El Salvador Mega Prison

balaks said:
With huge support from the population by the looks of it. I'd say that if most of us lived there and experienced what many of them have in the last decade we would likely feel the same.
Click to expand...
I would venture to guess that you could get huge portions of Alabama to support a policy of rounding up teenage black men in Birmingham and Montgomery and throwing them in El Salvador style prisons. You would be cool with that right? After all, it would have huge support.
 
One think that I heard Bukele say in a speech months ago when this started, is that prisoners were having a bed and 3 meals a day with decent food while part of the population didn't have access as much as the prisoners comfortability. And that all that was paid with Salvadorian taxes. That partly of why people was living miserably was due to the extortion that the country had been facing because of these gangs (I guess shit government policies had nothing to do, like public treasury buying bitcoins) and that this had to stop, that a prisoner could not live better than people in el salvador with salvadorian taxes. They stripped the prisons of beds (so, they did it deliberately) and only 1 meal a day.
 
Human Rights have always been hard fought for in whichever countries which have won them, if a government can rely on Populism as their excuse then those rights are easily lost. Any group which cause a problem, maybe one that needs the rights won to hold protests, political voting matters, then lies can much more easily tell the public that taking those rights away again has been supported by the larger percentage of the population. I don't think it's my imagination, my dark dreams or nightmares because we've seen it in Europe several times, we last saw it in Britain used very successfully by Margaret Thatcher's overwhelmingly popular govt. to kill off the car industry, the coal, to privatise citizens assets, to tell the newly redundant and jobless communities up and down the country that they needed to get on their bikes, leave their families on their own or uproot them maybe - you see it was popular and the protections in place for workers were taken away.

Once you set a precedent your authoritarian govt starts using populism as excuses to maybe put more people in mega prisons, as in this case without trials, without recourse to defence or justice. Sure populism got a lot of drugs and guns off the streets but you also delayed justice which as they say in the phrase is justice denied. In Britain the current govt. is using the removal of the country from the EU as an excuse to leave the ECHR - the courts which protect Human Rights. Sure, not everyone deserves to keep their Human Rights. It took Britain to create and for parties to sign up to the first document entitling the wider population to initial Human Rights over and above what a King and Parliament deemed his divine right, until 1215 AD. Another 600 years or so to begin enacting those rights, since then 300 years to develop equal rights until what we have, or had today or soon. Us Westerners sure shouldn't be treating themselves as people who know what living in other countries is like. Our ancestors fought for our protections, it's so easy to give them away, we know nothing but our forefathers suffered through our own medieval era. Makes me wonder what else is going on in El Salvador to be honest.
 
WI_Red said:
I would venture to guess that you could get huge portions of Alabama to support a policy of rounding up teenage black men in Birmingham and Montgomery and throwing them in El Salvador style prisons. You would be cool with that right? After all, it would have huge support.
Click to expand...
Do you honestly believe that? Very odd straw man attempt by the way.
 
You can always tell the people who have only ever lived in first world countries going by discussions like this. None of you have ever lived in a third world country that is controlled by crime where you live in fear everyday. I've been robbed (A few times), had my first car stolen, felt a gun put against my head multiple times in one night, been tied up in a room in the dark, along with other people, while a friend of mine was raped in that room. I'm sorry but when you murder, rape, steal and terrorize the lives of others, you do not deserve the same rights as honest, law abiding citizens. I recognize that that does not align with a lot of my other views on things, and I am willing to accept that that is strongly influenced by personal experiences, but it is what it is.

Would be great if my country had something like this and a leader willing to execute it.
 
Cloud7 said:
You can always tell the people who have only ever lived in first world countries going by discussions like this. None of you have ever lived in a third world country that is controlled by crime where you live in fear everyday. I've been robbed (A few times), had my first car stolen, felt a gun put against my head multiple times in one night, been tied up in a room in the dark, along with other people, while a friend of mine was raped in that room. I'm sorry but when you murder, rape, steal and terrorize the lives of others, you do not deserve the same rights as honest, law abiding citizens. I recognize that that does not align with a lot of my other views on things, and I am willing to accept that that is strongly influenced by personal experiences, but it is what it is.

Would be great if my country had something like this and a leader willing to execute it.
Click to expand...

If you have lived in a third world country, chances are you already had one of those. Guess how it worked.
 
It is disturbing to read how many people are willing to forego due process and the rule of law, in order to build some torture prisons that won't even have a lasting effect on crime. Because at best they fight the symptoms of deeper issues, but do absolutely nothing to resolve the underlying issues that actually cause crime.
I also find it disturbing that so many people just decide to believe that whoever is in a prison like this, is deserving of the sentence or even guilty. Because in a country as corrupt as El Salvador, we must assume that there are more than enough people imprisoned who have done nothing wrong or have never received a due process.
And by the way, if any of this shit worked, the USA would be the safest country on earth. It is not. Not even close.
 
HTG said:
It is disturbing to read how many people are willing to forego due process and the rule of law, in order to build some torture prisons that won't even have a lasting effect on crime. Because at best they fight the symptoms of deeper issues, but do absolutely nothing to resolve the underlying issues that actually cause crime.
I also find it disturbing that so many people just decide to believe that whoever is in a prison like this, is deserving of the sentence or even guilty. Because in a country as corrupt as El Salvador, we must assume that there are more than enough people imprisoned who have done nothing wrong or have never received a due process.
And by the way, if any of this shit worked, the USA would be the safest country on earth. It is not. Not even close.
Click to expand...

This. I shat on Rodrigo Duterte because he went extremely far with extrajudicial actions to lead his so-called war on drugs in the Philippines while it did not address the underlying issues at all. El Salvador ain't getting out of this in the long term, not with that kind of poor attempt at deterring.

Part of a country's evolution from third-world to second-world or better requires respect of due process. If not, the same old spiral will go on and on to no end.
 
balaks said:
They arrested anyone with a gang tattoo. You only get that if you are a gang member. You only become a gang member if you have murdered someone. That's your initiation into this gang from what I have read.
Click to expand...

According to Bukele's own statement, only 1 % of the arrests will be innocent people, which means 400 people in this vacation resort and 6-700 people in total so far. If you're not inclined to trust a dictator, then maybe you'll suspect that the number is higher. It's a bit strange that you're more optimistic than the guy who is actually behind this.

You're also way off on the murder thing. Murder being a requirement to join is a thing that varies from clique to clique, and even if this wasn't true the government is not only going after suspected MS-13 members. They have arrested more than the amount of total MS-13 members worldwide. A lot of the people arrested won't be murderers, and reqruitment is often a forced thing.
 
WI_Red said:
I would venture to guess that you could get huge portions of Alabama to support a policy of rounding up teenage black men in Birmingham and Montgomery and throwing them in El Salvador style prisons. You would be cool with that right? After all, it would have huge support.
Click to expand...

That is based on race. There is no indication of that happening here. Someone mentioned Nazi Germany earlier as well and its just wrong examples.

The high approval rating point is brought up to show the population believes people who are supposed to go to jail are getting thrown in jail. If a high number of innocent folks were rounded up as well in the mix of it all, the approval rating would never be this high. There are other reasons it's brought up as well and that is in context of a less developed nation trying to get lectured (yet again) by a developed western nation on how to police fully ignoring the situation and context.

Even a place like Norway couldn't get to where it is without centuries of brutal policing. Different societies need different laws based on what is relative to their time and region. Pretty sure some jails in the west have better living standards than lower class honest folk in poor countries. Point being, the context matters and that's why the high approval rating is brought up. To portray that within the context of what was happening in El Salvador an overwhelming majority (something like 95%!) believe this is justified. Comparisons to Nazis or what you just said doesn't really apply.

To reply to something @Mr Pigeon and @adexkola said earlier about not being fair if it's your own family involved, I am pretty sure the 95% or so that support this don't all have families murdered either but they've seen the situation from up close and live through it every day. You can't say every last bit of them are just being emotional or reactionary can you?
 
balaks said:
Do you honestly believe that? Very odd straw man attempt by the way.
Click to expand...
Yes, I 100% believe with this, especially if it was a secret vote. I lived in Alabama for 20 years and spend large amounts of time working with rural folk, especially farmers.

Also, not a straw man argument at all since your used popular support as an argument for justifying this.
 
NotThatSoph said:
According to Bukele's own statement, only 1 % of the arrests will be innocent people, which means 400 people in this vacation resort and 6-700 people in total so far. If you're not inclined to trust a dictator, then maybe you'll suspect that the number is higher. It's a bit strange that you're more optimistic than the guy who is actually behind this.

You're also way off on the murder thing. Murder being a requirement to join is a thing that varies from clique to clique, and even if this wasn't true the government is not only going after suspected MS-13 members. They have arrested more than the amount of total MS-13 members worldwide. A lot of the people arrested won't be murderers, and reqruitment is often a forced thing.
Click to expand...

Bukele is a dictator?

EDIT: And also, he never said only 1% but no more than 1% in his statement so that's a big difference.
 
shamans said:
That is based on race. There is no indication of that happening here. Someone mentioned Nazi Germany earlier as well and its just wrong examples.

The high approval rating point is brought up to show the population believes people who are supposed to go to jail are getting thrown in jail. If a high number of innocent folks were rounded up as well in the mix of it all, the approval rating would never be this high. There are other reasons it's brought up as well and that is in context of a less developed nation trying to get lectured (yet again) by a developed western nation on how to police fully ignoring the situation and context.

Even a place like Norway couldn't get to where it is without centuries of brutal policing. Different societies need different laws based on what is relative to their region. Pretty sure some jails in the west have better living standards than lower class honest folk in poor countries. Point being, the context matters and that's why the high approval rating is brought up. Comparisons to Nazis or what you just said doesn't really apply.
Click to expand...

I see, so it's cool to for a population to support a group being stripped of human rights as long as it is not being done for racial reasons or religious reasons. How about political reasons? This is what I can't wrap my head around, that some of you are cool with this since it is happening to mostly bad people (the innocents, just collateral damage, right?). But here is the thing, who gets to define what constitutes a "bad person"? This is why some in this thread, myself included, are so against this. Either human rights apply to everyone in all cases or they are a mirage that can be pulled by who is in power.
 
WI_Red said:
I see, so it's cool to for a population to support a group being stripped of human rights as long as it is not being done for racial reasons or religious reasons. How about political reasons? This is what I can't wrap my head around, that some of you are cool with this since it is happening to mostly bad people (the innocents, just collateral damage, right?). But here is the thing, who gets to define what constitutes a "bad person"? This is why some in this thread, myself included, are so against this. Either human rights apply to everyone in all cases or they are a mirage that can be pulled by who is in power.
Click to expand...

Yes race and a different ethnic group with context makes a huge difference. Black people are a less privileged part of a dynamic in which the white person holds power. You're giving a totally wrong example comparing it to this. I also never said "as long as its not done for" but yes, of course those are some pretty darn obvious reasons wouldn't you say?

And of course, political reasons would be silly as well. Now to the actual reason and who defines what constitutes a "bad person" I would say having a giant ass ms-13 tattoo on your back is a pretty easy start?

Let me ask you, would you show the same sympathy to a neo nazi group with a bunch of massive swastika tattoos on their back being rounded up in a country that had a serious problem with it?
 
shamans said:
Yes race and a different ethnic group with context makes a huge difference. Black people are a less privileged part of a dynamic in which the white person holds power. You're giving a totally wrong example comparing it to this. I also never said "as long as its not done for" but yes, of course those are some pretty darn obvious reasons wouldn't you say?

And of course, political reasons would be silly as well. Now to the actual reason and who defines what constitutes a "bad person" I would say having a giant ass ms-13 tattoo on your back is a pretty easy start?

Let me ask you, would you show the same sympathy to a neo nazi group with a bunch of massive swastika tattoos on their back being rounded up in a country that had a serious problem with it?
Click to expand...

This is so frustrating. It's not about "showing sympathy", it's about acknowledging that using popular support as a rationale for allowing government to strip human rights from a group (defined by said government) is the slipperiest of slippery slopes to go down.

Race? Religion? Ethnic differences? Political affiliations? ALL of those have been used and are now in use as rationales for populist governmental attacks on human rights.
 
WI_Red said:
This is so frustrating. It's not about "showing sympathy", it's about acknowledging that using popular support as a rationale for allowing government to strip human rights from a group (defined by said government) is the slipperiest of slippery slopes to go down.

Race? Religion? Ethnic differences? Political affiliations? ALL of those have been used and are now in use as rationales for populist governmental attacks on human rights.
Click to expand...

It's not a rationale. A bunch of folks aren't arbitrarily deciding in a mob like fashion to target 1 group for no reason. It's a war against ms-13 criminals. The support is brought up to show the idea that innocents are indiscriminately getting rounded up. This is not true as the numbers wouldn't add up. The second reason it's brought up, again, is to provide context since you can't compare how violent a punishment is without the context of local laws and norms.

There are facilities in American prisons that if not granted would be considered "violation of human rights". In poorer countries, even lower class people can't afford these same facilities so do we expect them to provide it to their prisoners? That's just an example.

Also, I still want to know your answer to this: Let me ask you, would you show the same sympathy to a neo nazi group with a bunch of massive swastika tattoos on their back being rounded up in a country that had a serious problem with it?
 
RedTiger said:
A1 bingo.
Click to expand...

Statistically, crime in the US and UK isn't that far off, especially if you take into account different states and cities.

Also, it did work in the US. It worked in the 90s under Guliani in NYC. I posted a long post fully backed with stats a few pages back busting any myth it wasn't Giuliani's policies that busted NYC crime.
 
shamans said:
It's not a rationale. A bunch of folks aren't arbitrarily deciding in a mob like fashion to target 1 group for no reason. It's a war against ms-13 criminals. The support is brought up to show the idea that innocents are indiscriminately getting rounded up. This is not true as the numbers wouldn't add up. The second reason it's brought up, again, is to provide context since you can't compare how violent a punishment is without the context of local laws and norms.

There are facilities in American prisons that if not granted would be considered "violation of human rights". In poorer countries, even lower class people can't afford these same facilities so do we expect them to provide it to their prisoners? That's just an example.

Also, I still want to know your answer to this: Let me ask you, would you show the same sympathy to a neo nazi group with a bunch of massive swastika tattoos on their back being rounded up in a country that had a serious problem with it?
Click to expand...

I thought I addressed your question, but I guess you need a direct answer: Yes, I would have a problem with it if the sole reason someone was being arrested was because of a tattoo.

As to the rest of your post, I really don't know what else to say so I will repeat myself again. Governments should never be given authority to strip human rights from any group under its control, even if 99% of the population is in support of it. This does not mean people should not be put in jail, or that they should all be Norwegian style prisons, but it does mean that everyone arrested should have access to due process, adequate food and sanitation, and a safe place to sleep.

edit: This is why the ACLU defends the right of those same neo-nazi's to peaceably assemble and their right to free speech. Defending the rights of others, even when what they stand for disgusts us, is the only way to ensure that legal protections remain free of exceptions.
 
Last edited:
I'm also a bit curious, to the people who see the statistics and conclude that this is so effective. What did El Salvador do in 2012, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019 and 2020 that worked so well?
 
WI_Red said:
Yes, I 100% believe with this, especially if it was a secret vote. I lived in Alabama for 20 years and spend large amounts of time working with rural folk, especially farmers.

Also, not a straw man argument at all since your used popular support as an argument for justifying this.
Click to expand...
There’s a difference between popular support amongst a subsection of population (rural white Alabama farmers) and the majority of a whole nation.
 
choiboyx012 said:
There’s a difference between popular support amongst a subsection of population (rural white Alabama farmers) and the majority of a whole nation.
Click to expand...

Alabama and El Salvador populations are about the same.
 
shamans said:
Sounds like a lame Musk style joke but by no measure is he actually a dictator (yet)
Click to expand...

He qualifies in my book.

El Salvador's top court has ruled that presidents can serve two consecutive terms, paving the way for leader Nayib Bukele to seek re-election in 2024.
The judges behind the decision were appointed in May after the National Assembly, dominated by the president's party, sacked the previous justices.
Click to expand...

Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-58451370
 
shamans said:
Statistically, crime in the US and UK isn't that far off, especially if you take into account different states and cities.

Also, it did work in the US. It worked in the 90s under Guliani in NYC. I posted a long post fully backed with stats a few pages back busting any myth it wasn't Giuliani's policies that busted NYC crime.
Click to expand...
And as they have harsher sentences, worse prisons and the death penalty, it should be far less criminal. Yet it isn’t. Because this shit doesn’t work. It never did and never will. Because crime is not a result of a lack of cruel prisons, but the result of a whole bunch of underlying socioeconomic factors.
 
choiboyx012 said:
There’s a difference between popular support amongst a subsection of population (rural white Alabama farmers) and the majority of a whole nation.
Click to expand...

Ok, fine. In 1996 65%+ of the US believed that marriage (a basic human right I would say) between homosexual couples should not be allowed. So that was good and proper, right?

Unfortunately, it was only when popular opinion shifted enough that cases like Obergefell could proceed to the supreme court. When popular opinion sways what is and what is not considered a human right the only outcome can be the limitation of those rights by the majority.
 
HTG said:
And as they have harsher sentences, worse prisons and the death penalty, it should be far less criminal. Yet it isn’t. Because this shit doesn’t work. It never did and never will. Because crime is not a result of a lack of cruel prisons, but the result of a whole bunch of underlying socioeconomic factors.
Click to expand...

China, Singapore, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar
 
WI_Red said:
I thought I addressed your question, but I guess you need a direct answer: Yes, I would have a problem with it if the sole reason someone was being arrested was because of a tattoo.

As to the rest of your post, I really don't know what else to say so I will repeat myself again. Governments should never be given authority to strip human rights from any group under its control, even if 99% of the population is in support of it. This does not mean people should not be put in jail, or that they should all be Norwegian style prisons, but it does mean that everyone arrested should have access to due process, adequate food and sanitation, and a safe place to sleep.

edit: This is why the ACLU defends the right of those same neo-nazi's to peaceably assemble and their right to free speech. Defending the rights of others, even when what they stand for disgusts us, is the only way to ensure that legal protections remain free of exceptions.
Click to expand...

At this point I think whatever I am saying is not going through so I will drop it. I will say one last time that it's not because "people are in support of it" but because they are psychotic murdering criminals. The support, again, is mentioned to show relative to the situation there they do not see it as a violation of human rights so I would take word of locals.

According to your definition of what is and isn't inhumane, most prisons not in a developed country would be deemed inhumane. Should they stop having prisons?

Adequete food and sanitation and a safe place to sleep is a privilege for many people. I think you can imagine how it would be perceived if you told them your prisoners deserve this, especially from someone living in a western bubble (including myself in that bubble as well)
 
WI_Red said:
I thought I addressed your question, but I guess you need a direct answer: Yes, I would have a problem with it if the sole reason someone was being arrested was because of a tattoo.

As to the rest of your post, I really don't know what else to say so I will repeat myself again. Governments should never be given authority to strip human rights from any group under its control, even if 99% of the population is in support of it. This does not mean people should not be put in jail, or that they should all be Norwegian style prisons, but it does mean that everyone arrested should have access to due process, adequate food and sanitation, and a safe place to sleep.

edit: This is why the ACLU defends the right of those same neo-nazi's to peaceably assemble and their right to free speech. Defending the rights of others, even when what they stand for disgusts us, is the only way to ensure that legal protections remain free of exceptions.
Click to expand...
Not that i disagree with the bolded, but human rights (or the lack thereof) is relative in the context of a country’s sociopolitical, economic environment is it not? I think that’s what he was trying to get at. We can’t really apply our western first world living standards on a dirt poor country that has lived through violent civil wars and then violent modern gangs. Their living conditions are shitty. I’m sure their prisons conditions have always been shitty. You mentioned Norwegian prisons so you understand this relativity. So what to you constitutes adequate food, sanitation, and sleeping room in El Salvador, so as not to strip them of human rights? And is this any different to prisons in other third world countries with drug/gang violence like Brazil and Colombia?
 
WI_Red said:
I am always (and by now I shouldn’t be) floored by peoples willingness to accept state sponsored terror, violence, and executions, as if it only happens to the “right people”. Hell, we had a poster say it was “correct” to let the dogs loose on suspects in another thread. We are no more enlightened then our ancestors, we just have fancier ways of being monsters.
Click to expand...

Whilst I agree with that, in the above instance, it's easy for people who live in a more civilised society and who don't have to live in fear of gangs, to take a more measured view. I don't have to worry about being shot or stabbed on the way to work, but if I did, I suspect I'd be less sympathetic to the obvious difficulties people who commit that kind of crime have probably had which impacted why they behave that way.

Generally, harsh consequences for crime will always be a vote winner with the general public, because if you're a victim of crime you want to see the perpetrators suffer. That's just human nature.

Not sure how you solve a problem like El Salvador with gang culture so engrained and a murder rate like it had. Locking everyone with a tattoo up is probably the easiest option.
 
choiboyx012 said:
Not that i disagree with the bolded, but human rights (or the lack thereof) is relative in the context of a country’s sociopolitical, economic environment is it not?
Click to expand...

This is wrong. Regardless of a country's envirornment, human rights are absolute. Genocide for example, is not "more understandable" in a poor impoverished nation, and that defense wouldn't fly at the Hague.
 
adexkola said:
This is wrong. Regardless of a country's envirornment, human rights are absolute. Genocide for example, is not "more understandable" in a poor impoverished nation, and that defense wouldn't fly at the Hague.
Click to expand...
And which rights are those, that are specifically being violated?
 
choiboyx012 said:
And which rights are those, that are specifically being violated?
Click to expand...

Right to life
Freedom from torture
Freedom from cruel/inhuman/degrading treatment and/or punishment
Freedom from slavery and servitude
Prohbition against the retrospective operation of criminal laws
Right to recognition before the law (aka can't disappear suspects with no due process)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.