Pictures are taken from the internet and are used for illustrative purposes only
Contrary to how we approach stuff, where conclusions and determinations are directed at, what we classify as events, as if the event just popped up, without a growing and developing period. My critique naturally is based on Virginia's imprisonment scheme, because its circumstance and condition are my organic reality enabling, the point or vantage of observation and scrutiny of the various interactions and intersections that cumulate into the aggregate, Virginia's imprisonment scheme. What my critique does is state, the colloquial, "don't drink the kool-aid". Because this Social Contract of the Commonwealth of Virginia cannot for example become unconditionally rule-based, on the accountability-function of governance, when the rules of its primordial or primitive origins, were conditioned on interests that for example have nothing to do with a condition of "absolute human being". So, if for example Virginia's imprisonment scheme, is absolutely about a level of relationship with the human being, while ignoring such a condition of "absolute human being" exist, naturally we will have all these events aggregating to this point where, the formulation is, Virginia's imprisonment scheme must be reformed. What my critique states is the simple refusal to allow refuge to suppositions. There is nothing complicated about suppositions, because it is always biased, with its nature dependent on what is plain and simple the negation of the human being, due to humanness being reduced to the objectivity and subjectivity of the dictatorship of intent. In so many words, fine if you want to claim that this pursuit or that policy goal has as fundamental interest, the materialization and realization of the Constituted aspirations of the "People" of Virginia, you can do so, but don't act surprised when I question by placing in quotation marks, "by the way, who exactly are the People, you profess concern for". What this then does is, it isn't that one has "permission" to speak, but one Speaks. For example the Virginia Mother who accepts by understanding that her son has run afoul of Virginia Laws, has been subjected to process of the Justice Infrastructure, despite the fact that as a Mother she doesn't have to like and welcome the fact that her son is imprisoned and no one in their right mind expects the Mother to become agreeable with it. However no one should be at odds with the Mother for demanding that the accountability-function of Virginia's governance, as embodied by the Prison Official behaves as unconditionally required and expected to. The circumstance as it currently exist and has historically existed, due to the fact the terms and realization of Virginia's Social Contract are suppositionary, with for example the Mother, despite recognizing its hypocrisies and I can say such with certainty, but due to a lack of conceptual language capturing and framing the hypocrisies, is just as much subjected to the same dynamic of the imprisonment of her son as if she was imprisoned, but and this makes it egregious, minus and without the Due Process of Law, regardless of its substance that her son was accorded and given. What I want to also focus on is this, which is a weapon wielded by the above-the-lawism presumption of Virginia's prison official but is a character, which is: the violations of the governance of the accountability-function are expected to be seen as singular occurrence and not structural and systemic. What I mean is the Mother of the imprisoned Virginian accepts the dehumanization as one of.
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
No comments :
Post a Comment