The Death Penalty Justice Or Revenge

This volume consists of papers and interviews which attempt to shed a strong light on the ethical problems that the death penalty presents, to put a finger on what constitutes the core problem of this punishment, and to show where humanity stands in this respect in the first quarter of the 21 st century. Its contributors are Robert (Renny) Cushing, Michele Duvivier Pierre-Louis, Tsakhia Elbegdorj, Gilbert (Gill) Garcetti, Hanne Sophie Greve, Phillip F. Iya, Sylvie Zainabo Kayitesi, Ioanna Kucuradi (ed.), Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, Joaquin Jos'e Martínez, Federico Mayor, Ibrahim Najjar, Rajiv Narayan, Navanethem (Navi) Pillay, Bill Richardson, Jos'e Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, Horacio Verbitsky and Asunta Vivo.

A professor of social psychology explores the history of execution in America, weighing its social costs, discussing its potential benefits and problems, and building a new model for understanding the politics behind the death penalty.

"Justice for Deborah Thornton is complete, " Richard Thornton said after the execution of her killer, Karla Faye Tucker, in Texas. "I want to say to every victim in the world, demand this." But which form of justice is this victim demanding-retribution or restoration? Taking seriously the claims of death penalty supporters, Lloyd Steffen constructs a theory of just execution. For every acknowledged killer on death row there are dozens who maintain their innocence. Supporters of the death penalty -- along with its opponents -- must demand fairness so that innocent persons are not subjected to the terror of an unjust execution. Reminding us that Jesus likewise faced the terror of unjust execution, Steffen asks Christians to reacquaint themselves with the symbol of the cross as an instrument of state terror rather than a divine decoration.

America is driven by vengeance in Terry Aladjem's provocative account - a reactive, public anger that is a threat to democratic justice itself. From the return of the death penalty to the wars on terror and in Iraq, Americans demand retribution and moral certainty; they assert the 'rights of victims' and make pronouncements against 'evil'. Yet for Aladjem this dangerously authoritarian turn has its origins in the tradition of liberal justice itself - in theories of punishment that justify inflicting pain and in the punitive practices that result. Exploring vengeance as the defining problem of our time, Aladjem returns to the theories of Locke, Hegel and Mill. He engages the ancient Greeks, Nietzsche, Paine and Foucault to challenge liberal assumptions about punishment. He interrogates American law, capital punishment and images of justice in the media. He envisions a democratic justice that is better able to contain its vengeance.

America is driven by vengeance in Terry Aladjem's provocative account – a reactive, public anger that is a threat to democratic justice itself. From the return of the death penalty to the wars on terror and in Iraq, Americans demand retribution and moral certainty; they assert the 'rights of victims' and make pronouncements against 'evil'. Yet for Aladjem this dangerously authoritarian turn has its origins in the tradition of liberal justice itself – in theories of punishment that justify inflicting pain and in the punitive practices that result. Exploring vengeance as the defining problem of our time, Aladjem returns to the theories of Locke, Hegel and Mill. He engages the ancient Greeks, Nietzsche, Paine and Foucault to challenge liberal assumptions about punishment. He interrogates American law, capital punishment and images of justice in the media. He envisions a democratic justice that is better able to contain its vengeance.

From 1965 until 1980, there was a virtual moratorium on executions for capital offenses in the United States. This was due primarily to protracted legal proceedings challenging the death penalty on constitutional grounds. After much Sturm und Drang, the Supreme Court of the United States, by a divided vote, finally decided that "the death penalty does not invariably violate the Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause of the Eighth Amendment." The Court's decisions, however, do not moot the controversy about the death penalty or render this excellent book irrelevant. The ball is now in the court of the Legislature and the Executive. Leg islatures, federal and state, can impose or abolish the death penalty, within the guidelines prescribed by the Supreme Court. A Chief Executive can commute a death sentence. And even the Supreme Court can change its mind, as it has done on many occasions and did, with respect to various aspects of the death penalty itself, durlog the moratorium period. Also, the people can change their minds. Some time ago, a majority, according to reliable polls, favored abolition. Today, a substantial majority favors imposition of the death penalty. The pendulum can swing again, as it has done in the past.