Today I give the page to Veronica Sanchez Villamil, Philosophy of Law student who has obtained an honors degree course in the recently completed 2009-1010. I present (with his consent) his final work of Unit 2 of the subject on the Watchmen movie (based on the comic by Alan Moore). I hope you enjoy reading and it disagrees with their views (to feed an interesting debate). KEYBOARD
GUEST: VERONICA SANCHEZ VILLAMIL
The Culpeper Minute is the narrative strategy by which the director chose Watchmen film genre to transpose what the original comic are the memories of the first Nite Owl, Hollis Mason, published in 1975 under the title Under the Hood . The presenter of the show, John Culpeper, interview with author, Hollis Mason, who has the public profile of being the second of several masked heroes in the 40's, in the U.S., began a peculiar crusade against crime, each for different motivations, inspired by the story of Superman newborn. Mason, who was then part of the NYPD, he confesses in the interview that the Police Force and their "style of justice" at the time was not enough for him, so he trained his physical skills, he invented a costume, and began a parallel struggle. Obviously, the only difference between a way of fighting crime (the police) and the other (like masked hero) are the limits imposed by the rule of law. A Mason clearly troubled him those limits. It seemed that regardless of what that would ensure effective detracted from the system. So, a little rivalry, a little more conviction and for fun, decided to park to approach what he meant a more efficient protection of society.
If we focus on the plot, Mason's book hits the market at a time in which we might call the first batch of superheroes - the Minutemen, had retired a few years (except for The Comedian, who was still active), perhaps more, perhaps tired, but in any case, "overcome" by the appearance of a "superhuman," Dr. Manhattan, and because the social mass naive supported them in the beginning had begun to question them. Mason himself acknowledges how he influenced the time to "hang up the mask" the fact finding that some of his companions were "so depraved and crooked as the criminals they pursued, and even the showman impartial Culpeper, even states that Dr. Manhattan "afraid of not only our enemies but ourselves."
However, with the appearance on the 70 of "supervillains" high media profile, the presence of these characters by secret identity acting outside the law again be welcomed by American society. In fact, at the time of publication had already taken the generational-had begun the adventures of Watchmen, but there was still no Keene Act - by the senator of the same name intended to focus on "surveillance" again to be under the control of the state (of law). No However, it had created (or recreated) the right social climate for the rule: ask painted Who watches the watchers?, criminals who claim that at least they "give face" and the vox populi scared because in the search of this utopian more security really has only become more insecure.
Among the "watchdog" of this second generation that will suffer the Keene Act and whose story follows the plot of the movie is Rorschach, a character very different origins and history of Mason, but agrees with him in questioning the effectiveness the rule of law in the fight against crime ("evil" in his system absolute moral values). One author, Tony Spanakos, refers to when Rorschach meets Keene Act with a note in the body of a rapist who "leaves" at the entrance to a police station, which only says "never." In a word, according Spanakos, express their views on the state (1. Is permanently cracked, so you better "never" to "until a new president, 2. Falla in their ability to enforce the law, he is" doing their job "3. lacks the moral clarity necessary for trial and punishment, he kills the criminal, because it looks like a demon in nature, while the State believes in the possibility that violators be reformed).
Bridging the gap, these two characters, each in its own way, illustrate very well a tendency to overcome anything that cycle (as in the film itself) is crying out for more speedy and effective measures in the fight against crime (and protection society) even at the cost of guarantees in the use of coercion and sacrifice in the human rights of criminals (or those who appear as such). These "guidelines", in my view, is in two directions:
- On the society and their "voices" (journalists, politicians, etc ...), generally following particular crimes atrocious before which time (or not so) the state might be hindered to expunge responsibilities precisely by the need to hold on to some "limits."
- Originating in the state legislature itself, which sometimes takes "strategies" that clearly deviate from the traditional law (criminal, in this case) guarantor: criminalization of mere association activities, expansion of police powers , limits the right of defense, interference with the right to privacy of communications, easing the burden of proof, negotiation of penalties, repentant and informers impunity ... or, in some cases, directly to evade the law or abuse of law.
Throughout this paper I have tried to reflect and respond to if efficacy can be a pretext for the reduction of collateral, or whether, as concluded Watchmen, you have to fear the "watcher" at least as much as the criminal. To do this, I analyzed the positioning of the film on this subject, I have developed and exemplified the two lines that currently one can observe this trend (of opposing the guarantees of effectiveness), given above, and I surmised that the protective model is paramount, because the principles that underpin it are themselves the foundations of the rule of law, which would lose legitimacy if to keep we assume its negation. Furthermore, it is too simple and safe to assume that more power in the hands of those who protect us would make us feel safer. Del
"maybe I was wrong" Hollis Mason to "never" Rorschach.
Between the two "guards" of the two generations there are certainly many differences, even if they could agree on some point in their assessment of the ineffectiveness of the rule of law to combat crime. Hollis man is socially integrated, from a family of farmers in Montana, someone raised in a traditional manner, with a simple moral and pragmatic basis. Rorschach (Walter Kovacs), however, quite the opposite: a complex being, dark, haunted, apocalyptic ... Someone who grew up in a dysfunctional family, without affection, and with little education that is personalized stay in a juvenile facility. However, both suffer at first a transformation similar (though much more extreme the Kovacks). Hollis Mason begins militants in the ranks of the rule of law (as a member of the Police Force), but after a few years and due to events which discuss below, are beginning to believe that this "style of justice" is not enough for him . For its part, Rorschach, began his career as a masked simply collaborating with the State of law, putting the criminals at the disposal of its gears, until one day and decides to change the chip itself to do all the work is more effective and efficient. But there is a difference in their subsequent evolution, while Nite Owl seen how what looked good, useful, effective and can slip right into crimes as horrible as it is the fight in the name of justice, Rorschach is radicalized in its role as legislator, judge and executioner, and died as such, without a hint of self-criticism (in fact, caricatures of "colleagues" who play by the rules of the rule of law).
But let's start by Mason. The Culpeper Minute us ex - cop and ex - "vigilant" as a boy born and raised on a farm in Montana at age 12 moved with his family to New York. The clash of realities between the rural and the Big Apple experienced by his relatives is sent by his grandfather: "country people are healthier than the city, their way of life. They help each other. " In the city begins to live realities that hitherto were unknown, especially street crime. To all this must be added his love of pulp fiction novels, which he defines as a paradigm of "a system of absolute values, where it was not in doubt and ill deserved the punishment they deserved. " In 1938, the first issue of Superman left him "speechless." By this time he was a policeman, and in his own words, the vision of the superhero "introduced him to a new way to fight crime," an idea that is charged with reading in the press of the adventures of Hooded Justice, first of masked vigilantes who start the crusade against crime and then begin to proliferate and gain media coverage.
At this point you may have to ask (apart from the personal motivations of each one of the masked) by the ratio of initial sympathy for these "heroes" street, which at first simply seen as the "competence of the police," without much criticism. The news media how Hooded Justice had foiled a robbery attempt, or Silhouette uncovered the corrupt business of an editor who worked with child pornography (and given a brutal beating him and the two chambers) normally think they could not have resulted especially repugnant in the eyes of the public because, like Superman interventions refer to criminals in the act. That is, minimizing the negative effects of a power acting without any guarantees of rights or without control, by the immediacy of the crime that was perpetrated it more difficult but not impossible, the commission of "errors" ("in what is (or appears to be) clear, we should not interpret.")
The first reactions of the citizens of New York emphasize the legitimizing aspect of efficiency. Comments like: "The problem is a bit of the Police Department. If you copy a bit what they do not need these masked heroes heroes "or" I do not care who comes to save his skin, a masked or a cop, someone always comes when I ask for help "appear to be on that line. Not scary, in principle that exercise of power is not regulated.
back to Hollis, he attributes the beginning of his double life to "amused him was the right thing and enjoyed as a dwarf." Statements like this have led some authors among those who have analyzed from a philosophical perspective to consider the comic first Nite Owl as someone without ideology, without great moral ideas but possessing a basic sense of decency, which I'm not sure that we can understand, if not as "common sense." Your Kiosquero in fiction apparent effect on that idea, saying it "is a cop, he knows right from wrong, these rolls are not intellectuals, is a great man." So, apart from other characters "guards" are built by their creators from any ethical point of view, with the aim to make sense of moral criticism of those positions (ethics, utilitarianism), Mason is an exponent of rational common sense and basic, based on family education received, that sometimes the experience necessary to revise its assumptions. Perhaps it would fit - as stated Mark D. White for the second owl, in the Aristotelian virtue ethics, one that is the right approach in the 'golden mean "(virtue) between two extremes (vices). It could, in response aspects such as catching criminals courage - but it deflates with women, or their ability to see evil as a director who works with child pornography on his partner Edward Blake. However, we have little information about its actions to value.
Mason sees himself as someone who does the right thing (and, in a way his teammates again, "we made too many good things in our community as we simply ignored), but it is also the first to notice the excesses that were committed in the name of justice, or the amorality of some of his "colleagues" (The Comedian), aspects both to report on their memories and somehow motivate annulled. As Culpeper question, "Mason does not regret what he has done, but is sufficient justification for his own moral code put on a mask and start handing out justice?". In any case, compared to the infantile (and even indecent) from its beginnings in the work of "vigilance" Hollis Mason is an example of great clarity of ideas with its withdrawal. First, is able to realize the contradiction of the appearance of Dr. Manhattan: The existence of a being with superhuman powers working for the government, which viewed from the ethics of "supervisor" should be panacea in the fight against crime (so to ideas such as the war becomes obsolete), but really scary (a terrible fear, an insecurity that got you to the bone). Ie "scared" power without control. Second, realize that some acts of "vigilantes" are so depraved and twisted as the criminals they pursue. In a sense is giving input to the concept of "lack of legitimacy."
On the other side we have Rorschach, who will also start doing a bit of history, insofar as relevant to the topic. We are introduced to Walter Kovacs as the son of a prostitute who grew up without father affection. At age 10, hit a few schoolmates, leading to placement in a juvenile facility where he received some education and further develops hatred for her mother and some idealization of the absent parent (and through it, of which he believed to have views towards Truman). When he comes out and starts working as a tailor in a clothing store something happens that is decisive in his decision to become "masked vigilante" murder of an Italian woman who had much to do with irresponsibility (lack of implication) its neighbors. Following this event, Kovacs begins to radicalize their social theories, based on the disappointment that the selfishness reports inherent in those neighbors, which extends to the whole society. Repugnant the crime but also the social response to it. So begins his adventures, covered with a mask of a special material designed by Dr. Manhattan and closely linked to two aspects: the murder of the woman and its system of absolute morality of ends (good and evil, black and white as staining of Rorschach test.) As the definition of "superhero" of Coogan, in this case also is closely linked to disguise their motives and secret identity. In fact, Rorschach makes us think in a kind of Batman led to extremes of psychopathy (both growing up without parents, both begin with "it" by his revulsion at what the crime, both act outside the rule of law because it "does not work", and both fiction choose an identity linked to the triggering event of its "mission"). However, although research skills and struggle slightly developed, Rorschach does not have "super powers" or the "super technology" of Batman.
At first, it conforms to cooperate with law enforcement, but because of another case involving (a pederast who kidnaps a girl, sexually assaulted, the killer and finally gives it to feed their dogs) , adjust your attitude. Realize the value gap in which humanity finds itself, where the only good and evil is only that he is drawn, and on that basis, begins to concentrate in their hands legislation, trial and execution. Never again will rely on the State for these jobs, and their response to the Keene Act already know (and its triple meaning). Unlike Mason, never saw the "risks" that this entailed, and his line of criticism of the "colleagues" is the opposite: Those who have accepted the Keene Act have turned their backs on their "mission" have "sold ".
The Rorschach philosophical positions have been analyzed from many points of view, not all relevant to the topic of this work. It is, without doubt, the character that has generated more comments, and then highlight some of these positions:
- For Jacob M. Held Rorschach exemplifies the retributive theory of punishment, according to which wrongdoers must be punished just because they have done wrong. The retributivist gives each one his own. The blame for the evil done to be punished with another evil of the same dimensions (proportionality), no more reason to do justice. Disappear all purposes of the penalty or punishment (or rehabilitation or re-socialization, and general prevention and special prevention). Even the protection of society should guide the punishment of the guilty. The consequentialist retributivism is not (not justified by their results), but lies rather in a Kantian deontologism. The criminal has to be taken as an end in itself, and never as a means (as someone with dignity that deserves respect.) The punishment is to protect and play a moral order (the Rorschach, since the incident with the pederast), because "this world drifts is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills children, nor is the destiny which the shreds, and the chance he fed the dogs. Us. Just us. " (...) Then I was reborn, free to scribble on the design blank canvas, on moral questions, is this world. Was Rorschach. "
Obviously the state is not retributive. State criminal law has other guidelines and principles, among them the rehabilitation and resocialization of the offender (which has been defined as the surest way of obtaining social peace), and general and special prevention. Retributive purposes of punishment and English systems do not exist (and this is something that everyone happy, as does a Rorschach).
The main criticism against retributivism focus on "implementation problem": How do we determine what is worth each? Who determines the just punishment? Who determines what moral values \u200b\u200bshould be affirmed and how? Moreover, as happens to Rorschach, moral arrogance can make it out of hand, so I really do need a system of checks (the rule of law must necessarily possess healthy). More or less successfully, a weak rule of law itself provides no answer to these questions. Obviously, if the state is weak or corrupt, as with the Gotham City of Batman, or Mexico or Colombia - and the control mechanisms do not work, it perverts the argument.
- J. Robert Loftis brings to Rorschach analysis deontologism often used to rationalize their actions, but really it does is distort it to "justify" their fascist brutality. For the purposes deontologism never justify the means, people should never be taken as a means but an end. Actions are neither good nor bad in themselves, but it all depends on the goodwill of the acting. That is the only asset: the will to do good.
But all that degenerates in the case of Kovacs in a "dichotomous thinking" that leads him to ignore the intrinsic value of persons (or is it good or is bad, and if evil must be punished, without nuance ... or respect for human dignity or the right of defense, or any other law). Ie: you have to run whom he considered not to warrant further in the census of the living, without defense or argument. The truth is that it looks a lot like totalitarianism (where the state can do everything without leaving any free space on your power to the people, ie where there are no human rights). As Loftis says the real reason is not really a Rorschach deontologist is that it fails to show no respect for people (the second formulation of Kant's Categorical Imperative: Act in a way that you treat humanity as you like be addressed to you, always as an end and never as a mere means). So respect for the criminal and procedural safeguards to directly affect the dignity and respect the person of the criminal brings us closer to the ideal of conduct.
"plates against masks": Are the "vigilantes" more effective than the police? In the Watchmen universe
the presence of the masked vigilante and fight crime virtually unregulated eventually become redundant in the United States police. This, the threat to their existence by "unfair competition", calls a strike in 1977, whose slogan is "plate, no masks," which is harshly suppressed by the very "vigilant" and ends with the Keene Act, which we know, they are forced to sign, retire or work for the government.
But why are so "effective" the "vigilantes"? Only stop in the investigation of the death of Edward Blake, the Comedian, Rorschach noticed how just a few hours beyond what the police never will. Clearly, neither Rorschach or any of the masked men need a warrant to search a house, and well, if you know what you think Kovacks of torture ("Give me the little finger of the hand of a man and I will get information. The computer itself is something unnecessary), we can imagine the respect we deserve illegal detentions, secret communications, the right to lawyer or a trial with all guarantees. Apart from appreciating the many contradictions of character in fiction (sometimes the end justifies the means, but sometimes it does) it seems that every time we go deeper into the path of fascism but it is not (although in part) object of this work, it is questionable whether a company is really more secure as well.
Well, the conclusion is that Watchmen. History is full of key claim to that effect from beginning to end, that also neatly sums up the main lines of criticism developed by the doctrine
- The use of the quotation from Juvenal's Satire VI - Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? - as a reaction and response of American society to fear and distrust that generate the masked vigilante.
- The suggestion of a possible opposite of its intended effect (increase or greater atrocity of the crimes.) It is the "supervillain" Moloch who brings this argument because of the appearance of Dr. Manhattan and the possible further impact on crime: "When you live in a world with figures of authority of a superhuman nature have to rebel to a higher level go further. (...) The world needs balance. The enemy of Dr. Manhattan will come soon. "
- Possible "perversion" or "diversion" in the behavior of "vigilantes", perfectly exemplified by comedian or Rorschach.
- Insecurity and fear of the unchecked power or control.
And yes, Watchmen might be an accurate portrayal (though not longer an opinion.) Forgetting the presence of heroes acting outside the rules and imagining a State which attempts to give greater weight to the protection of social peace allowing you exceed a certain limit or sometimes lack of controls (in full or selective) could be that if we got the opposite effect (in fact, we have the actual example of the totalitarian states). Notes
Luigi Ferrajoli that " irreplaceable power law is neither to brute force or military force, as manifested in the torture or war. It lies, rather, in the asymmetry between law and crime, among institutional response and terrorism. Only this asymmetry, in fact, is able to delegitimize terrorism as a crime, politically neutralize, isolate and weaken it socially or morally. " Conversely, when institutions go down to the level of crime which the State is softened.
Bridging the gap, the "real world."
do not know if it is only my impression, but even Watchmen date 1985, the debate that was neither then nor is obsolete now. Cyclically, and to some bitter criminal problems (such as terrorism in Spain), organized crime or some point exceptionally heinous crimes before the law appears limited display of accountability (if Marta del Castillo, for example), apparently because of the need to be subject to certain limits in order to guarantee certain constitutionally recognized rights, resurfacing the "voices" critical to the Guarantor in favor of "efficiency" in the fight against crime. The penal law guarantees are viewed as facilitators of the impunity of criminals and some are calling for more forceful on several fronts, such as hardening penalties, the reintroduction of retributive purposes of punishment, or selective admission (in the most serious cases or repugnant to society) of the decline in criminal and procedural guarantees (which is already more disturbing). Since journalists who argue that the High Court to be "understanding" with the terrorists, to overturn the law as applied throughout the "effective work" of the security forces who arrested them, citizens who hold that the police should have actually "sing" to the alleged murderers of Marta del Castillo, or the lack of condemnation from society to the torture of Islamic terrorists at Guantanamo.
started indicating that they are cyclical because, as happens in the film, are due to circumstantial situations, ideological, etc ... and also like in the film, are offset by opposite tension: critical reactions to any advancement of the State involving the denial of guarantees (to cite one example, the frequent allegations of Amnesty International, but have little or no weight).
But these trends have also been found depth in some sense in their own state legislature, which sometimes takes "strategies" that clearly deviate from the traditional law (criminal, in this case) guarantor: criminalization crimes of mere association activities (citing as an example in this regard Luis Andrés Rodríguez Vélez Article 340 of the Colombian Penal Code: "Where two or more persons conspire to commit crimes, each of them shall be punished for that act alone, with imprisonment of three to six years "), extension of police powers and limitations on the rights of defense (the presumption of veracity of allegations of agents), interference with the right to privacy of communications (interception of communications with lawyers), easing the burden of proof, negotiation of penalties (conciliation in criminal matters, statements of compliance); impunity regrets and informers (drug traffickers in Spain) ... or the "principle of opportunity", in some cases directly with law fraud or abuse of law. For example, include the matter of the latter, the claim of the principle of opportunity for Colombian prosecutors for not investigating the killings perpetrated by the rebel "Red", who murdered his boss, Ivan Rios in March 2008, reaching cutting off a hand to prove their identity to the Colombian government, which was promising to deliver you a reward millionaire. Notes
Ferrajoli such a thing is a contradiction in itself. If the repression and punishment of criminals is intended to protect and play a moral order which is the rule of law, then "(...) the breaking of the rules of the game is called (...) for enforcing the same rules game, the rule of law is defended by its denial. " Conclusions
At this point it is perfectly consistent to argue that the lesson of Watchmen in this issue is that, unable to balance a priori which produces more uncertainty (and correspondingly fear), it makes sense to try to minimize the potential abuse or irreparable damage to persons innocent who can be expected beforehand, ie, those who could commit the State in the interest of efficiency in the fight against crime without collateral. Preprint
A second could be that the removal of safeguards in the protection of the rights most directly linked to human dignity and respect need not necessarily lead to greater efficiency (quite the contrary), as a rule of law that it discredits weakens. If we understand that the rule of law is the embodiment of the system of values \u200b\u200bthat we want them to apply as individuals, we can not defend its denial.
In any case, any opinion will depend largely on the personal vision that each has of the state: bureaucratic machine, slow, corrupt and insensitive, or supervisor efficient, based on a system of checks and balance are controlled, and respect for human rights. Of course, how strong or weak it is every rule of law on each territory, which is largely subject to the legitimacy that is sustained or lost. BIBLIOGRAPHY
Coogan, Peter. The definition of the Superhero.
Ferrajoli, Luigi, law and reason, Madrid, Trotta, 2001. [809 to 820]
Ferrajoli, Luigi. Combating torture: a battle of reason. Speech at the Center for Contemporary Culture in Barcelona presentation del trabajo de investigación: La tortura y otras formas de violencia institucional en el Estado Español (05/02/09).
Held, Jacob M., Can we steer this rudderless world? Kant, Rorschach, retributivism and honor. En: Mark D. White (Ed.), Watchmen and Philosophy. A Rorschach test,
Hoboken, New Jersey, John Wiley & sons, Inc, 2009 [19 – 31].
Loftis, J. Robert, Means, ends, and the critique of pure superheros. En: Mark D.
White (Ed.), Watchmen and Philosophy. A Rorschach test, Hoboken, New Jersey, John Wiley & sons, Inc, 2009 [63 – 77].
Spanakos, Tony, Super-Vigilantes and the Keene Act. En: Mark D. White (Ed.), Watchmen and Philosophy. A Rorschach test, Hoboken, New Jersey, John Wiley & Sons, Inc, 2009 [33 - 46].
Vélez Rodríguez, Luis Andrés. "The fight against organized crime as a dilemma for the rule of law. Approaching an alternative. " Legal Review. N º 5-2. July 2008. [89 to 108].
White, Mark. D., The Virtues of nite owl potbelly. In: Mark D. White (Ed.), Watchmen and Philosophy. A Rorschach test, Hoboken, New Jersey, John Wiley & Sons, Inc, 2009 [79 - 90].
0 comments:
Post a Comment