Whatever nice-sounding things the little kids are told, the police, "justice" system, etc. are actually more interested in enforcing the existing social order than they are in being the good guys, or the letter or spirit of the law.
And such "schools" are certainly all about enforcing the existing social order, upon "residents" who the Cops & Co. are not favorably inclined toward.
> the police, "justice" system, etc. are actually more interested in enforcing the existing social order than they are in being the good guys, or the letter or spirit of the law.
What are you interested in? I know it's a provocative question, but blaming some 'system' is 90% of the problem. What am I interested in? My actions speak.
The "system" isn't a vague boogeyman but the product of individual decisions that funnel things in aggregate to a certain conclusion. Think of how birds fly in a "V" formation, something emergent from each bird following the same simple rules.
A teen not abiding by the boundaries of society may be dealt with in a way that seems viciously over-reactive because maintaining order is the entire focus of each element of the legal/judicial system. The degree of infraction is less important than respecting the authority of the system itself. Like be an asshole to a judge or cop and see what happens - it shouldn't matter as much as it does, but everyone instantly feels the raw danger of doing such a thing because of this dynamic.
The problem is that "testing boundaries" is a natural phase of growing up and is really about coming to grips with your own identity and values. There is a huge disconnect between how "the system" (or people serving roles within the system) approach these situation vs. any actual threat to the system itself.
We're not birds or beasts acting on instinct; they don't invent democracy and form judicial systems. The system is not somewhere else, it's not something else, it's not someone else, it's sitting in front of your computer right now.
Let me try: Blaming 'the system' isn't abandoning responsibility (or isn't necessarily). It's a statement about the structure of the problem.
Some evils are caused by the intent of one individual. Remove that individual, or change their behaviour, no more problem. In other cases the situation is perpetuated by a structure of social relations which isn't visible if you only consider individuals.
Yes, ultimately individuals have to take responsibility and take action, but that is necessary but not sufficient. To understand what it will take to cure the disease requires understanding 'the system'.
Suppose in this case, one year we manage to remove all abusive staff from these schools. That's a solution at the level of individual responsibility. And well worth doing. But soon enough abusive individuals will work their way into these positions again. Only by recognising that this system is inherently prone to result in abuse can you figure out how to prevent it.
We are literally beasts that invented justice and democracy. This is a reasonable interpretation of a constrained view of these things. Such is my view.
That said, I agree wholeheartedly with the conclusion in the second paragraph.
And such "schools" are certainly all about enforcing the existing social order, upon "residents" who the Cops & Co. are not favorably inclined toward.