|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On June 25 2026 01:50 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2026 00:17 LightSpectra wrote: Speaking of owning the libs. Camp Mystic, the Texas nondenominational Christian summer camp where 28 people died in a flood last year because Kerr County Republicans declined an updated flood warning & monitoring system paid for by the Democrat-passed American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, just filed for bankruptcy. They reportedly already had kids enrolled for a program this year. Obviously people enrolled their children there, because that is the safest place to put your children. It is statistically extremely unlikely that a bunch of children would drown there in two subsequent years. That... doesn't hold up to actual probability theory. Unless the flood caused them to change things (like move their campsite to somewhere less likely to flood), the chance of it flooding again this year is exactly as high as it flooding last year.
This is what causes people to build their homes near rivers with the excuse that the "once in a generation" flood happened two years ago, so that means they're safe for a generation...
|
On June 25 2026 01:56 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2026 01:50 Simberto wrote:On June 25 2026 00:17 LightSpectra wrote: Speaking of owning the libs. Camp Mystic, the Texas nondenominational Christian summer camp where 28 people died in a flood last year because Kerr County Republicans declined an updated flood warning & monitoring system paid for by the Democrat-passed American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, just filed for bankruptcy. They reportedly already had kids enrolled for a program this year. Obviously people enrolled their children there, because that is the safest place to put your children. It is statistically extremely unlikely that a bunch of children would drown there in two subsequent years. That... doesn't hold up to actual probability theory. Unless the flood caused them to change things (like move their campsite to somewhere less likely to flood), the chance of it flooding again this year is exactly as high as it flooding last year. This is what causes people to build their homes near rivers with the excuse that the "once in a generation" flood happened two years ago, so that means they're safe for a generation...
I think that was the joke.
Tbh I don't think I know many people who would send their kids to a camp where a bunch of children died recently, regardless of how those kids died and how present the danger remains. Especially considering they're spiritual folk, that's gotta put a figurative wet blanket over the energy of the camp.
It's like murder taking place in a house lowering its property value.
|
Democrat's chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus lost their primary to democratic socialist Darializa Avila Chevalier.
Mamdani cast Avila Chevalier as the future of the Democratic Party, saying as he announced his endorsement on MS NOW that she will be “on the front lines” of showing that Democrats “have to be fighting for a vision that reckons with the fact that working people were not left behind just four years ago or 16 years ago. They were left behind a long time before that.”
“And it will take a new generation of leadership to ensure that the heartbeat of this party is once again the struggles of the working class,” Mamdani said.
Avila Chevalier is also a vocal critic of Israel, calling its war against Hamas in Gaza a genocide. A Columbia University alumna, she participated in the pro-Palestinian protests at the university and was present during last year’s standoff with police at Hamilton Hall, which she described as “quite horrific.” She also attended a controversial pro-Palestinian rally the day after Hamas’ 2023 attacks in Israel — an event that Brad Lander, the former city comptroller also sporting Mamdani’s endorsement in his congressional bid, condemned.
Avila Chevalier has voiced support for legislation to block certain arms sales to Israel, also known as the “Block the Bombs” bill. She has also called for abolishing ICE, “Medicare for All” and national tenant protections.
www.nbcnews.com
That seems like a reasonably significant development regarding US politics?
|
On June 25 2026 01:56 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2026 01:50 Simberto wrote:On June 25 2026 00:17 LightSpectra wrote: Speaking of owning the libs. Camp Mystic, the Texas nondenominational Christian summer camp where 28 people died in a flood last year because Kerr County Republicans declined an updated flood warning & monitoring system paid for by the Democrat-passed American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, just filed for bankruptcy. They reportedly already had kids enrolled for a program this year. Obviously people enrolled their children there, because that is the safest place to put your children. It is statistically extremely unlikely that a bunch of children would drown there in two subsequent years. That... doesn't hold up to actual probability theory. Unless the flood caused them to change things (like move their campsite to somewhere less likely to flood), the chance of it flooding again this year is exactly as high as it flooding last year. This is what causes people to build their homes near rivers with the excuse that the "once in a generation" flood happened two years ago, so that means they're safe for a generation... Agreed. I assumed that Simberto was being sarcastic, since obviously thoughts and prayers and partisan stubbornness are all notoriously terrible at accomplishing anything.
Also, there is a special type of irony attached to a Christian camp being unprepared for a devastating flood.
|
On June 25 2026 02:04 Fleetfeet wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2026 01:56 Acrofales wrote:On June 25 2026 01:50 Simberto wrote:On June 25 2026 00:17 LightSpectra wrote: Speaking of owning the libs. Camp Mystic, the Texas nondenominational Christian summer camp where 28 people died in a flood last year because Kerr County Republicans declined an updated flood warning & monitoring system paid for by the Democrat-passed American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, just filed for bankruptcy. They reportedly already had kids enrolled for a program this year. Obviously people enrolled their children there, because that is the safest place to put your children. It is statistically extremely unlikely that a bunch of children would drown there in two subsequent years. That... doesn't hold up to actual probability theory. Unless the flood caused them to change things (like move their campsite to somewhere less likely to flood), the chance of it flooding again this year is exactly as high as it flooding last year. This is what causes people to build their homes near rivers with the excuse that the "once in a generation" flood happened two years ago, so that means they're safe for a generation... I think that was the joke. Tbh I don't think I know many people who would send their kids to a camp where a bunch of children died recently, regardless of how those kids died and how present the danger remains. Especially considering they're spiritual folk, that's gotta put a figurative wet blanket over the energy of the camp. It's like murder taking place in a house lowering its property value. Or like families continuing to attend church services run by religious leaders who have recently abused children. If God allows it, then who are we to question it?
|
On June 25 2026 02:07 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2026 01:56 Acrofales wrote:On June 25 2026 01:50 Simberto wrote:On June 25 2026 00:17 LightSpectra wrote: Speaking of owning the libs. Camp Mystic, the Texas nondenominational Christian summer camp where 28 people died in a flood last year because Kerr County Republicans declined an updated flood warning & monitoring system paid for by the Democrat-passed American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, just filed for bankruptcy. They reportedly already had kids enrolled for a program this year. Obviously people enrolled their children there, because that is the safest place to put your children. It is statistically extremely unlikely that a bunch of children would drown there in two subsequent years. That... doesn't hold up to actual probability theory. Unless the flood caused them to change things (like move their campsite to somewhere less likely to flood), the chance of it flooding again this year is exactly as high as it flooding last year. This is what causes people to build their homes near rivers with the excuse that the "once in a generation" flood happened two years ago, so that means they're safe for a generation... Agreed. I assumed that Simberto was being sarcastic, since obviously thoughts and prayers and partisan stubbornness are all notoriously terrible at accomplishing anything. Also, there is a special type of irony attached to a Christian camp being unprepared for a devastating flood.
Yes, i was joking there. I just kind of find bad math to be funny.
|
On June 25 2026 02:06 GreenHorizons wrote:Democrat's chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus lost their primary to democratic socialist Darializa Avila Chevalier. Show nested quote +Mamdani cast Avila Chevalier as the future of the Democratic Party, saying as he announced his endorsement on MS NOW that she will be “on the front lines” of showing that Democrats “have to be fighting for a vision that reckons with the fact that working people were not left behind just four years ago or 16 years ago. They were left behind a long time before that.”
“And it will take a new generation of leadership to ensure that the heartbeat of this party is once again the struggles of the working class,” Mamdani said.
Avila Chevalier is also a vocal critic of Israel, calling its war against Hamas in Gaza a genocide. A Columbia University alumna, she participated in the pro-Palestinian protests at the university and was present during last year’s standoff with police at Hamilton Hall, which she described as “quite horrific.” She also attended a controversial pro-Palestinian rally the day after Hamas’ 2023 attacks in Israel — an event that Brad Lander, the former city comptroller also sporting Mamdani’s endorsement in his congressional bid, condemned.
Avila Chevalier has voiced support for legislation to block certain arms sales to Israel, also known as the “Block the Bombs” bill. She has also called for abolishing ICE, “Medicare for All” and national tenant protections. www.nbcnews.comThat seems like a reasonably significant development regarding US politics? Awesome! Score another win for New York, assuming she wins the general election (and she almost certainly will). Hopefully we'll see other blue states with similar victories.
|
On June 25 2026 02:06 GreenHorizons wrote:Democrat's chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus lost their primary to democratic socialist Darializa Avila Chevalier. Show nested quote +Mamdani cast Avila Chevalier as the future of the Democratic Party, saying as he announced his endorsement on MS NOW that she will be “on the front lines” of showing that Democrats “have to be fighting for a vision that reckons with the fact that working people were not left behind just four years ago or 16 years ago. They were left behind a long time before that.”
“And it will take a new generation of leadership to ensure that the heartbeat of this party is once again the struggles of the working class,” Mamdani said.
Avila Chevalier is also a vocal critic of Israel, calling its war against Hamas in Gaza a genocide. A Columbia University alumna, she participated in the pro-Palestinian protests at the university and was present during last year’s standoff with police at Hamilton Hall, which she described as “quite horrific.” She also attended a controversial pro-Palestinian rally the day after Hamas’ 2023 attacks in Israel — an event that Brad Lander, the former city comptroller also sporting Mamdani’s endorsement in his congressional bid, condemned.
Avila Chevalier has voiced support for legislation to block certain arms sales to Israel, also known as the “Block the Bombs” bill. She has also called for abolishing ICE, “Medicare for All” and national tenant protections. www.nbcnews.comThat seems like a reasonably significant development regarding US politics? The big battle lines in the Democratic party is the DSA vs establishment and moderates, and the Democratic party's split on pro-Israel/anti-Israel. The NY primaries were the latest win for progressives. But in that win, a self-identified Zionist (though accusing Israel of genocide) won and received Mamdani's endorsement. That was Brad Lander. He renounced DSA membership after the DSA promoted an anti-Israel rally post-October 7th. But he was so favored to win that Mamdani made the smart political decision and endorsed.
But Mamdani's wife snubbed Lander by leaving off her husband's third endorsed candidate while she encouraged her Instagram followers to vote for the other two on primary day. That's a microcosm of the divide. If you like following interesting political news, keep your eyes on that story as we head to 2028.
|
On June 25 2026 02:20 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2026 02:06 GreenHorizons wrote:Democrat's chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus lost their primary to democratic socialist Darializa Avila Chevalier. Mamdani cast Avila Chevalier as the future of the Democratic Party, saying as he announced his endorsement on MS NOW that she will be “on the front lines” of showing that Democrats “have to be fighting for a vision that reckons with the fact that working people were not left behind just four years ago or 16 years ago. They were left behind a long time before that.”
“And it will take a new generation of leadership to ensure that the heartbeat of this party is once again the struggles of the working class,” Mamdani said.
Avila Chevalier is also a vocal critic of Israel, calling its war against Hamas in Gaza a genocide. A Columbia University alumna, she participated in the pro-Palestinian protests at the university and was present during last year’s standoff with police at Hamilton Hall, which she described as “quite horrific.” She also attended a controversial pro-Palestinian rally the day after Hamas’ 2023 attacks in Israel — an event that Brad Lander, the former city comptroller also sporting Mamdani’s endorsement in his congressional bid, condemned.
Avila Chevalier has voiced support for legislation to block certain arms sales to Israel, also known as the “Block the Bombs” bill. She has also called for abolishing ICE, “Medicare for All” and national tenant protections. www.nbcnews.comThat seems like a reasonably significant development regarding US politics? Awesome! Score another win for New York, assuming she wins the general election (and she almost certainly will). Hopefully we'll see other blue states with similar victories. It's critical to understand how they succeeded, and what they succeeded against if people want to replicate it elsewhere (and I'm not sure that's actually something all Democrat voters/supporters here want).
I'm confident an electoral path to anything resembling a desirable future must include those kinds of discussions in places like these among people that see this sort of "inside out" strategy as the best way forward.
|
On June 25 2026 02:32 dyhb wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2026 02:06 GreenHorizons wrote:Democrat's chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus lost their primary to democratic socialist Darializa Avila Chevalier. Mamdani cast Avila Chevalier as the future of the Democratic Party, saying as he announced his endorsement on MS NOW that she will be “on the front lines” of showing that Democrats “have to be fighting for a vision that reckons with the fact that working people were not left behind just four years ago or 16 years ago. They were left behind a long time before that.”
“And it will take a new generation of leadership to ensure that the heartbeat of this party is once again the struggles of the working class,” Mamdani said.
Avila Chevalier is also a vocal critic of Israel, calling its war against Hamas in Gaza a genocide. A Columbia University alumna, she participated in the pro-Palestinian protests at the university and was present during last year’s standoff with police at Hamilton Hall, which she described as “quite horrific.” She also attended a controversial pro-Palestinian rally the day after Hamas’ 2023 attacks in Israel — an event that Brad Lander, the former city comptroller also sporting Mamdani’s endorsement in his congressional bid, condemned.
Avila Chevalier has voiced support for legislation to block certain arms sales to Israel, also known as the “Block the Bombs” bill. She has also called for abolishing ICE, “Medicare for All” and national tenant protections. www.nbcnews.comThat seems like a reasonably significant development regarding US politics? The big battle lines in the Democratic party is the DSA vs establishment and moderates, and the Democratic party's split on pro-Israel/anti-Israel. The NY primaries were the latest win for progressives. But in that win, a self-identified Zionist (though accusing Israel of genocide) won and received Mamdani's endorsement. That was Brad Lander. He renounced DSA membership after the DSA promoted an anti-Israel rally post-October 7th. But he was so favored to win that Mamdani made the smart political decision and endorsed. But Mamdani's wife snubbed Lander by leaving off her husband's third endorsed candidate while she encouraged her Instagram followers to vote for the other two on primary day. That's a microcosm of the divide. If you like following interesting political news, keep your eyes on that story as we head to 2028. I thought Mamdani and Lander teaming up (back before Mamdani won) was pretty interesting to watch, and I'm glad that Mamdani recently supported Lander back. Disappointed to hear about Mamdani's wife snubbing Lander though.
On June 25 2026 02:32 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2026 02:20 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 25 2026 02:06 GreenHorizons wrote:Democrat's chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus lost their primary to democratic socialist Darializa Avila Chevalier. Mamdani cast Avila Chevalier as the future of the Democratic Party, saying as he announced his endorsement on MS NOW that she will be “on the front lines” of showing that Democrats “have to be fighting for a vision that reckons with the fact that working people were not left behind just four years ago or 16 years ago. They were left behind a long time before that.”
“And it will take a new generation of leadership to ensure that the heartbeat of this party is once again the struggles of the working class,” Mamdani said.
Avila Chevalier is also a vocal critic of Israel, calling its war against Hamas in Gaza a genocide. A Columbia University alumna, she participated in the pro-Palestinian protests at the university and was present during last year’s standoff with police at Hamilton Hall, which she described as “quite horrific.” She also attended a controversial pro-Palestinian rally the day after Hamas’ 2023 attacks in Israel — an event that Brad Lander, the former city comptroller also sporting Mamdani’s endorsement in his congressional bid, condemned.
Avila Chevalier has voiced support for legislation to block certain arms sales to Israel, also known as the “Block the Bombs” bill. She has also called for abolishing ICE, “Medicare for All” and national tenant protections. www.nbcnews.comThat seems like a reasonably significant development regarding US politics? Awesome! Score another win for New York, assuming she wins the general election (and she almost certainly will). Hopefully we'll see other blue states with similar victories. It's critical to understand how they succeeded, and what they succeeded against if people want to replicate it elsewhere (and I'm not sure that's actually something all Democrat voters/supporters here want). I'm confident an electoral path to anything resembling a desirable future must include those kinds of discussions in places like these among people that see this sort of "inside out" strategy as the best way forward. dyhb just brought up two topics that I think make a lot of sense - democratic socialism vs. establishment/moderation and one's position on Israel (or perhaps one's position on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict). Those would be parts of the "what"; I would think that the "how" would include charismatic speeches and grassroots movements. I worry that not everyone has the same charisma that Sanders, Mamdani, and AOC have, so what would be reasonable "how" approaches that could be accessible to most/all left-wing candidates?
And can you say more about the "inside out" strategy? What does that mean?
|
She's the prison abolitionist who refused to say murderers should be locked up? Bonkers. Also as is normal the person with socialist in their platform did better in the richer areas, because of course.
|
On June 25 2026 03:35 Introvert wrote: She's the prison abolitionist who refused to say murderers should be locked up? Bonkers. Also as is normal the person with socialist in their platform did better in the richer areas, because of course. Would you mind posting the entire cited quote or video clip that this is from, so that we could see/hear the exact words and surrounding context?
|
On June 25 2026 03:38 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2026 03:35 Introvert wrote: She's the prison abolitionist who refused to say murderers should be locked up? Bonkers. Also as is normal the person with socialist in their platform did better in the richer areas, because of course. Would you mind posting the entire cited quote or video clip that this is from, so that we could see/hear the exact words and surrounding context?
https://nyeditorialboard.substack.com/p/darializa-avila-chevalier-on-housing
Nicole Gelinas Just speaking of human rights and human dignity, you’ve been a prison abolitionist, a decarceralist. What should happen to somebody who has killed somebody else? I mean, I went to a sentencing last week, a man killed another man, didn’t know the person, just sitting on a stoop, got a 18-year prison sentence. Should that person not go to prison? And what should happen instead?
Darializa Avila Chevalier So, you know, for prison abolitionists, I think a lot of folks misunderstand what that vision of the world actually is. And it is one that actually centers this question of harm. At the heart of what we’re asking is: What, why is it that there is so much harm in our society?
And how do we, A, prevent it, and B, deal with it when it happens. And as someone who has worked with folks who have been incarcerated, who have felt ostracized, for lack of a better term, by so many facets of our society for being poor, for being Black, for being Latino. I work at a public defender’s office where most of our clients are incredibly poor Black and brown New Yorkers. And for so many, the crimes that they’re being indicted for are crimes of poverty, or the effects of poverty.
And when I think about this question of harm, I think how do we create a society where people feel so safe that they don’t need to pick up the phone and call the police. And when harm does happen, how do we actually create repair? Because what we have right now is a system in whenever harm happens, there’s more harm being perpetrated, not only on the folks who engaged in the harm, but also on the victims of the harm. I’m someone who has actually been the victim of crimes, of violence, and gone to the police as a young person thinking, doing the thing that society told me to do, and all that did was traumatize me more.
Josh Greenman But what do you do to the murderer though? Or what do you do— Darializa Avila Chevalier But and so I’m trying to answer the question, which is that— What we do is that we then put people behind bars in incredibly traumatizing conditions in a context where they cannot actually reflect on the harm that they caused or feel any remorse on that because they’re just trying to survive inside, and they’re being re-traumatized day after day after day while inside. And then when they’re released, they’re bringing that trauma back to our community, and that is having a reverberating effect on everyone in our society. And so as an abolitionist, you know, when you think about this question of harm, we have to think not only about interrupting that cycle of harm but also preventing it from the onset. And part of that has to do with thinking about, what are the systems that actually reduce that harm from happening in the first place?
And I have spoken to clients at public defender’s office where you hear the larger story of what happened, and it was folks who were under so much stress from the conditions that they were facing that they lashed out in a way that was out of character, in ways that they deeply regret. They don’t have a way to actually repair now because they don’t have a pathway towards that. You see folks who just need access to medical care. I had, at one of the jobs I had many years ago, a client who would actually intentionally get arrested because being on Rikers was the only way that he could get access to his bipolar medication. And this is a reflection of a larger failure of our system to actually protect our people from harm, to think about harm in a more expansive way, and actually address it meaningfully and effectively.
Josh Greenman But, did we answer what happens to the murderer? Do you not incarcerate the murderer?
Darializa Avila Chevalier You know, again, I’m talking about this question between the distance between the world we want to see and the world that we’re at. And tomorrow, you know, when that instance happens, that [incarceration] is what’s going to happen, right? And I don’t think anyone in society questions that that’s what’s going to happen.
Ben Smith But can you get a little less abstract? Like she was watching a jury vote on the guy’s guilty, should he be sentenced or not?
Darializa Avila Chevalier Well, this is what I’m saying is that when that happens, and as someone who has sat in so many courtrooms, to me, all of that is tragic. The fact that the murder happened is tragic. The fact that there was a circumstance in which that could even come to pass is tragic, and all of that is a reflection of systems that allowed that circumstance to be possible. And so, you know, I have always focused my attention on how do we create systems where that’s not even the possibility.
As a bonus it appears she wants no one to ever be deported for any reason and wants everyone to vote including non-citizens.
|
If you're wealthy and support socialism, you get called a hypocrite. But if you're poor and support socialism, you get called envious. It's almost like it's a bad faith accusation to prevent people from talking about billionaires (and now a trillionaire) existing in a world where child poverty and medical debt are common.
|
Northern Ireland27272 Posts
On June 25 2026 03:58 LightSpectra wrote: If you're wealthy and support socialism, you get called a hypocrite. But if you're poor and support socialism, you get called envious. It's almost like it's a bad faith accusation to prevent people from talking about billionaires (and now a trillionaire) existing in a world where child poverty and medical debt are common. Almost eh? Happy cake day by the way
|
On June 25 2026 03:56 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2026 03:38 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 25 2026 03:35 Introvert wrote: She's the prison abolitionist who refused to say murderers should be locked up? Bonkers. Also as is normal the person with socialist in their platform did better in the richer areas, because of course. Would you mind posting the entire cited quote or video clip that this is from, so that we could see/hear the exact words and surrounding context? https://nyeditorialboard.substack.com/p/darializa-avila-chevalier-on-housingShow nested quote + Nicole Gelinas Just speaking of human rights and human dignity, you’ve been a prison abolitionist, a decarceralist. What should happen to somebody who has killed somebody else? I mean, I went to a sentencing last week, a man killed another man, didn’t know the person, just sitting on a stoop, got a 18-year prison sentence. Should that person not go to prison? And what should happen instead?
Darializa Avila Chevalier So, you know, for prison abolitionists, I think a lot of folks misunderstand what that vision of the world actually is. And it is one that actually centers this question of harm. At the heart of what we’re asking is: What, why is it that there is so much harm in our society?
And how do we, A, prevent it, and B, deal with it when it happens. And as someone who has worked with folks who have been incarcerated, who have felt ostracized, for lack of a better term, by so many facets of our society for being poor, for being Black, for being Latino. I work at a public defender’s office where most of our clients are incredibly poor Black and brown New Yorkers. And for so many, the crimes that they’re being indicted for are crimes of poverty, or the effects of poverty.
And when I think about this question of harm, I think how do we create a society where people feel so safe that they don’t need to pick up the phone and call the police. And when harm does happen, how do we actually create repair? Because what we have right now is a system in whenever harm happens, there’s more harm being perpetrated, not only on the folks who engaged in the harm, but also on the victims of the harm. I’m someone who has actually been the victim of crimes, of violence, and gone to the police as a young person thinking, doing the thing that society told me to do, and all that did was traumatize me more.
Josh Greenman But what do you do to the murderer though? Or what do you do— Darializa Avila Chevalier But and so I’m trying to answer the question, which is that— What we do is that we then put people behind bars in incredibly traumatizing conditions in a context where they cannot actually reflect on the harm that they caused or feel any remorse on that because they’re just trying to survive inside, and they’re being re-traumatized day after day after day while inside. And then when they’re released, they’re bringing that trauma back to our community, and that is having a reverberating effect on everyone in our society. And so as an abolitionist, you know, when you think about this question of harm, we have to think not only about interrupting that cycle of harm but also preventing it from the onset. And part of that has to do with thinking about, what are the systems that actually reduce that harm from happening in the first place?
And I have spoken to clients at public defender’s office where you hear the larger story of what happened, and it was folks who were under so much stress from the conditions that they were facing that they lashed out in a way that was out of character, in ways that they deeply regret. They don’t have a way to actually repair now because they don’t have a pathway towards that. You see folks who just need access to medical care. I had, at one of the jobs I had many years ago, a client who would actually intentionally get arrested because being on Rikers was the only way that he could get access to his bipolar medication. And this is a reflection of a larger failure of our system to actually protect our people from harm, to think about harm in a more expansive way, and actually address it meaningfully and effectively.
Josh Greenman But, did we answer what happens to the murderer? Do you not incarcerate the murderer?
Darializa Avila Chevalier You know, again, I’m talking about this question between the distance between the world we want to see and the world that we’re at. And tomorrow, you know, when that instance happens, that [incarceration] is what’s going to happen, right? And I don’t think anyone in society questions that that’s what’s going to happen.
Ben Smith But can you get a little less abstract? Like she was watching a jury vote on the guy’s guilty, should he be sentenced or not?
Darializa Avila Chevalier Well, this is what I’m saying is that when that happens, and as someone who has sat in so many courtrooms, to me, all of that is tragic. The fact that the murder happened is tragic. The fact that there was a circumstance in which that could even come to pass is tragic, and all of that is a reflection of systems that allowed that circumstance to be possible. And so, you know, I have always focused my attention on how do we create systems where that’s not even the possibility.
As a bonus it appears she wants no one to ever be deported for any reason and wants everyone to vote including non-citizens. Thanks for posting the interview. I don't think she did the Prison Abolition movement any favors there. I feel like she could have still stressed the importance of gradually reducing prison populations and eventually replacing jails with proper rehabiliation centers / whatever her specific vision is, without completely dodging the question about murderers. Her dodges make her position seem very incomplete.
|
Nicole Gelinas Just speaking of human rights and human dignity, you’ve been a prison abolitionist, a decarceralist. What should happen to somebody who has killed somebody else? I mean, I went to a sentencing last week, a man killed another man, didn’t know the person, just sitting on a stoop, got a 18-year prison sentence. Should that person not go to prison? And what should happen instead?
Darializa Avila Chevalier So, you know, for prison abolitionists, I think a lot of folks misunderstand what that vision of the world actually is. And it is one that actually centers this question of harm. At the heart of what we’re asking is: What, why is it that there is so much harm in our society?
And how do we, A, prevent it, and B, deal with it when it happens. And as someone who has worked with folks who have been incarcerated, who have felt ostracized, for lack of a better term, by so many facets of our society for being poor, for being Black, for being Latino. I work at a public defender’s office where most of our clients are incredibly poor Black and brown New Yorkers. And for so many, the crimes that they’re being indicted for are crimes of poverty, or the effects of poverty.
And when I think about this question of harm, I think how do we create a society where people feel so safe that they don’t need to pick up the phone and call the police. And when harm does happen, how do we actually create repair? Because what we have right now is a system in whenever harm happens, there’s more harm being perpetrated, not only on the folks who engaged in the harm, but also on the victims of the harm. I’m someone who has actually been the victim of crimes, of violence, and gone to the police as a young person thinking, doing the thing that society told me to do, and all that did was traumatize me more.
Josh Greenman But what do you do to the murderer though? Or what do you do— Darializa Avila Chevalier But and so I’m trying to answer the question, which is that— What we do is that we then put people behind bars in incredibly traumatizing conditions in a context where they cannot actually reflect on the harm that they caused or feel any remorse on that because they’re just trying to survive inside, and they’re being re-traumatized day after day after day while inside. And then when they’re released, they’re bringing that trauma back to our community, and that is having a reverberating effect on everyone in our society. And so as an abolitionist, you know, when you think about this question of harm, we have to think not only about interrupting that cycle of harm but also preventing it from the onset. And part of that has to do with thinking about, what are the systems that actually reduce that harm from happening in the first place?
And I have spoken to clients at public defender’s office where you hear the larger story of what happened, and it was folks who were under so much stress from the conditions that they were facing that they lashed out in a way that was out of character, in ways that they deeply regret. They don’t have a way to actually repair now because they don’t have a pathway towards that. You see folks who just need access to medical care. I had, at one of the jobs I had many years ago, a client who would actually intentionally get arrested because being on Rikers was the only way that he could get access to his bipolar medication. And this is a reflection of a larger failure of our system to actually protect our people from harm, to think about harm in a more expansive way, and actually address it meaningfully and effectively.
Josh Greenman But, did we answer what happens to the murderer? Do you not incarcerate the murderer?
Darializa Avila Chevalier You know, again, I’m talking about this question between the distance between the world we want to see and the world that we’re at. And tomorrow, you know, when that instance happens, that [incarceration] is what’s going to happen, right? And I don’t think anyone in society questions that that’s what’s going to happen.
Ben Smith But can you get a little less abstract? Like she was watching a jury vote on the guy’s guilty, should he be sentenced or not?
Darializa Avila Chevalier Well, this is what I’m saying is that when that happens, and as someone who has sat in so many courtrooms, to me, all of that is tragic. The fact that the murder happened is tragic. The fact that there was a circumstance in which that could even come to pass is tragic, and all of that is a reflection of systems that allowed that circumstance to be possible. And so, you know, I have always focused my attention on how do we create systems where that’s not even the possibility. To all the prison abolitionists out there, the question (rephrased, repeated, and ultimately evaded) has to be answered at some level along the way. A skilled politician will slip in their talking points and refocus the discussion while also giving the straight answer along the way. This one dances around a focal point that never actually leaves her lips and leaves the audience guessing. The murderer gets something other than incarceration, since incarceration causes harm and a cycle of harm and the system is broken, and something else causes repair. If you think society needs a transition period with lighter incarcerations, since society is so broken now, that needs to be said too.
|
She could have answered the question better. But it's perhaps a success in drawing attention to the fact that even if a very small number of criminals are utterly irredeemable (which is controversial), the vast majority aren't. There's no reason why America shouldn't adopt a much more humane rehabilitation system like they have in Denmark that results in significantly less recidivism. If she simply said "yes, I still think serial murderers should be imprisoned" then we wouldn't even be talking about this at all.
In some ways this issue is like vaccine injuries. Fixating on the extremely small amount of those while ignoring the orders of magnitude more people that have been killed or permanently injured because they didn't vaccinate is weaponized disinformation. Our shitty prison system that literally causes more crime than it prevents, the very reason it's supposed to exist, needs to be scrutinized more.
|
On June 25 2026 04:24 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2026 03:56 Introvert wrote:On June 25 2026 03:38 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 25 2026 03:35 Introvert wrote: She's the prison abolitionist who refused to say murderers should be locked up? Bonkers. Also as is normal the person with socialist in their platform did better in the richer areas, because of course. Would you mind posting the entire cited quote or video clip that this is from, so that we could see/hear the exact words and surrounding context? https://nyeditorialboard.substack.com/p/darializa-avila-chevalier-on-housing Nicole Gelinas Just speaking of human rights and human dignity, you’ve been a prison abolitionist, a decarceralist. What should happen to somebody who has killed somebody else? I mean, I went to a sentencing last week, a man killed another man, didn’t know the person, just sitting on a stoop, got a 18-year prison sentence. Should that person not go to prison? And what should happen instead?
Darializa Avila Chevalier So, you know, for prison abolitionists, I think a lot of folks misunderstand what that vision of the world actually is. And it is one that actually centers this question of harm. At the heart of what we’re asking is: What, why is it that there is so much harm in our society?
And how do we, A, prevent it, and B, deal with it when it happens. And as someone who has worked with folks who have been incarcerated, who have felt ostracized, for lack of a better term, by so many facets of our society for being poor, for being Black, for being Latino. I work at a public defender’s office where most of our clients are incredibly poor Black and brown New Yorkers. And for so many, the crimes that they’re being indicted for are crimes of poverty, or the effects of poverty.
And when I think about this question of harm, I think how do we create a society where people feel so safe that they don’t need to pick up the phone and call the police. And when harm does happen, how do we actually create repair? Because what we have right now is a system in whenever harm happens, there’s more harm being perpetrated, not only on the folks who engaged in the harm, but also on the victims of the harm. I’m someone who has actually been the victim of crimes, of violence, and gone to the police as a young person thinking, doing the thing that society told me to do, and all that did was traumatize me more.
Josh Greenman But what do you do to the murderer though? Or what do you do— Darializa Avila Chevalier But and so I’m trying to answer the question, which is that— What we do is that we then put people behind bars in incredibly traumatizing conditions in a context where they cannot actually reflect on the harm that they caused or feel any remorse on that because they’re just trying to survive inside, and they’re being re-traumatized day after day after day while inside. And then when they’re released, they’re bringing that trauma back to our community, and that is having a reverberating effect on everyone in our society. And so as an abolitionist, you know, when you think about this question of harm, we have to think not only about interrupting that cycle of harm but also preventing it from the onset. And part of that has to do with thinking about, what are the systems that actually reduce that harm from happening in the first place?
And I have spoken to clients at public defender’s office where you hear the larger story of what happened, and it was folks who were under so much stress from the conditions that they were facing that they lashed out in a way that was out of character, in ways that they deeply regret. They don’t have a way to actually repair now because they don’t have a pathway towards that. You see folks who just need access to medical care. I had, at one of the jobs I had many years ago, a client who would actually intentionally get arrested because being on Rikers was the only way that he could get access to his bipolar medication. And this is a reflection of a larger failure of our system to actually protect our people from harm, to think about harm in a more expansive way, and actually address it meaningfully and effectively.
Josh Greenman But, did we answer what happens to the murderer? Do you not incarcerate the murderer?
Darializa Avila Chevalier You know, again, I’m talking about this question between the distance between the world we want to see and the world that we’re at. And tomorrow, you know, when that instance happens, that [incarceration] is what’s going to happen, right? And I don’t think anyone in society questions that that’s what’s going to happen.
Ben Smith But can you get a little less abstract? Like she was watching a jury vote on the guy’s guilty, should he be sentenced or not?
Darializa Avila Chevalier Well, this is what I’m saying is that when that happens, and as someone who has sat in so many courtrooms, to me, all of that is tragic. The fact that the murder happened is tragic. The fact that there was a circumstance in which that could even come to pass is tragic, and all of that is a reflection of systems that allowed that circumstance to be possible. And so, you know, I have always focused my attention on how do we create systems where that’s not even the possibility.
As a bonus it appears she wants no one to ever be deported for any reason and wants everyone to vote including non-citizens. Thanks for posting the interview. I don't think she did the Prison Abolition movement any favors there. I feel like she could have still stressed the importance of gradually reducing prison populations and eventually replacing jails with proper rehabiliation centers / whatever her specific vision is, without completely dodging the question about murderers. Her dodges make her position seem very incomplete. I'm going to agree with you here. I don't even know if she's thought about phasing in her program, or if she actually has an answer to hardened criminals/repeat criminals. Prison abolitionists have to answer whether all prisons are gone, who still goes to prison if any, and what about recidivism within non-prison alternatives. I'm not interested if she thinks 40 years from now violent crime is at 10% of today because we've done such a bang-up job of fixing root causes.
|
On June 25 2026 04:45 LightSpectra wrote: She could have answered the question better. But it's perhaps a success in drawing attention to the fact that even if a very small number of criminals are utterly irredeemable (which is controversial), the vast majority aren't. There's no reason why America shouldn't adopt a much more humane rehabilitation system like they have in Denmark that results in significantly less recidivism. If she simply said "yes, I still think serial murderers should be imprisoned" then we wouldn't even be talking about this at all. I'm not so sure that all publicity is good publicity, but I'm with you that our prison system needs to be significantly reformed and that we can emulate other countries that do it so much better than we do. Happy birthday, btw!
On June 25 2026 05:37 dyhb wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2026 04:24 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 25 2026 03:56 Introvert wrote:On June 25 2026 03:38 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 25 2026 03:35 Introvert wrote: She's the prison abolitionist who refused to say murderers should be locked up? Bonkers. Also as is normal the person with socialist in their platform did better in the richer areas, because of course. Would you mind posting the entire cited quote or video clip that this is from, so that we could see/hear the exact words and surrounding context? https://nyeditorialboard.substack.com/p/darializa-avila-chevalier-on-housing Nicole Gelinas Just speaking of human rights and human dignity, you’ve been a prison abolitionist, a decarceralist. What should happen to somebody who has killed somebody else? I mean, I went to a sentencing last week, a man killed another man, didn’t know the person, just sitting on a stoop, got a 18-year prison sentence. Should that person not go to prison? And what should happen instead?
Darializa Avila Chevalier So, you know, for prison abolitionists, I think a lot of folks misunderstand what that vision of the world actually is. And it is one that actually centers this question of harm. At the heart of what we’re asking is: What, why is it that there is so much harm in our society?
And how do we, A, prevent it, and B, deal with it when it happens. And as someone who has worked with folks who have been incarcerated, who have felt ostracized, for lack of a better term, by so many facets of our society for being poor, for being Black, for being Latino. I work at a public defender’s office where most of our clients are incredibly poor Black and brown New Yorkers. And for so many, the crimes that they’re being indicted for are crimes of poverty, or the effects of poverty.
And when I think about this question of harm, I think how do we create a society where people feel so safe that they don’t need to pick up the phone and call the police. And when harm does happen, how do we actually create repair? Because what we have right now is a system in whenever harm happens, there’s more harm being perpetrated, not only on the folks who engaged in the harm, but also on the victims of the harm. I’m someone who has actually been the victim of crimes, of violence, and gone to the police as a young person thinking, doing the thing that society told me to do, and all that did was traumatize me more.
Josh Greenman But what do you do to the murderer though? Or what do you do— Darializa Avila Chevalier But and so I’m trying to answer the question, which is that— What we do is that we then put people behind bars in incredibly traumatizing conditions in a context where they cannot actually reflect on the harm that they caused or feel any remorse on that because they’re just trying to survive inside, and they’re being re-traumatized day after day after day while inside. And then when they’re released, they’re bringing that trauma back to our community, and that is having a reverberating effect on everyone in our society. And so as an abolitionist, you know, when you think about this question of harm, we have to think not only about interrupting that cycle of harm but also preventing it from the onset. And part of that has to do with thinking about, what are the systems that actually reduce that harm from happening in the first place?
And I have spoken to clients at public defender’s office where you hear the larger story of what happened, and it was folks who were under so much stress from the conditions that they were facing that they lashed out in a way that was out of character, in ways that they deeply regret. They don’t have a way to actually repair now because they don’t have a pathway towards that. You see folks who just need access to medical care. I had, at one of the jobs I had many years ago, a client who would actually intentionally get arrested because being on Rikers was the only way that he could get access to his bipolar medication. And this is a reflection of a larger failure of our system to actually protect our people from harm, to think about harm in a more expansive way, and actually address it meaningfully and effectively.
Josh Greenman But, did we answer what happens to the murderer? Do you not incarcerate the murderer?
Darializa Avila Chevalier You know, again, I’m talking about this question between the distance between the world we want to see and the world that we’re at. And tomorrow, you know, when that instance happens, that [incarceration] is what’s going to happen, right? And I don’t think anyone in society questions that that’s what’s going to happen.
Ben Smith But can you get a little less abstract? Like she was watching a jury vote on the guy’s guilty, should he be sentenced or not?
Darializa Avila Chevalier Well, this is what I’m saying is that when that happens, and as someone who has sat in so many courtrooms, to me, all of that is tragic. The fact that the murder happened is tragic. The fact that there was a circumstance in which that could even come to pass is tragic, and all of that is a reflection of systems that allowed that circumstance to be possible. And so, you know, I have always focused my attention on how do we create systems where that’s not even the possibility.
As a bonus it appears she wants no one to ever be deported for any reason and wants everyone to vote including non-citizens. Thanks for posting the interview. I don't think she did the Prison Abolition movement any favors there. I feel like she could have still stressed the importance of gradually reducing prison populations and eventually replacing jails with proper rehabiliation centers / whatever her specific vision is, without completely dodging the question about murderers. Her dodges make her position seem very incomplete. I'm going to agree with you here. I don't even know if she's thought about phasing in her program, or if she actually has an answer to hardened criminals/repeat criminals. Prison abolitionists have to answer whether all prisons are gone, who still goes to prison if any, and what about recidivism within non-prison alternatives. I'm not interested if she thinks 40 years from now violent crime is at 10% of today because we've done such a bang-up job of fixing root causes. Yeah definitely. Her lack of an answer regarding murderers made me curious as to what other prison abolitionists might say about what to do with violent criminals. I found this article from another political abolitionist, where the author starts with their stated goal: "The most common question posed to abolitionists is “what about the rapists and murderers?” Most people are not satisfied with the answer they receive. This article is an attempt to break this question down further from my perspective as an abolitionist." https://transformharm.org/ab_resource/what-about-the-rapists-and-murderers/
I feel like most people who pose the question are just generally looking for an acknowledgement that dangerous people need to (at least temporarily) be removed from society, and the author above seems to struggle with immediately making that acknowledgement alongside promoting rehabilitation, just like how Chevalier struggled in her interview. The article's author makes plenty of important points about how the current criminal justice system is broken, most rapists and murderers are still out on the street, and how income inequality and other systemic injustices are huge factors in why violent crimes occur... but it's not until the very end of the article that I found some proposed alternatives:
"Imagine a survivor whose version of accountability looks like trauma treatment and alcohol addiction treatment for their abuser instead of jail. For a family whose loved one was murdered, imagine the person who harmed them was required to help support them financially while they adjust and heal. Imagine folks who are trained in violence intervention strategies called to intervene in volatile situations, and resolving the issue both immediately and over time. Imagine properly funded anti racist or anti gender based violence community programs that can regularly engage with people who have engaged in abusive behavior or folks with racist beliefs in group and individual settings over long periods of time."
I appreciate that they lay out all their critiques of the status quo - I think they do a fine job arguing that a lot needs to change about our current system. I think some prison abolitionists may believe that if they were to accept the premise that some criminals can't be rehabilitated - that even if it's just the hypothetical worst of the worst, rarest 0.0001% outliers who need to be isolated from society - then their entire position might be in jeopardy, so I'm not particularly surprised if they act cagey when it comes to violent criminals. Taking the "okay fine, prison as a very last resort" position completely off the table just isn't going to be satisfying for a lot of people though, and there are so many helpful intermediary steps our society could still take without needing to be sold on literally zero incarcerations.
|
|
|
|
|
|