Reflections on the Guillotine
Camus, A. (1957). In Resistance, Rebellion and Death (1961).
This research essay is worth a special note. As the title suggests, it is based on a historical analysis but nevertheless full of reflections and reasoning. He refuses purely sentimental confusion because it is made up of cowardice and eventually stands on the worst side. Every paragraph is written with his conviction. The supporting documents which described moments at the guillotine are as chilly as excoriating one's own.
He argues that if the capital punishment is a regrettable necessity as its advocates say and an example in the effort of preventing another crime, the execution should be performed publicly and described vividly so that all others know. But the State hides it because such punishments paradoxically would blame the state for letting such crimes happen. Statistically those who faced capital punishment in fact had seen its execution in their life. So, criminals who commit such crimes are less likely to be intimidated than quiet individuals. Camus also finds correlation with alcohol consumption and crimes, in particular, child murders, which is an example that punishments are socially selective. He mentions, "The unpunished crime infected the whole city. But innocence condemned or crime too severely punished, in the long run, soils the city just as much." While emphasizing seeking reasonable solutions to the death penalty, Camus quotes from Jean Graven, Swiss jurist: "Faced with the problem that is once more confronting our conscience and our reason, we think that a solution must be sought, not through the conceptions, problems, and arguments of the past, nor through the hopes and theoretical promises of the future, but through the ideas, recognized facts and necessities of the present" (Revue de Criminologie et de Police Technique (Geneva), special issue, 1952).
Lastly Camus articulates that people killed by the state for the past thirty years for political reasons outnumbered private murders, thus, society should protect itself not from individuals but from the State. After all, capital punishment is an examplary system of absurdity in that no one has the right to call another's extinction and the judgment is ridiculously subjective.
This research essay is worth a special note. As the title suggests, it is based on a historical analysis but nevertheless full of reflections and reasoning. He refuses purely sentimental confusion because it is made up of cowardice and eventually stands on the worst side. Every paragraph is written with his conviction. The supporting documents which described moments at the guillotine are as chilly as excoriating one's own.
He argues that if the capital punishment is a regrettable necessity as its advocates say and an example in the effort of preventing another crime, the execution should be performed publicly and described vividly so that all others know. But the State hides it because such punishments paradoxically would blame the state for letting such crimes happen. Statistically those who faced capital punishment in fact had seen its execution in their life. So, criminals who commit such crimes are less likely to be intimidated than quiet individuals. Camus also finds correlation with alcohol consumption and crimes, in particular, child murders, which is an example that punishments are socially selective. He mentions, "The unpunished crime infected the whole city. But innocence condemned or crime too severely punished, in the long run, soils the city just as much." While emphasizing seeking reasonable solutions to the death penalty, Camus quotes from Jean Graven, Swiss jurist: "Faced with the problem that is once more confronting our conscience and our reason, we think that a solution must be sought, not through the conceptions, problems, and arguments of the past, nor through the hopes and theoretical promises of the future, but through the ideas, recognized facts and necessities of the present" (Revue de Criminologie et de Police Technique (Geneva), special issue, 1952).
Lastly Camus articulates that people killed by the state for the past thirty years for political reasons outnumbered private murders, thus, society should protect itself not from individuals but from the State. After all, capital punishment is an examplary system of absurdity in that no one has the right to call another's extinction and the judgment is ridiculously subjective.
Comments