian outcomes for the US--due to justifications for totalitarian actions based on lies. If you seek the destruction of the US, as many do, that behavior would make sense. If you're a US citizen, you're creating your own hell.
- hotpotamus 3y ago
  It can't happen here.
- belter 3y ago
  A US president lost an election and tried to overthrow a democratic elected government, people died defending the rule of law. Is that what you call fear-mongering?
  - 1MachineElf 3y ago
    So instead of justifying your assertion that Trump voters want to make the USA exactly like Saudi Arabia, you changed the topic to a matter of election security. You haven't done much to assuage the parent comment's claim that these fears are delusional. Asking for an investigation to ensure the integrity of the election does not equal an overthrow of a democratically elected government. Don't think that your careful wording around "people died defending" helps conceal the reach you're making. ONE "defending" police officer died of a heart attack - no court of law would hold someone responsible for a death like that. The three other deaths were pro-Trump protesters fighting for a fair election. I watched members of a certain political party mock the deaths of Trump supporters while they happened live on January 6th - who was it you were saying wanted the US to be more like Saudi Arabia?

tj-teej 3y ago

FWIW in the American south it's common for Fraternities to hold BBQs and party outside of executions