Vigilante Justice in India - Sampat Pal Devi

International Women's Day is held every year on March 8th, and this year The Guardian put out a list of the "Top 100 Women". They range from Lady Gaga to Hawa Abdi. The women on the list have achieved success in their own rights, but have also helped women as a whole. One woman: Sampat Pal Devi (shown above) caught my eye.

Devi is the leader of an all women's vigilante fighting force in the province of Uttar Pradesh, called the Gulabi Gang (translated as the pink gang, for the pink saris they wear). Armed with sticks, they have stormed police stations when they have refused to register complaints about violence against women, attacked men that have abused their wives, unearthed corruption in distributions of grain to the poor, stopped child marriages, and encouraged girls to go to school. Devi is a controversial character, and she has many criminal charges against her. However, she continues to travel around India on a rusty bicycle recruiting new members. With 20,000 members throughout India, with that number growing every day, Devi and the members of the Gulabi Gang are a powerful force.

So, is vigilante justice a suitable alternative to state sponsored justice? Devi and her gang have taken justice into their own hands because they believe that the state is not doing a good enough job to protect women. The danger would be that in an ideal state run justice force there are rules to prevent innocent people from getting hurt or convicted for something they did not do. Vigilante justice can easy descend to a place where innocent people do get hurt. Also, in Devi's version of justice an "eye for an eye" is implemented, and that can also get out of hand. On the other hand, many women in Uttar Pradesh and throughout India do not have any protection from their husbands or other men, so Gulabi Gang provides that. They also seem to have a positive impact on their communities. So, although vigilante justice can be misused it seems to work well for Devi and the Gulabi Gang.

What do you think?

To Draft or Not To Draft

Last Wednesday (March 2, 2011), Jon Stewart had Allison Stranger on the Daily Show to discuss foreign policy and her new book "One Nation Under Contract" (find the episode here). The book is about how the wars and Iraq and Afghanistan are the first time the United States has been involved in conflict and had about the same number of contractors as servicemen. However, that is not what I want to talk about. During the interview, the part that stuck in my head was Stranger's argument that now is the time to have a real national conversation about reinstating the draft.

If a draft were reinstated, since almost everyone would be involved in the military, there would be much more public interest in where our military goes. So the declaration of war would be given much stronger consideration, which I think is warranted because of the weight a war holds. Rousseau and Aristotle both argued for a draft so that democracy could be upheld - with every citizen involved Rousseau and Aristotle believed that the citizens would be more inclined to actively seek a better society for all citizens. There is also the argument that it gives young adults a sense of attachment to their country and descipline as well as breaks class divisions by combining all conscripts together. Economically it is more efficient because conscripts are not paid when they are not in active duty because they are in their civilian jobs while a professional military is paid even when inactive.

The reasons against are more well known, and many of them are very similar to the arguments to uphold a democracy for a draft. The power of an individual to choose whether or not they want to fight is a powerful and just argument and the act of imposing a duty on someone warrants the comparison to involuntary servitude. It can also be said that the very act of conscripting someone is an act that denies them their rights and destroys democracy in that area. Conscription during peace-time is not economically cost effective either.

Conscription in the US is a touchy subject and although I am unwilling to say I would support a draft I think the idea deserves more thought. What do you think?