RIP John Lewis

Goodbye, John Lewis. Thank you for the #goodtrouble pic.twitter.com/LDzDV1dKXW

— Stephen Colbert (@StephenAtHome) July 18, 2020

There is a Freeform show entitled Good Trouble and perhaps that inspired the name.  John Lewis inspired so many.  Right after the lesser known but still important civil rights great C.T. Vivian died, Lewis passed into history.  The moral vision he spoke as being "our" responsibility holds but we are left alone.

One person suggested bringing back the Voting Rights Act (a comprehensive voting rights bill is likely on the front burner if the Dems win big in November) and voting rights amendment. The current set are not quite doing the job.  See, e.g. the Supreme Court aiding and abetting a poll tax with a due process violation twist in Florida (the justices simply don't to fully go to summer recess) -- with only three liberals (led by Sotomayor again; Breyer was silent) speaking on the record with a strong dissent. 

His comprehensive vision was cited by linking to a speech he gave against DOMA.  (More than one civil rights great was gay.) His last tweet was against singling out immigrant students (the Trump policy holding that those who did not take classes in person in the fall would not be allowed to remain in the U.S. for now was revoked upon challenge).  And, he spoke with a lot more moral force than I against use of violence and vandalism in protests.

John Lewis saw Barack Obama becoming POTUS but still was something of Moses looking over at the Promised Land in some ways. His breadth of justice and moral duty almost suggests this would be so by definition.  There was of course an outburst of sadness and honoring.  It was not really a surprising -- he was eighty and fighting cancer.  But, part of this is a sadness for the times, a honoring of his vision and reaffirmation of "our" role in it all.  He spoke of a need to say optimistic, not to let despair take over. At times, all the focus on Trumpians fuckery does seem that. We need to not just focus on that.  Focus on the good and focus on the fight. And, keep your sense of humor!

The boy that once preached to his chickens died yesterday. 

(One thing that probably won't get much attention is how John Lewis actually got into Congress. He first lost to a white politician and then had a nasty race with fellow civil rights hero [if with a very different style; Julian Bond was more polished and patrician] and won with support of the white vote. After then, he had no real challenges.  His other big loss was when the SNCC moved to a more extreme and violent mentality, leading to a challenge to his leadership. This was a key turning point.)

===

I saw something where the lawyer of the last person executed noted that the person who the feds convicted years back no longer existed. He repented and spend his time in prison doing good. Such is the message of redemption that clashes some with the religion of those who support Trump (though I'm sure some of them also are against the death penalty).

I need not rest my opposition to the death penalty on such pure grounds, but do find much to the idea that executing someone over twenty-five years after the crime (or even much sooner than that) is rather off.  You are killing someone different.  Unless the person is a threat in prison -- and let's be honest to say a few are -- what is the value to this?  Prison is punishment.  For some victims, the death has some value.  But, as we saw earlier this week, that surely isn't applied consistently (nor could it really). 

The death penalty is part of an arbitrary system that adds to that of the penal system ("criminal justice" seems begging the question) by taking a life.  The broad based movement to reform the system is appreciated.  We do take more care for a life, even if only a virtual handful are executed. It is like the lost sheep in the gospels, the lone one seeming that much more precious on some level.  And, I do on a basic level oppose the death penalty because I think we do not have the moral and legal authority to execute even those who murder children to defend one's meth business.

It is usually the case, however, that one needs not -- and it's easier too -- go all the way in cases of this nature. And, each of the first three federal executions underline the problem here.  I would have to research the last three though the feds choosing one mass drug related murder -- among those three -- in the last seventy years is likely arbitrary. The kidnapping/rape/murder was horrible, especially involving a servicewoman.  But, there are many such horrible cases not leading to execution. Timothy McVeigh is of course a solitary case here.

The death penalty like torture (and it can overlap) cannot rest on the chance "what about Hitler" example.  I was ridiculed a long time ago for being concerned about the treatment of Saddam Hussein's sons.  I found a few being concerned (calling out the rank injustice of it) about the killing of Bin Laden in a raid a tad ridiculous.  I'm not a saint.  I'll leave others to worry about the soul of some of these people. But, they are not worth the lives of many more, selected by a sort of lottery, either.

The more one researches how the federal death penalty was restarted (e.g., a ACS call  on the matter in early July noted how the feds rushed the process, which ultimately was given an assist by five members of the Supreme Court, one or more members who probably would blame "abolitionists" for the whole thing), the more issues one sees. This includes three "ideal" choices (horrible crimes, white) of a troubled pool that in practice were not (the prosecutor and judge were ultimately against the death sentence in one, another had competency issues and problems could be cited in a third or fourth too).  The excessive expansion of the federal death penalty in recent years is also suggested by one or more of these or at least many on death row in general. 

The theoretical "ideal" execution is not the practice.  And, the overall experience reeks of Trumpian.