National Moratorium on Prison Construction 3106 Mt. Pleasant Sr., N.W. Washington, DC 20010 Our country's present policies of crime control have resulted in the most massive wave of prison and jail construction in the world's history. Ironically, the use of prisons rather than community resolution of the underlying problems seems only to generate more crime. But the crime control industry is now a multi-billion dollar growth industry employing over a million persons in 50,000 agencies. These folks at NMPC have put together some meaningful policies to reduce dependence on prisons, and provide an additional point of leverage to help turn around another messed-up institution where we've take n the path that's easiest in the short term but a total failure in larger perspective. -TB Stone walls do not a prison make Nor iron bars a cage; Minds innocent and quiet take that for a hermitage; If I have freedom in my love, And in my soul am free, Angels alone that soar above Enjoy such liberty. -Ricbard Loaelace August/September 1977 RAIN page 15 Prisoners of Liberation, Allyn and Adele Rickett, 197 3, 92.5O fromt Anchor Press 501 Franklin Ave. Garden Ciry, NY 11530 This is the best other resource we've found on rethinking our penal system, Written by confessed American spies who spent tirne in Chinese prisons during the Korean War, it's a fascinating account of the criticism/self-criticism process used by the Chinese, the taking of responsibility by communities to reeducate and make criminals aware of the effects of their actions and the real catharsis that comes out of rcleasing and dealing rvith the motions and situations involved. -TB It_is often said that possessions are important because they enable the possessors thereby to enrich and enhance their personalities and characters.'Ihe claim is that by means of ownership the porvers of self-dire ction and self-control inherent in personality become real. Property, they say, gives stability, security, independence, a real place in the larger life of the community, a feeling of responsibility, all of which are elements of vigorous personality. Nevertheless, the greatest characters, those who have influenced the largest numbers of pe ople for the longest time, have been people with extremely few possessions. The reason for this is some thing that we usually fail to realize, namely that the essence of personality does not lie in its isolated individuality, its separateness from other people, its uniquencss, but in its basis of relationships with other personalitiei. It is a capacity for friendship, for fellowship, for intercourse, for entering imaginatively into the lives of orhers. At its height it is a capacity for and exercise of love. Friendship and love do not require ownership of property for either their ordinary or their finest expressions. Creativeness does not depend on possession. Intangible relationships are more important to the individual and to society than property is. It is true thar a certain kind of pleasure and satisfaction come from acquiring mastery over material things, but that sort of power and that sort of satisfaction are not so secure, so permanent, so deep, so charactcristic of mental and moral maturity as are some others. 'lhe mosl permanent, most se cure and most satisfying sort of possession of things orher than the materials needed - for bodily life , lies not in physical control and power of exclusion but in intellectual, cmotional and spiritual understanding and appreciation. 1'his is especially clcar in regard to beauty. . . . . . .'lhe most beeutiful and restful room I ever entered was in a Japanese country inn, without any furniture of pictures or applied ornamenrs. Its beauty lay in its wonderful proportions and the soft colors of unpainted wood beams, paper walls and straw matting. There can be beauty in complexity but complexity is not rhe essence of beauty. Harmony of line , proportion and color are much more important. In a sense , simplicity is an important element in all great arr, for it means the rcmoval of all dctails that are irrelevant to a givcn purpose. lt is one of the arts within thc great art of life. And perhaps the mind can be guided best if its acriviries are always kept organically related ro rhe most important purposes in lifc. . . . There is one further value ro simplicity. It may be regarded as a mode of psychological hygiene. Jusr as earing too rrnrch is harmful to the body, even though the quality ofihe food eaten is excellent, so it seems that there may be a limit to the number of things or the amount of property which a person may own and yet keep himself psychologically healthy. fhe possession of many things and of great wealth creares so many possible choices and decisions to be made every day that it becomes a nervous strain. One effect of this upon ihe will, and hence. upon success in life, was deftly statid by Confucius, "Here is a man whose desires are few. In som" ihing, he will not be able ro mainrain his resolution but tliey will be few. "Here is a.man whose desires are many. In some things he will be able to mainrain his resolution but thev wi-ll be few." If a.person lives among great possessions, they constltute an environment which influences him. His scnsiiiveness to certain important human relations is apt to become clogged and dulled, hisimagination in regard to the subtle but iilportant elements of pe rsonal relationship or in regard to lives in circumstanccs less fortunate than hii own is apt to become less active and less keen. This is not always the result, but the exception is rare. When enlarged to inter-group relationships, this tends to creare social misunderstandings and friction. ' The athlete, in order to win his contest, strips off the nonessentials of clothing, is careful of what hc earj, simplifies his life in a number of ways. Great achievemenrs of the mind, of the imagination, and of the will also requirc similar discriminations and disciplines. If simplicity of living is a valid principle, there is one important precaution and condition of its application. I can explain it best by somerhing which Mahatma Gandhi said to me. We were talking about simple living and I said that it was easy_for me to give up most things but that I had a greedy mind and wanted to keep my many 6ooks. He said, ,,Tlien don't give them up. As long as you derive inner help and comfort from anything, you should keep it. If you were to give it up in a mood of self-sacrifice or out of a stern sense of duty, you would continue ro wanr it back, and that unsatiified want would make trouble for you. Only give up a rhing when you want some other condition so much that the thing no longer has any attraction for you, or when it seems to-interfere with that which is more greatly desired."
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NTc4NTAz