hanging saddam

[arguchik]

cnn has a little video on its website today, in which a female reporter interviews people on the street to see if: a) they watched the video, apparently shot with a cell phone, of saddam hussein's death by hanging; and b) if so, if they felt guilty about it. several people said they wouldn't watch it because people shouldn't be watching it; the moment of death is private and should be treated with respect. several others said, "hell yeah i watched, and the bastard got what he deserved." i could envision them cheering while the blue flickering light of the computer screen washed across their faces. a few said, "yes, i watched. i didn't expect to feel guilty or uneasy about it, but i really did." one woman said watching it has made her re-think her pro-death penalty stance.

i don't know how i feel about it. i will say that i haven't watched the video. i was not surprised to see it circulating, but i haven't looked at it and i don't intend to. i watched the "official" video of the moments leading up to the execution, in which the hangmen put a noose around saddam hussein's neck--that upset me enough, and i am already queasy about the death penalty, without watching a hanging. i think watching the "unofficial" video probably would make me feel guilty, or at least a species of guilt. part of me thinks videos like this should not ever be available--it basically reinstates public executions. another part of me thinks...well, if seeing video like that can make people re-think a pro-death penalty stance, then maybe it's worth it. people should see the uncomfortable, unpleasant, but factual truth about things that are basically being done in their names. but then i see the cheerleaders, and how the public spectacle of a death like saddam's feeds bloodlust and warmongering.

my gut feeling is that the video shouldn't be shown--and that it shouldn't have been filmed to begin with. but maybe that's just because i don't want to see it. as with most things, public ethics is a complex, sticky business, and response is so varied that it can't really serve as a basis for an ethic anyway. so what are we left with?

i'm feeling rather down today. still working for the union, doing nothing but research this week, and it's got me feeling very isolated, socially. the new quarter started yesterday, and i'm not on campus.

i really miss teaching.

P.S. (added later) in other news, the only (known) remaining copy of steve irwin's death from a stingray barb has been handed over to his widow, thereby "ensuring the gruesome footage will never make it onto YouTube." (citing this article.) the coincidence of these stories is fascinating.

P.P.S. i just got an email notifying me that sandra gilbert (of madwoman in the attic fame, along with susan gubar) is coming to seattle to talk about her new book, death's door: modern dying and the ways we grieve.)

Comments

[wondrousbeauty.livejournal.com]

Check this out.

[arguchik.livejournal.com]

oh my god...

[ms-violet.livejournal.com]

Thank you for the food for thought.

[arguchik.livejournal.com]

i am a morbid girl, sometimes...

[alice-at-night.livejournal.com]

Have you thought about how much it's the MEANS (hanging) that is distrurbing you/others? That watching someone be killed in a less vicious manner would be easier to stomach? Like, dunno, sleeping pill overdose or leathal injection or something gentler (if you can term a death mechanism "gentle").

This conversation before has led to a nice circular argument that State killing should be physically vile. Because gentle killings are easier to accept. And an easier to accept killing is morally vile . . but I'm not up to playing the D.A. just now.

[arguchik.livejournal.com]

that's an interesting question. sure, my squeamishness about watching the saddam hanging video is somewhat related to the method used (i don't particularly want to see someone's neck broken--i wouldn't want to watch that happen in a horseriding accident, or a diving accident, either), but it's not limited to that. see the bit in my post about how i think it's actually necessary for people to see uncomfortable things that are being done in their names--i include watching animals slaughtered for consumption, here, along with battlefront pictures and executions. but the complexity of the question emerges when i think about how watching stuff like that can actually feed bloodlust and warmongering. adding further to that complexity is the propensity for witnesses to yell taunts and jeers at the person being executed. taking everything into account, public executions amount to cruel and unusual punishment for the executee, in my opinion.

on the other hand, if there are going to be executions at all, people should see it, should witness the act of their representatives in the state killing another human being. and really, is any method of execution less violent than any other? they all amount to the same thing, so the question of what method to use comes down to the question of which matters more: the experience of the person being executed, or the experience of those witnessing the execution. fyi, the last public execution in the u.s. was in 1936. i believe it was outlawed as "cruel and unusual," but that probably had more to do with the squeamishness of people watching than with any concern about the condemned person's experience.

from what i've read, autopsies of execution victims suggests that the guillotine is the most "humane" form of execution in terms of the condemned's experience. it's quick and pretty much foolproof. hanging is close. not so foolproof (it can and does go horribly wrong), but when done "correctly" so that the neck snaps at around the C1-C3 vertebrae, it's very quick (death is still usually by asphyxiation, though). interestingly, the states of washington and new hampshire still use gallows for some executions (it's up to the condemned person to choose)--in washington, most recently in the mid-1990's, i believe. the most recent hanging execution in the u.s. was in delaware in 1996, though delaware also stopped using the gallows that year.

the so-called "modern" (sanitized) mode of execution by lethal injection is easier to watch, certainly, because the victim is given both a sedative and a paralytic. but chemical death is not as quick, and probably not as painless, and the jury is out on how well the sedative works. don't even get me started on the gas chamber or the electric chair--just check out what happened to ethel rosenberg when she was electrocuted. there are more recent examples of botched electrocutions, too.

[alice-at-night.livejournal.com]

No sure I get your point exactly: I gather you object to capital punishment.

(random aside: as a child I kept confusing the term capital punishment with corporal punishment. anyway . . .)

Or is it only "cruel & unusual" capital punishment? Or is it is MORE to c&u than gentler? And this is stemming from empathy with the victim? Or because it perpetuates blood-lust and general bad behaviors in the spectators? Both? Or do you object to c&u primarily because it is against the law (I don't think that is you, but I've heard it argued that way before) ?

In centuries past, hangings were a festival affair. And sometimes intentionally botched to prolong viewers enjoyment (I guess) (actually, I understand there were financial incentives for the executioner - he'd take payoffs to make the death quicker).

I remember press from the last hanging in Delaware - at least it was somber. Still leaves open the question of is somber better than festive? is gentle better than disturbing? . . .

I'm a believer we can come up with a "humane" killing mechanism. The question remains: should we? And executions could be private: should they be? What are the conditions that state killing is acceptable - and if it is NOT acceptable - well, why not?

[arguchik.livejournal.com]

again, a very interesting question. i am opposed to the death penalty, period. i think it's cruel and unusual at base, no matter the method. given that it's going to happen for the foreseeable future (because it's currently the legally sanctioned and usual practice in many states), i am torn as to whether it should be public or not. on the one hand, i think public executions violate the "cruel and unusual" standard more than private executions do; on the other hand, i think it's important for people to see what is being done in their name. generally speaking, i favor open and full disclosure of facts and information. this issue is tricky because that disclosure infringes on the right of a condemned person to die with dignity. (i know all of the arguments about this--that the person's victims didn't die with dignity, etc. nevertheless, if saddam hussein's crime was to kill massive numbers of people summarily and without dignity, is it any better or different or more just for the state that replaced his administration to perpetrate the same kind of death on him? this is not a rhetorical question. i'm asking it in earnest, because i think it's an important issue for discussion.)

as to why i'm opposed to the death penalty, that is a more complex question. in a nutshell: it is unevenly applied in a racist and classist manner; it is cruel and unusual at base; it is irreversible, and the criminal justice system in the u.s. is far from infallible in determining guilt or innocence; i am uncomfortable with the state killing a person who has been rendered physically helpless, defenseless; i fail to see the advantage of execution over life imprisonment; and i think the practice perpetuates an "othering" of violent criminals that is deeply problematic. sometime i'll post a longer and more detailed explanation of my thoughts on this--the problem is, it dovetails with my academic interests in scientific conceptions of the body and what michel foucault calls biopower (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biopower), so such a post is likely to get very long, and the language is likely to tip over into academy-ese (um...i mean it will probably sound pedantic).

just to be clear: i am in favor of assisted suicide for people who choose that over suffering excruciatingly painful, debilitating, fatal illnesses. i see that as very different because it's consensual.