Clarifications on Cosby & liberty and justice for all

Why, as a liberal, I believe in limiting the powers of a violent state. Also why I mistrust the government as an instrument of social justice, while recognizing its necessity.

I met with two types of backlash over my first post and video dealing with the release of Bill Cosby after the Pennsylvania Supreme Court overturned his sexual assault conviction. The 83-year-old ex-comedian and convicted rapist is now free. Emotions are understandably high.

The first reaction was from people who believe that Cosby was wrongly convicted in the first place. These people believe the whole thing was manufactured, that Cosby was essentially set-up. Maybe so, but I remain unconvinced. Even if some of his accusers were discredited, we have plenty to suggest that Cosby’s concept of consent is badly warped.

The second reaction was from people who thought I was somehow celebrating Cosby’s release because I was happy to see him set free. Somehow I am both claiming he’s guilty and celebrating his release—how these can both be true is beyond me.

In any case, both of these reactions miss the mark. For the purposes of this discussion—a discussion about prosecutorial overreach and the government acting outside the law to essentially coerce a confession—I am not interested in guilt or innocence. It is, in this context, entirely irrelevant. Prosecutors who bend the law can screw over the innocent or let a guilty man walk. That is one reason we have due process and hold the government to certain standards—at least in theory (though this is often overlooked when it comes to the poor and downtrodden).

On the other hand: In my first post and video I spent too much time discussing the reaction to this from people on the left. I spend a lot of time critiquing left-liberals these days, not because I am a conservative, but because I consider myself a left-liberal and I believe the broader movement and the DNC have lost their way (though I do not really consider myself a Democrat, a party that is—in my book—merely the lesser of two evils, still deep in the pockets of banks and corporations and other special interests; still very much a bad actor in the Never-ending War between Haves and Have-Nots).

In any case, I admit that I spent too much time focusing on this critique and not enough time focusing on my larger point with regards to justice, which is that we should be more afraid of a justice system unconstrained by the rule of law than we should be of one elderly man released from prison. This is not to protect the rich and famous, the Bill Cosbys of the world, but to protect the rights of ordinary Americans, especially the poor and disenfranchised. This is a matter of social justice, even if the social justice crowd is unwilling to accept that because they are angry at the outcome and justifiably upset that a convicted rapist is walking free (and before you holler that he wasn’t guilty, once again this is beside the point and I’m uninterested in litigating guilt or innocence here).

Sometimes guilty people walk free because we have laws in place that are designed to protect the innocent. Due process is enshrined in our legal system to ensure that the state doesn’t trample roughshod over our rights. It doesn’t always work out as intended, especially if you’re poor, but that is the intent. To protect our individual liberty against capricious district attorneys, politicians, or other officers of the law; to protect every citizen from an over-zealous and punitive state eager to snatch away the very freedoms it’s supposed to protect. And chip away it has, year after year, at those liberties, always in the name of security or safety or defense or law and order. The state grows and grows more powerful and feeds off of our fears and our hatreds and our anger and our sense of justice, too. The state, after all, has a monopoly on violence and we must ensure that it is hamstrung in its capacity to mete out violence, whether that’s locking people up in cages or killing them in the streets. I am not antigovernment in practical terms; I recognize the need for a government. But I am not starry-eyed, either. I also recognize the dangers. In the 20th century, modern nation-states killed more people than in any century prior, locked up more people, sent more people to concentration and labor camps. We should be careful when we think of the state as some instrument of justice, even though it can be.

I am not a proponent of “defund the police” (inasmuch as I recognize the need for police in this wicked world, though I would be happier in a world without them) but I am a proponent of demilitarizing the police, reforming the police and ending overly punitive and carceral laws that lead to overpopulated prisons and, I believe, a grave systemic injustice that hurts this country economically, spiritually and morally. I am on the side of social justice, and because I am I believe that courts overturning botched prosecutions is on net a good thing. If some bad people walk free because of it, so be it. Better that than a country that no longer cares about rights, about privacy, about the rule of law (by which I mean the rule of law as it applies both to private citizens and the state). Justice is messy. Sometimes it doesn’t feel like justice at all.

As an end-note, I will remind readers that I oppose the death penalty. I oppose it in entirely. I do not believe that the state should punitively murder its own citizens. I realize that in the course of duty, police are sometimes left with no choice. But once a criminal, no matter how vile, is apprehended we do have a choice. To kill or not to kill. The risk that a death row inmate is innocent is simply too great. But beyond that, I do not believe that in a civilized and just society the state should ever carry out executions. Nor does it save taxpayer money.

I think this belief is in keeping with my arguments around Cosby. Constraining the power of the state is a matter of liberty and justice for all—for the guilty and the innocent, the rich and the poor, for men and women of all colors. So yes, sure, be angry that Cosby walked free. Be angry that the prosecution screwed up. Be angry that we live in a country that is supposedly free, and yet locks people up behind bars for years and years because they got caught with a naturally growing plant, or chose to put some other chemical in their body. Be angry that we treat drug abuse like something to be punished instead of something to be healed. Be angry that not enough ever seems to be done to prevent abuse or poverty or to help the mentally ill. There is always something to be angry about, and most of it is justified.

But this is all much, much bigger than one case or one man. Be angry but see with open eyes and clear mind. Too narrow a focus on bringing retribution to a single sinner can muddy our thinking about the bigger picture, the slippery slopes, the precedents that are set, and the unintended consequences—and suffering—that can follow.

Thank you for reading, as always.