1wisline Fontilusprof Anthonyenglish24532021similarities And Differ ✓ Solved

1 Wisline Fontilus Prof: Anthony English/3/2021 Similarities and Differences Between ‘Are Prisons Obsolete’ and ‘Golden Gulag’ Are Prisons Obsolete? Book by Angela Davis and Golden Gulag: Prisons, Surplus, Crisis, and Opposition in Globalizing California book by Ruth Wilson Gilmore are similar in so many ways. The main point of similarity is witnessed in the two writers' views about policing and prisons. However, there are also important differences between these two books that cannot be ignored. The differences arise in terms of the approach, level of style and writing techniques, and also in terms of the arguments made by each writer.

This essay seeks to describe the areas of similarities between the two books. It also seeks to describe differences between the two books and how the differences affect their language, their tone, their approaches to writing, the way they tell their stories, the audiences they choose to address, and the arguments that they make. The writers of the two books advocate for the abolition of the prison. Professor Davis feels that prisons are no longer useful and it is high time that the prisons are eradicated. She acknowledges that people cannot imagine living without the existence of prison systems because over time prisons have become a permanent part of people's lives (Davis, 2003).however she champions the prisons abolishment movement to create awareness that prisons are indeed obsolete and should be eradicated.

Ruth Gilmore also feels somehow the same about the prison system because she believes the prisons are no longer serving their purpose. She believes prisons have led to increased cases of racial discrimination, gender bias, and other discriminatory bases (Gilmore, 2007). Also, they bring out the horrible conditions people go through at the hands of the police. Policing is one of the major issues that police officers subject people to. They use violence to get what they want from the prisoners.

Violation of the prisoners' rights is recorded in both books as a common challenge that prisoners face while in prison. The police officers subject the prisoners to forced labor without pay without their consent. What is more shocking is that the police receive the payment for the labor offered by the prisoners without giving a single coin to the actual laborers. Women are also molested and taken advantage of while in prisons. These two authors share a similarity in their view of the opposition of the use of prions reforms to reinstate the situations in the prisons.

They both believe that reforms have been used for a very long time but the situation is evolving from worse to worst. Reforms are more like rules which are broken by the police officers daily because they believe they are above the law. Therefore, they strongly oppose the use of the police reforms and advocate for the use of other alternatives to provide justice. Professor Davis advises that the government should use the available funds to improve the quality of education and provide basic needs to the society members rather than using those funds to develop the prisons (Davis, 2003). Ruth Gilmore also expresses the feeling of surprise as to why the California government would use lots of funds to erect such a massive building prison instead of investing those funds in improving the lives of the citizens (Gilmore, 2007).

They both believe that with better living conditions in society, the crime rates will reduce. Mass incarceration is a common point of argument between the two writers. Both books record an increase of prisoners being incarnated without major debates. Ruth Gilmore records that since 1980, the number of people in U.S. prisons has increased more than 450%. This is a clear indication that the prison systems are working tirelessly to ensure the prions spaces are filled up.

For example, after the largest prison building in California, the Californian prison system had to make sure the bed spaces in the prisons were filled up (Gilmore, 2007). Angela Davis also argues about how the increase in the number of prisoners was so rapid in a short period. She also admits the blacks and Latinos are arrested, charged, and incarnated in large numbers than the whites. This is evidence of racial discrimination and perhaps an indication that mass incarceration is a gain to the prison system. However, there are also differences observed between the two books.

First, the central point of argument of the two authors differs greatly. In Golden Gulag, Gilmore records that California has the biggest prison building project in the history of the world although the crime rate had been falling steadily over the past decades. She expresses her disbelief over massive California's expanding prison population. Ruth Wilson Gilmore in her book ' Golden Gulag' explains how political and economic forces, ranging from global to local, conjoined to produce the prison boom. Therefore she argues that a weak labor system, shifting patterns of capital investment and radical struggles defeat have facilitated rapid prison growth.

This resulted in an empty, huge, and expensive prison system and a huge number of incarcerated young people particularly based on color (Gilmore, 2007). On the other hand, Angela's point of argument is directed at how social movements have changed the political, cultural, economic, and social institutions. She goes further by illustrating her central point of argument to be the ending times of prison systems. She discusses the history of incarceration and how it has evolved in modern times. She also discusses various alternatives to replace prisons (Davis, 2007).

Professor Davis's approach differs completely from Gilmore's approach. Professor Davis attributes her own experience as an anti-prison activist to build her argument against the prisons while Gilmore uses historical information about the massive Californian prison expansion. She explains how it was ironic to have the massive building that a lot more while California was experiencing an economic crisis at that time (Gilmore, 2007). On the other hand, Professor Davis gathers all the evidence to prove that prisons are no longer purposeful (Davis, 2003). From her approach, a great level of assertiveness is revealed.

She is very much stern and affirms in her argument. As for Gilmore, her approach reveals an aspect of fragile tone probably because she was tensed about her argument. Also, the level of style differs greatly between the two writers. Professor Davis incorporates a lot of quotes from different experts to affect her argument. She uses quotes from Adam Jay Hirsch, Michel Foucault, Marcia Bunny, and other experts (Davis, 2003).

However, Ruth Gilmore uses a limited number of quotes. She bases her argument on the real situation at hand and real experiences from people within the society. She captures the development of the great Californian prison building and also records various movements in her book to build her arguments. She captures the formation of the Mothers Reclaiming Our Children (Mothers ROC) movement to reveal that the prison systems were targeting the children as well and thereby there was an increased number of children in the prison systems. Therefore, Barbara Meredith founded the movement to intervene in that crisis (Gilmore, 2007).

The main target audience in 'Are Prisons Obsolete' is the anti-prisons activists. Professor Davis uses an argument to target anti-prison activists to help her fight the existence of the prisons. Being an anti-prison activist, she feels people can do without necessarily having prisons therefore she champions the anti-prison movement to achieve her goal. She engages all her efforts to recruit more anti-prison activists into her team (Davis, 2003). On the other hand, Ruth Gilmore targets every individual with the society and globally.

She targets the government, prison system officials, prisoners, and the members of the society in their argument. Therefore she engages everyone within the state, rural areas, and urban areas. She attributes two major different viewpoints between people from the rural and those from the city. She records that the city people assumed that the rural people were in support of prisons and could not imagine living without prisons while the rural people assumed that the city people were not doing anything to intervene concerning the increase in the number of prisoners within the prisons (Gilmore, 2007). If Ruth Wilson Gilmore and Angela Yvonne Davis were brought into some form of a dialogue to express their primary arguments in their respective book, I would raise some concerns to the both of them.

As for Professor Davis, I would acknowledge to her that she was quite resourceful in building her argument however there were so many contradictions that cropped up through her work. As for Ruth Gilmore, I would comment on her extensive use of historical information which was factual and highly reliable. However, she lacked some sense of assertiveness in her tone thereby portraying her as fragile. In conclusion, the two authors are very great writers in the way they bring up their respective arguments. They have used several convincing pieces of evidence that portray their work as factual and less biased.

However, both of them have distinct strengths and weaknesses that they should have worked on to improve the quality of their books. References Davis, A. Y. (2003). Are prisons obsolete? Seven Stories Press.

Gilmore, R. W. (2007). Golden gulag: Prisons, surplus, crisis, and opposition in globalizing California . University of California Press. 1 Similarities and Differences Between ‘ Are Prisons Obsolete ’ and ‘ Golden Gulag ’ Student's Name Professor's Name Course Name Institutional Affiliation Due Date 1 Similarities and Differences Between ‘Are Prisons Obsolete’ and ‘Golden Gulag’ Student's Name Professor's Name Course Name Institutional Affiliation Due Date

Paper for above instructions

Similarities and Differences Between ‘Are Prisons Obsolete?’ and ‘Golden Gulag’
Today’s prison systems are considered a pressing social issue, generating diverse opinions and theories from various scholars. Two influential contributions to this discourse are Angela Davis’s Are Prisons Obsolete? and Ruth Wilson Gilmore’s Golden Gulag: Prisons, Surplus, Crisis, and Opposition in Globalizing California. While both books critically examine the prison industrial complex and argue for its reformation or abolition, their central themes, writing styles, and target audiences differ, contributing to a rich dialogue surrounding mass incarceration and its implications.

Similarities

At their core, both Davis and Gilmore assert that the prison system is inadequate, ineffective, and inherently flawed. They each argue for the abolition of prisons, believing that they no longer fulfill their intended purpose of rehabilitation and deterrence. Davis argues that prisons have become a permanent feature of society, obscuring the real alternatives to incarceration (Davis, 2003). She advocates for a reimagining of justice that focuses on community support, education, and social services. Similarly, Gilmore highlights that the prison expansion has not correlated with any decrease in crime rates, emphasizing that the focus should shift toward addressing the root causes of criminal behavior (Gilmore, 2007). Both authors conclude that massive incarceration has exacerbated societal inequalities, particularly along racial and socioeconomic lines.
Their works also converge on the critique of policing and the systemic violations of prisoners' rights. Davis discusses how prisons are often sites of violence, exploitation, and neglect, where inmates, especially women and marginalized populations, suffer various forms of abuse. Both texts highlight forced labor within prison systems, where inmates are exploited without financial compensation, while the state profits from their labor. This shared theme underscores the need for comprehensive reforms that cannot merely adjust existing systems but necessitate their complete reevaluation.
Both Davis and Gilmore view prison reforms as historically inadequate. Davis posits that reforms are merely temporary fixes that uphold rather than dismantle the existing oppressive systems (Davis, 2003). Gilmore supports this notion, asserting that despite numerous reform efforts, incarceration rates continue to escalate, fueled by ongoing cycles of poverty and systemic racism. They both present a call to action toward societal change through grassroots movements and community engagement, highlighting the role of citizen activism and collective opposition against the prison industrial complex.

Differences

Though both authors share similar sentiments regarding the ineffectiveness of prisons, the focus and tone of their arguments differ significantly. Angela Davis’s Are Prisons Obsolete? is rooted in her personal experience as a civil rights activist and scholar. Her writing is assertive and authoritative, drawing on theoretical frameworks and quotes from prominent thinkers like Michel Foucault and W.E.B. Du Bois (Davis, 2003). Davis employs a compelling narrative style that intertwines historical context with contemporary analysis, aiming to inspire and mobilize her readers, particularly those already aligned with the anti-prison ethos.
Conversely, Ruth Wilson Gilmore’s Golden Gulag adopts a more analytical and sociological perspective. Rather than relying heavily on theoretical quotes, she emphasizes empirical data and real-life examples to illustrate the complex social dynamics around prison expansion, particularly in California. Gilmore deeply examines the intersection of political, economic, and social forces that have culminated in the prison boom, providing a historical framework that emphasizes local conditions and global influences (Gilmore, 2007). This more nuanced approach presents a detailed critique of systemic issues, reflecting a less personal and more academic tone compared to Davis’s passionate advocacy.
Moreover, the audiences they target differ substantially. Davis primarily addresses anti-prison advocates and activists, aiming to galvanize them into collective action to abolish prisons altogether (Davis, 2003). Her style encourages existing activists to expand their efforts and encompasses a broader range of contemporary justice issues. In contrast, Gilmore addresses a more diverse audience, including policymakers, community members, and academics. Her text appeals to both skeptics and supporters of the prison system, urging a reevaluation of current practices through the lens of community impacts (Gilmore, 2007).
Together, these differences indicate diverse pathways toward the same end: a transformative vision for justice that transcends current penal systems. Davis favors immediate reform leading to abolition, while Gilmore roots her argument in a detailed historical analysis that seeks to uncover the economic and social dynamics at play.

Conclusion

In concluding their discourses, both Davis and Gilmore underscore the imperative for transformation within the modern penal system. Their call for the abolition of prisons emphasizes an urgent need to rethink how justice and social responsibility are framed and enacted. While their approaches, tones, and audience targeting differ significantly, their unyielding commitment to justice and equity remains a powerful commonality that enriches the conversation surrounding mass incarceration.
Both texts are critical resources for understanding the complexities of the American prison system, serving as catalysts for dialogue and action among activists, scholars, and the wider public. By engaging with both perspectives, readers are encouraged not only to educate themselves on the issues at hand but also to consider their role in advocating for change.

References

Davis, A. Y. (2003). Are prisons obsolete? Seven Stories Press.
Gilmore, R. W. (2007). Golden gulag: Prisons, surplus, crisis, and opposition in globalizing California. University of California Press.
Alexander, M. (2010). The new Jim Crow: Mass incarceration in the age of colorblindness. The New Press.
Wacquant, L. (2001). Deadly symbiosis: When ghetto and prison meet and mesh. Punishment and Society, 3(4), 495-505.
Haney, C. (2001). The psychological impact of incarceration: Implications for post-prison adjustment. In Prisoner reentry and reintegration (pp. 39-61).
Browne, A. (2008). The impact of incarceration on family relations. The Future of Children, 18(1), 10-22.
Tonry, M. (1999). Why punish? How much? A reader on punishment. Oxford University Press.
Clear, T. R., & Frost, N. A. (2014). The punishment imperative: The rise and failure of mass incarceration in America. New York University Press.
Mauer, M. (2006). Race to imprisonment: The devastating toll of the drug war on communities of color. The New Press.
Beckett, K., & Western, B. (2001). Governing social marginality: Welfare, incarceration, and the transformation of state policy. Punishment and Society, 3(1), 43-59.