I would suggest it has to do with promoting an ethos of coercive domination. Prisons divide the population into dangerous others who "deserve to be locked up" and the rest of us who have to lock them up "for our own protection". The same defensive rationalization extends to amorphous threats from potential enemies overseas. The occupied lands are populated by people who "can't look after themselves", which justifies the empire going in (and staying indefinitely) to "maintain order".
On 3/21/08, Michael Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Friday 21 March 2008 11:59:01 Sandwichman wrote: > > > Sure, Canada and the UK have lower incarceration rates but how > > many overseas military garrisons do they maintain? Perhaps I could sum > > up my point with the slogan: "occupation begins at home". > > This line of inquiriy seems intuitively promising but I wonder: how does > the connection work? Why does maintaining the legions throughout > the Empire require locking up so many people at home? -- Sandwichman _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
