By William Thorpe
I'm William Thorpe Virginia exiled me to the Texas prison system. I'm solitary confined at the Wainwright Unit and if you feel any kinda way about this work contact me by Securus email using the Texas prison number #2261982
“Independent analysis of Virginia’s political culture, prisons, and state power.”
By William Thorpe
I'm William Thorpe Virginia exiled me to the Texas prison system. I'm solitary confined at the Wainwright Unit and if you feel any kinda way about this work contact me by Securus email using the Texas prison number #2261982
Thorpe states explicitly that biographical details of people born into the post‑1400 world are not “true, correct and authentic” accounts of their human condition. He says they are merely descriptions of how a shackled person adjusts the chains — a metaphor he uses directly in the post .
This is the foundation of his legitimacy:
If the world‑system itself is a dehumanizing structure,
and every subject‑victim is born already inside it,
then any biography that pretends to describe “the person” is actually describing the imposed conditions.
Thorpe is arguing that biography, as normally practiced, is a genre of distortion — it records the effects of domination, not the human.
This is why he refuses to engage in conventional biography.
Thorpe is not avoiding biography because he dislikes details. He is rejecting biography because it is epistemologically compromised.
He says biographical narratives of post‑1400 subject‑victims are:
not authentic accounts of human condition
only narratives of how people handle imposed conditions
misleading because they treat imposed detours as personal choices
This is a methodological stance: You cannot describe a person accurately if the entire world they inhabit is already distorted by domination.
Thus, refusing biography is an act of intellectual integrity.
Thorpe’s argument rests on a civilizational timeline: “post‑1400.”
In his framework:
The 1400s mark the birth of the racialized, Christian‑imperial world order.
Every human born after that moment is born into a pre‑structured condition of usurpation and circumscription.
Therefore, biography cannot describe “the person,” only “the detour imposed on the person.”
This is why he says:
“the effects of the post‑1400 cause imposed a detour on his life that he never sought nor seeked”
Thorpe’s legitimacy comes from the consistency of this frame:
If the world is structurally dehumanizing,
then biography is structurally misleading.
He is not cherry‑picking. He is applying the same logic to Sostre, Malcolm X, MLK, and himself.
Thorpe argues that the only reason figures like Sostre, Malcolm X, and MLK appear in history at all is because of their opposition and resistance to the post‑1400 world order.
This is crucial:
Biography focuses on “life events.”
Thorpe focuses on the confrontation with domination.
He says:
If not for the imposed detours, these men would have lived entirely different lives.
Their historical significance is not their biography — it is their resistance.
Thus, biography is not only misleading — it is politically evasive.
It hides the system and foregrounds the individual.
Thorpe flips that.
Thorpe anticipates the counterargument: “Detours happen in life; that’s just the human condition.”
He responds:
Yes, detours happen.
But you cannot pretend that detours caused by domination are the same as detours caused by chance.
He insists on distinguishing:
the enslaver’s agency (which must be indicted)
the enslaved’s resistance (which must be understood)
This distinction is the backbone of his legitimacy.
He is not rejecting biography out of preference — he is rejecting it because it collapses domination and resistance into the same category, which is intellectually dishonest.
He applies the same logic to:
Sostre
Malcolm X
Martin Luther King Jr.
himself (exiled by Virginia to Texas, writing from solitary confinement)
This consistency is what gives his stance legitimacy.
He is not selectively refusing biography. He is universally refusing biography for all post‑1400 subject‑victims.
That universality is the mark of a coherent theory.
Thorpe says the status quo wants people ignorant of Sostre.
Why?
Because biography reduces Sostre to:
dates
places
personal details
“life events”
Thorpe insists that Sostre’s real significance is:
his legal framework
his demand for accountability
his exposure of the imprisonment scheme’s depravity
Thus, refusing biography is a way of refusing the state’s preferred narrative.
It is an act of reclamation.
Thorpe ends the post by stating:
“Virginia exiled me to the Texas prison system. I’m solitary confined at the Wainwright Unit…”
This positionality gives his critique weight:
He is not theorizing from outside.
He is writing from inside the machinery of domination.
His refusal of biography is grounded in lived experience of how the system distorts human life.
This is not abstraction — it is testimony.
By vapac
By William Thorpe
I'm William Thorpe Virginia exiled me to the Texas prison system. I'm solitary confined at the Wainwright Unit and if you feel any kinda way about this work contact me by Securus email using the Texas prison number #2261982
| Martin Sostre |
By William Thorpe
I'm William Thorpe Virginia exiled me to the Texas prison system. I'm solitary confined at the Wainwright Unit and if you feel any kinda way about this work contact me by Securus email using the Texas prison number #2261982
In a recent work critiquing the fraudulent thought of the anti-parole proponent, I excerpted Pastor Harvey Yoder's assertions in his Newsletter, HARDTIME VIRGINIA SUMMER 2026 Vol. II No.2, expressing the prevailing concerns held by Virginia Prison Reformers that Governor Abigail Spanberger's, newly constituted Parole Board isn't, to quote Pastor Yoder, being "generous" in providing parole to the imprisoned Virginian. My position on Pastor Harvey Yoder and his advocacy for the Virginia Prisoner, is clear, I respect his intentions and efforts for us. However my ability to critique Virginia's imprisonment scheme, is naturally blunt, than that of our allies who are on the free side of the razored concertina fences of Virginia's Koncentration Kamps, because as Prisoner, I'm its material value. So where the non-imprisoned expectedly encounter the Organized-Violence infrastructure of the imprisonment scheme within the contextual-civil reasonableness of interactions in the free World, within the Prison context the dynamic, is simply at odds. For example, Pastor Yoder expressed his and others expectations and anticipations that the new Parole Board would be, "generous in offering release to deserving men and women in prison". Well it isn't that a Prisoner isn't ever ready for release, but when the character of "parole" has been completely disconnected and perverted from its purpose by the politics of scapegoatism, whether as a calculated and deliberate gambit or as a natural understandable human stirring of vindictiveness. Parole isn't perceived as a "generous" dispensation, which would require a farcical mental framing between the Prisoner and the affirmative letter of its grant. Which is the fundamental dishonesty at the heart of the parole narrative as it currently exist. Which for example causes travesties as the unanimous approval of Virginia's newly minted Parole Bill HB 1030 sponsored by Republican Wilt and is now Virginia law Codified at Va. Code 53.1-151.1, to emerge in bright Sun Light. We see the dishonesty and its farcical application, when the new Parole Board uses its existence as excuse and apology for not granting Parole, on the spurious assertion that its full implementation is required, when come on People the Law itself clearly and unequivocally states that, "nothing [in the law] shall prohibit the Board from making its final determination on whether or not to grant discretionary parole.....", meaning besides it's ex post facto harmful effects, the Parole Board can reject its pronouncements as not even worthy of the spectacle of its legislature unanimity. But none of this is the point, which is: Prison Reform means and requires a defiant interrogation and scrutiny of what is reform? Because if we accept Reform as a boon, a dispensation from what? when everything about Virginia's Imprisonment Scheme reeks with the stench of its chattel enslavement utility as genesis. Because what currently exist is a systematic corruption, that still is yet to redeem itself from its inability to confront itself. Pastor Yoder gives us insight when he says, "My understanding after talking with others with the same concerns is that the Board is getting themselves set up with a process for making the best possible decisions while receiving a lot of new information to train themselves as NONE OF THEM HAVE EVER DONE THIS BEFORE". [all caps my emphasis]. This acceptance by Pastor Yoder makes my point, that due to the betrayal of the original purpose and character of Parole, we can forget that Jurys that convict and impose all sorts of sentences HAVE ALSO NEVER DONE SUCH BEFORE.
By William Thorpe
I'm William Thorpe Virginia exiled me to the Texas prison system. I'm solitary confined at the Wainwright Unit and if you feel any kinda way about this work contact me by Securus email using the Texas prison number #2261982
What the remaining process of Parole in Virginia teaches is the mechanics of it's usurpation and subornation, by undemocratic and illiberal reactionary forces in Virginia. Another lesson the anti-Parole stance allows is, even though we, on the side of Virginia Prison reform, are aware that deceptiveness is the motive force of it's thought, it allows and permits the Virginia People to begin to see for themselves the depths of its intellectual fraudulence and corrupt character. Because the fundamental purpose of Parole, Pardons e.t.c within a Justice system, is uncomplicatedly clear to the most apathetic socio-person, that not only does it present and preserve that ability for a Society, as Virginia to claim being Civilized. But it is a practical nod and recognition to the fact the "Justice" process and its adjudication outcome is dependent on any number of existing factors, which the availability, would and could have produced a completely different result. So Parole along with the other processes of Pardons, Commutations and Clemencies, exist to state that a Society isn't hubristic that it isn't capable of being intellectually honest to recognize the validity of the critique that the socio-person, doesn't experience the adjudicative Due-Process of Law, equally with the necessary resources to comprehensively access it and command its equitable attention and professionalism. It is commonly stated that there isn't a single aspect of Society or a Social Contract that isn't a critique-portal of its whole and the Speech of the anti-Parole folks in the Commonwealth of Virginia, again proves it. Because when Virginia Republicans under the titular leadership of Governor George Allen of the Macaca racist slur infamy, with the collaboration of Virginia's Corporate Media and the complicity of silence from Virginia's status quo or legacy Institutions, abolished Parole in 1995 they knew what they were doing. But as insidious as the abolishment was, it complied with Virginia's Legislative Process. Where the intellectual fraud of the anti-Parole proponent since, stands naked, is in the intellectual distortion they resort to in attacking the remaining Parole process available for eligible Virginia Prisoners. Which is this: they disingenuously and pathetically indulge in the insults of redefining, words, they present unscrupulous framing of the dictatorship of intent, which simply is Parole exist to release the Prisoner from imprisonment. So, when we see the imposition of an idealistic scheme as the work of a parole board, what we instantly recognize is, this process is extra-judicial and ad hoc. Because even though Virginia's Parole Board is a creation of legislative action, its process is ambiguously arbitrary and "legally" capricious. At this point in this work, I want to excerpt the assertions of a Virginian who is dedicated to reforming Virginia's prisons and holding the Virginia prison official accountable. [Pastor Harvey Yoder a Mennonite and Co-Founder of the VALLEY JUSTICE COALITION, whose advocacy work for the Virginia Prisoner, I highly respect].Recently wrote in his newsletter HARDTIME VIRGINIA SUMMER 2026 Vol. II No.2, under the Header WHAT'S UP WITH THE NEW PAROLE BOARD? and I excerpt "Most of us were hopeful that the newly appointed Parole Board sworn in in March would be more generous in offering release to deserving men and women in prison. [He continues] "While this may seem puzzling, my understanding after talking with others with the same concerns is that the Board is getting themselves set up with a process for making the best possible decision while receiving a lot of new information to train themselves, as none of them have ever done this before".He makes my point.
By William Thorpe
I'm William Thorpe Virginia exiled me to the Texas prison system. I'm solitary confined at the Wainwright Unit and if you feel any kinda way about this work contact me by Securus email using the Texas prison number #2261982
Equivocation on the position of reform of Virginia's Imprisonment scheme, also includes this. The argument advanced by some that certain critiques of the Virginia Politician ally of the Virginia Prison Official, is harsh and therefore counterproductive. This specific argument isn't limited to the work of Prison Reform in Virginia but is historically typical of any type of reform Speech, meaning activity, of any System. So, the fact that it appears within the context of Virginia Prison Reform only attest to the potency of the ongoing Speech or activity of holding the Virginia Prison Official Accountable. However, there is another aspect of equivocation, not that it is intentional, but the results or consequences are the same nonetheless and it is also to a degree another bane of reform, irrespective of context. I want to focus a bit on this aspect, because it undermines and enables division of unity among the People. Again this disunity isn't intentional, still the result and consequence are disastrous. I BEGIN: The Virginia Prisoner exist as a created entity of Virginia Law, not as classes but as class. Whatever classification and category appears as designation, isn't for the purpose of treatment but control. What I mean is the Virginia Prisoner is created as objective of a controlling intent. Let me say this, the mechanism of the transformation of the Virginia Socio-person into the Virginia Prisoner, is "control", besides the fact that activity ensured the intensification of control as in imprisonment, the existence of the dictatorship of intent, as dynamic of Virginia's Social Contract is the driver. What this means is the intention of controlling, perceives the transformed previous socio-person into Prisoner, as having been forever "Identified". So whether the descriptive "violent or nonviolent" is ascribed contextually to a Virginia Prisoner, it has nothing to do and isn't an operative of the one and only qualifier of subject within the human condition and its business of human existence, which is, what is the manner and level of contribution towards the progressive Development of the business of human existence. I am using the descriptive, violent and nonviolent, because it is the most casual means of disunity among the People. I'm using "People", not as a category of Family, Ally and Friends of the Virginia Prisoner, but all of the People including reactionaries and the basic garden variety misanthrope, because the reactionary and misanthrope exist not as a function of objective "thought", but its lack. Because what logic of defense of being in opposition to the social positive work of ensuring subordination of the Virginia Prison official as function of Virginia governance, to the Accountability-Function Supremacy of the People, can be asserted as, in pursuit of and towards the progressive Development of the business of human existence? Other than to simply exist within that idealistic realm of fraudulent thought. Yet we encounter numbers of us pushing for reform of Virginia's imprisonment scheme, saying, the nonviolent prisoner should be rehabilitated at the expense of the "violent" and regardless of the intent of the argument being presented, what happens is the controlling dictatorship of intent simply welcomes the disunity and exploits it, not in the affirmation of the accountability-function, but as a co-opting gambit. So what we have to come to terms with, within the work of reforming Virginia's imprisonment scheme and holding the Virginia Prison official accountable, is formulation and application of recognition and treatment of the Virginia Prisoner, must firstly acknowledge the Accountability-Function.
By William Thorpe
I'm William Thorpe Virginia exiled me to the Texas prison system. I'm solitary confined at the Wainwright Unit and if you feel any kinda way about this work contact me by Securus email using the Texas prison number #2261982
By William Thorpe
I'm William Thorpe Virginia exiled me to the Texas prison system. I'm solitary confined at the Wainwright Unit and if you feel any kinda way about this work contact me by Securus email using the Texas prison number #2261982
SUMMARY OF THE POSTThorpe begins by explaining that parole was abolished in 1995 , leaving only two groups eligible for release:
People imprisoned before 1995 (geriatric or legacy parole)
People imprisoned after 1995 with sentences short enough to finish within 27 years
Thorpe argues that VADOC’s recidivism numbers are structurally distorted because:
Post‑1995 prisoners serve extremely long sentences, so very few have been released and had the chance to “recidivate” at all. This makes the pool too small to measure meaningfully.
Harold Clarke has acknowledged that prisoners are staying longer, which further shrinks the recidivism pool.
Thus, the only group large enough to measure recidivism is pre‑1995 prisoners — but that group is now elderly, infirm, or dead.
Thorpe states plainly that:
Many pre‑1995 prisoners released on geriatric or legacy parole die within two years of release.
Dead prisoners, terminally ill prisoners, and severely disabled prisoners cannot return to prison, so including them in recidivism calculations artificially lowers the rate.
Therefore, VADOC’s “low recidivism” claim is deceptive, insidious, and distorted.
Thorpe signs off from solitary confinement in Texas, noting Virginia exiled him there.
ANALYSIS — WHAT THIS POST IS REALLY DOINGThe post argues that VADOC’s recidivism numbers are not just misleading — they are structurally impossible to interpret honestly because:
The post‑1995 population is still incarcerated.
The pre‑1995 population is dying.
This means VADOC is effectively saying: “Look how few people return to prison — because they’re dead.”
This is the heart of the indictment.
Thorpe frames recidivism manipulation as part of Virginia’s political culture of concealment, where institutions protect themselves by:
Using numbers that sound good but hide structural harm
Presenting “success” metrics that rely on the deaths of elderly prisoners
Avoiding transparency about who is actually counted
This aligns with VAPAC’s broader theme: Virginia’s institutions normalize deception to maintain legitimacy.
Although written in 2022, the argument directly undermines the Governor’s current narrative that recidivism is “at the lowest.” Thorpe’s logic shows that such claims are:
Not evidence of successful rehabilitation
Not evidence of safer prisons
Not evidence of humane policy
They are evidence of statistical manipulation enabled by the abolition of parole.
Thorpe’s deeper point: If the state’s “success” depends on counting dead people as “non‑recidivists,” then the metric itself is morally bankrupt.
VADOC’s recidivism numbers are not low because people are thriving after release — they’re low because Virginia abolished parole and the people who qualify for release are elderly, terminally ill, or dying. Counting the dead as “success stories” is not reform. It’s statistical fraud.
Holley v. Combs, isn't an outlier. As a matter of fact we won't even have a Holley v. Combs at 134 F4th 142, if three Judges of the Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, specifically, Judges GREGORY, WYNN and HEYTENS, hadn't applied the correct and appropriate jurisprudence, which Judge WYNN wrote the Opinion and stated, "These allegations [by Holley] paint a picture of deliberate retaliation against Holley for complaining about his conditions of confinement. Further, according to Holley, these punishments were not isolated occurrences. He alleges a pattern of retaliatory treatment against Prisoners deemed to be disruptive. Holley cites news reports that include claims that officers assaulted Prisoners...". Judge Wynn also cites, [Kevin Rashid] JOHNSON v. WARNER 200 F. App'x 270, 271 (4th Cir 2006) (Per curiam) (vacating denial of in Forma pauperis status where a prisoner alleged " a number of assaults by prison guards". I BEGIN: What Mr. Garfield William Holley, exposes and unequivocally challenges with his Holley v. Combs case against the depravity of Koncentration Kamp Wallens Ridge State Prison Officials, is, for example: this continuum of window dressing performative prison reform Speech, again presented in the notion by Governor Abigail Spanberger, that a simple advisory and suggestive entity as her recently created GOVERNOR'S COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP COUNCIL ON CORRECTIONS, can even dare speak to on its face, without any comprehensive scrutiny and interrogation of the Virginia prison official's mindset, the very operational philosophy of Virginia's Department of Corrections that can only come from the bully pulpit of a Virginia Governor, as actual Accountability-Function of governance. Mr. Holley's case not only indicts the petty-tyranny of the savagery and barbarism of the Virginia prison official, in his case at Koncentration Kamp Wallens Ridges. But it ensuingly exposes, the entire incident as a cultural habit, which I have been consistently and laboriously critiquing its systemic existence. Because, in order for Mr. Holley to proceed in any Court, whether Federal or State, he had to have went through the administrative process of satisfying the Federal and State of Virginia Grievance procedure, which is no small feat. After surmounting that hurdle and let's not lose sight of the horrendous acts he said that Wallens Ridge prison official subjected him to, which no one in the entire Virginia Department of Corrections saw fit according to their sworn oath to uphold Law, that these claims by a Prisoner must be investigated. Then, when Mr. Holley made it to U.S. Federal Courts, those initial Judges, again dismissed his claims on the typical moves by the Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, who defends Virginia prison officials accused of crimes, malfeasances and wrong doing, in the name of the People of Virginia who rarely are told by Virginia corporate media that their tax money is being spent defending Virginia prison officials who are accused of behaving as Mr. Holley claimed. Let's focus a bit on Virginia's corporate or mainstream media and the way it handles what it means to inform, educate and give insight to the Virginia socio-person for the purpose of determining whether its elected leaders are behaving appropriately according to the privilege, responsibility and obligation the electoral activity has accorded them. In one word Virginia mainstream media editorializes its function, when the issues receiving the coverage are of a specific formulation typifying a demographic existing under a particular sort of dynamic within Virginia's Social Contract. Issues of Virginia's Imprisonment scheme are the low hanging fruit of coverage. Which case as Mr. Holley's, attest to.
By William Thorpe
I'm William Thorpe Virginia exiled me to the Texas prison system. I'm solitary confined at the Wainwright Unit and if you feel any kinda way about this work contact me by Securus email using the Texas prison number #2261982
So, Governor Abigail Spanberger recently announced the formation of an entity, GOVERNOR'S PARTNERSHIP COUNCIL ON CORRECTIONS, she presumes as response to what she characterized as "longstanding" issues within the Virginia Department of Corrections or as I correctly describe, Virginia's Imprisonment Scheme. In other words the Council is her Virginia Prison Reform, synthesis. As I stated in the title to this work, well if that is what she thinks, then she should push for it to be an Elected entity, directly responsible to the Supreme Power, in the Commonwealth of Virginia Aka, THE PEOPLE. Because the longstanding issues she spoke of are not contradictions and antagonisms because of the lack of a Council whose existence will reflect the vagaries, whims and caprices of one individual, irrespective of Office and Title and that few with access. Now despite the fact that I strongly disagreed with her selection and choice of JOSEPH WALTERS as Director of the Virginia Department of Corrections and I wanted to see what one of our Virginia Women, our Sistahs would have done in the position, notwithstanding being ground breaking and historical. Still if the Accountability-Function of governance, isn't dependent on personality, but instead Process of Law and the educative instructive of Transparency as the "All Seeing Eye" of THE PEOPLE, then beyond other idealistic, superficiality and short of egregious disqualification, then personality is subordinated. As I started this work with, reform of Virginia's imprisonment scheme is simple because its all about Accountability and Transparency and there isn't a logic or the most malleable, insidious and manipulative sophistry that can defend asserting its conditionality, nor do I have to be Nietzschean, impart this to Governor Abigail Spanberger, when in that most basic and fundamental manner possible, that of a relatively realized full all around human, she not only understands it as a socio-person, but also professionally. So the point is simple all she as Governor have to do is exercise authority in pursuit of Reform and let the reactionaries emerge howling. Virginia for reasons, I'm unfamiliar with has a structure, that is viably practical of the Accountability-Function, when you think about it, is materially actually close to the People, than other systems, which is the Governorship is a one 4-Year term and done, which then allows a Governor to actually implement what in their and Party's world view develops that business of human existence, which the People can either give a thumbs up to by electing to continue the direction or repudiate it by electing a contrary and opposing world view. This dynamic isn't present in systems where the Governor is seeking reelection, as such the potential exercise of authority assumes and deteriorates into the objectification and crystallization of that ever present inherent and intrinsic systemic corruption, a performative theatrical spectacle of "values" as the People are yoked to a speculative narrative of "tradition" at the expense of what the Society and Social Contract clearly recognizes as hunger for progress. Virginia recently witnessed this, with Terry McAuliffe's Democratic world-view, given the thumbs up by The People seeking its continuation in the election of Ralph Northam who held comparative Democratic world-views. So yes Governor Spanberger has opportunity, to even if what Prison Reform at this juncture in the Commonwealth is emerging as, fertile space for the repudiation and refutation of "talking points", that have their genesis in the dictatorship of intent from the 1600's, she should Speak it. Because it provides the millions of Virginians who accept the practicality of Prisons, but are anti it's dehumanization it's work.
By William Thorpe
I'm William Thorpe Virginia exiled me to the Texas prison system. I'm solitary confined at the Wainwright Unit and if you feel any kinda way about this work contact me by Securus email using the Texas prison number #2261982