comparing/contrasting the Venezuelan/Zimbabwean economic situations with historical hyperinflation "episodes"

In checking around the "deep Web" a few days ago, I found yet another update on Zimbabwe's ongoing economic meltdown of just epic proportions:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-33105400

...which mentions that the "Zimbabwean $", for (more than) what that's worth now, will be "phased out" in the foreseeable future, to be "replaced" by various currencies, like our $, the British £, the Euro, the Chinese/Japanese ¥, and other international currencies... Apparently, however, I've noticed in some places that they introduced these small-valued "centavos" (the Spanish word for "cents"/"coins") last year, effectively keeping their (worthless) $ going, albeit only in coin form, unlike practically all other currencies, regardless of whether or not they use coins and notes, or either or...

http://source.co.zw/2014/12/rbz-issues-centavo-coins-says-bringing-back-zimbabwe-dollar-suicidal/

...that being said, the numerous comparisons to other inflated/hyperinflated currencies of old, like Weimar Germany (1920s), most of Latin America, especially 1970s-90s Brazil, and their cruzeiro (the Portuguese word for "cross") (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=boE_xlkBcJM&list=FLRgGN7E7EWySO2r7NcFtULQ&index=53 for an old supermarket commercial from back then that, I think, best explains that whole crisis), among others, have continued as a result of that still-breaking news...

http://www.cato.org/pubs/dpa/html/dpa6/dpa6index.html (a Cato Institute report on Zimbabwe's "growth" ever since they (supposedly) ditched their currency)

most "conspiracy theorist" types out there, though, think that somehow, as a result of what's ongoing in the rest of the world right now (North America, Europe, over here, and down in Australia/New Zealand) (mostly due to various government practices, yet these people keep voting in such radicalswith their votes, like Greece (the neo-Nazi "Golden Dawn", or the current far-left "ruling party" there, "Syriza", or Hungary (the also neo-Nazi "Fidesz") right now, for instance), there'll be some sort of "reset" of the world's currencies, and that, again, somehow, those places will soon experience similar situations, while those other places that have experienced/are experiencing such meltdowns will somehow be "prosperous" "soon"...

​...I don't know how long it's been since any of you last studied/taught/otherwise followed, if ever, any non-sports economics, or any (non-"spin zone") politics in general, but I'm sure you've continued to follow such situations ever since any new developments in whichever stories...

I like to think of stuff like this as an important "buffer" against all the "crazy talk" in the media (particularly the "fringe" "new media", where most of those "conspiracy theorists" tend to emerge, or, even, sadly, our "talk radio" landscape, promoting such fringe "ideas") about economics:

http://www.netrootsmass.net/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/images/20100428-4-Marshall-Auerback.pdf

...mind you, that report is from a left-leaning website, but at least it's not all "doom and gloom", like the just aforementioned groups...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=boE_xlkBcJM (for an example of what I just referred to, RE: 1990's Brazil)

I know some of you most likely just called Robert Mugabe's actions in control of Rhodesia/Zimbabwe these past decades "criminal" after reading the above part of this post, but, for those of us who claim ancestry/heritage/etc. from any Latin American country, that Brazilian example, in terms of historical economic free falls, and the Venezuelan example, in current times, in spite of the sheer size of the inflation figures there, both pale in comparison to the fact that military governments were everywhere up and down and across the continent last century - no wonder so many of them/us are on other continents now - it's because of those governments stifling just about every semblance of life down there back then! I mean, at least in 1920s "Weimar" Germany, the government was at least trying to help its citizens, more or less, and just failing spectacularly at doing so, since the country was still paying off its WWI losses... Argentina, Brazil, Chile, the 2 "Guays", Peru, etc., etc., however - between the "disappearances" in (mostly) Argentina and Chile, and the (hyper)inflation in (mostly) Brazil and Peru, life was basically a "living ****" for them back then!

specifically, in Peru, where (most of) my family is originally from, the currency in use now has the same name as their second post-Spanish independence currency (the "sol", abbreviated "S/"), but, from about 1980 on through the rest of that decade, inflation kept creeping ever higher - 1979 and 1981 saw the introductions of S/10.000 and S/50.000 banknotes, in fact, indicating the mere beginning of the country's inflationary crisis, but there's a report here https://prezi.com/tt_9lv1dhytc/inflacion-en-el-peru-1980-1990/ that indicates, among other things:

"SOCIAL
Huelgas , desabastecimiento , violencia, especulación.
Micro empresas en colapso.
Barcos en los puertos se negaban a descargar los productos hasta que no se les pague.
Divisas se agotaron por el mal uso.
En 1883 el fenómeno de el Niño daño a la agricultura e infraestructura vial.
En la sierra la salida de los Señores de la tierra dejo a las sociedades rurales descabezadas socialmente, sin nadie que ocupara su lugar y reactivara la producción."

('social' (causes of the inflation): strikes, stock withdrawals/"selloffs", violence, speculation. Collapsed small businesses. Ships in ports not unloading their cargo/products until they were paid. The currency was only further harmed by misuse. (stuff about "el Niño" and other (historical) climate/weather phenomena, and their (historical) effects on the population)

"ECONÓMICO
Tazas de interés se elevaron en países acreedores, incrementando las cuotas de los países deudores.
Escasez de divisas .
Devaluación de la moneda.
El dolar de EE.UU ,se cotizaba en 12000 soles ---gobierno militar 200 soles."

('economic': interest rates were elevated in creditor nations, incrementing the quotas for their debtors. Scarcity of banknotes/currency. Devaluation. The U.S.$ settled at S/12.000 - for the military government itself, only S/200.)

"POLÍTICO
Situación crítica y compleja por efecto de las drásticas medidas , la reducción de ingresos, estatismo de la banca , incremento de la burocracia
POLÍTICO
Política caudillista , egocéntrica y extremado centralismo en la política
ECONÓMICO
la protección a la industria nacional fue incrementada con altos ancéles, controles de importaciones y prohibiciones
Inflación dejada por Belaúnde (100%) trato de ser combatida de manera heterodoxa , con controles de precios, devaluaciones selectivas y congelamiento del tipo oficial de cambio
Llego a existir mas de media docena de tipo de cambio, según el uso que se les dieran a las divisas
estas parecían medidas intervencionistas permisibles.
El sol fue reemplazado por el inti (100 soles = 1 inti).
Reducción de la inflación a un 60%.
Salarios reales aumentaron.
La política del control de precios y congelamiento de tipo de cambios se prolongó, mas allá de lo recomendable.
Perù dejo de ser sujeto de crédito internacional para importantes agencias de cooperación como:
Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo, Banco Mundial.
Agotamiento de las reservas del Perú.
Deuda externa aprox. Veinte mil millones de dolares.
Remuneraciones y consumo percápita por debajo del 50 %.
La producción agrícola nacional cayó ostensiblemente y la importación de productos aumentó un 49 %."

('political' 1: A complex/critical situation was created by effect of the drastic measures taken (by the military government). Wage reductions; banking 'statism', the incrementation of the 'bureaucracy')

(2: Caustic, egocentric, and incredibly centralized governance)

(more 'economic' causes: Protections for national industries were steadily removed through import controls and prohibitions. Inflation under (Fernando) Belaúnde (Terry, a top post-military 'junta' leader/President in the early 1980s) reached 100%+, and was attempted to be combatted in an "unorthodox" manner, with price controls, selective devaluations, and freezes on the official currency rates. There came to be over a half dozen types of official currency types, according to its overall use; as a result, the sol was replaced by the inti (I/) (in 1985), and inflation was thus reduced to about 60%. (Real) Salaries were increased. The policies of price controls and currency "freezes" were prolonged, beyond (most) recommendations. Peru was no longer subjected to the will of international creditors for important cooperation 'agencies' such as: the InterAmerican Development Bank; the World Bank; among others; resource reserves also increased. External debts numbered almost $20B. Remunerations and per-capita consumption fell below 50%. Agricultural production decreased by tons, and product imports increased 49%.)

"SOCIAL
El nivel del subempleo ascendió a un desastroso 73 % al término del gobierno aprista.
El número de horas perdidas por conflictos laborales con el gobierno,aumentó de 6 millones en 1985 a 124 millones en 1990.
El Grupo Andino redujo la inversión en el Perú
Inflación de 2,178.482 % considerada una hiper inflación y la mas alta a lo largo de la historia peruana y mundial."

(more 'social': Underemployment grew to a disastrous 73% at the end of the APRA (basically, the radical, leftist, version, back then, of what Venezuela is "living through", or perhaps "scraping by" would be a better term...) government. The # of hours lost due to labor conflicts with the government grew from 6M in 1985 to 124M in 1990. The Andean Group reduced its investments in the country, and inflation reached 2,178.842%, considered hyperinflation, and the largest in all of Peruvian and world history (back then, obviously, since the other situations have all rocketed past that % since then...)

There's more at the bottom about the consequences of all that stuff over in Brazil, but I already showed you an example of that meltdown, didn't I?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IGXlYNOUtK0 (for another example from 1990's Brazil)

an exposé on a famous (classical) jazz album

Throughout the course of history, most music genres have been seen as more “brash” and/or “overpowering”, not necessarily always allowing people to “think” about what message is being sent by some song(s). Jazz, however, seems to have avoided the “stereotyping” that most other genres have received, due to (generally) not containing many, if any, lyrics, and just letting the music stand on its own. One such album that almost perfectly captures the “thought-provoking”-type sound that most jazz has given us over the years was a 1959 album by trumpeter Miles Davis titled Kind of Blue, which had apparently been in the works for years (behind the scenes) prior to its eventual release to radio stations nationwide. It was recorded with many different contemporary jazz musicians, allowing many different styles to be heard by listeners who perhaps might have been looking for something with some “variety” in some album of that type. Despite its “depression”-type name, the album was almost entirely filled with more “upbeat” instrumental backings, hinting at a relatively easy process for the performers, and an almost “triumphant” lead out of the 1950s, wherein the only major world event was the Korean War, and into the civil rights’ movement of the 1960s, of which Davis would end up being a major proponent, mostly through his music, although also through his activism.

(SIDE NOTE: this happened right before recording started on what would later become Kind of Blue, and sort of “set the tone” for the rest of the civil rights movement, while also simultaneously infuriating the jazz community)

In August 1959, Davis and his world-famous “quintet” (separate from his recording group) were performing for the military inside the Birdland nightclub in midtown Manhattan. As he was leaving the nightclub after the performance, he was reportedly told by a few NYPD officers to “move on” while escorting a blonde woman across the street from the nightclub. After Davis tried to get out of the argument by telling the officer that he was a worker there, the officers chased the woman away from the scene, and arrested Davis for 3^rd-degree assault. As a result of the arrest, Davis was suspended from performances at all N.Y.C. jazz clubs until further notice, and was forced to plea bargain his way out of an N.Y.C. prison to get back to being able to perform in the City once again after those few weeks/months on suspension. Davis soon accused the officers to the Baltimore Afro-American of setting a “double standard”, in so many words, for themselves, and then for everybody else:

“It’s ridiculous to think I grabbed his nightstick. You can’t just take a gun or nightstick away from a policeman. If I had ever taken his nightstick from him, I wouldn’t look like this (points to bandaged forehead).” Davis complained in his autobiography that the aftermath of the arrest and trial/acquittal had “changed my whole life and whole attitude again, made me feel bitter and cynical again when I was starting to feel good about the things that had changed in this country.”, and, for the most part, the African-American and jazz communities agreed that, since the civil rights’ movement was roughly halfway between Rosa Parks’ famous “bus seat refusal” in Montgomery, Alabama, and the desegregation of public schools/Little Rock, Arkansas National Guard intervention/passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, they were in need of a more “upbeat” album/set of tunes to get them through ordeal after ordeal they faced back then.

For most musicians/band members recording an album along the lines of Kind of Blue, such would most likely be considered the most upbeat of their solos/albums. For Davis, however, the opposite appeared to be true: his previous solos/albums were more upbeat than Kind of Blue, owing to their styles in and of themselves, according to saxophonist John Coltrane in a 1958 interview during the production process for the album…:

“On returning… I found Miles in the midst of his musical development. There was one time in his past that he devoted to multi-chorded structures. He was interested in chords for their own sake. But, now, it seemed that he was moving in the opposite direction to the use of fewer and fewer chord changes in his songs…”

…and by Davis himself, in a different 1958 interview with Nat Hentoff, then running his own magazine, The Jazz Review:

“When you’re based on chords, you know at the end of 32 bars that they have run out and there’s nothing to do but repeat what you’ve just done – with variations. I think a movement in jazz is beginning away from the conventional string of chords… There will be fewer chords, but infinite possibilities as to what to do with them. Classical composers – some of them – have been writing this way for years, but jazz musicians seldom have (up until then).”

Davis’ comments signaled that he would continue the style started only about a year earlier, in one of his 1958 singles, “Milestones”, which had more of a “modal” style, instead of the more upbeat tone of “bebop”/”hard bop” of his previous singles/albums, prior to 1958: not quite as “mellow” as “cool jazz”, yet definitely more designed for “outings”, with its overall faster pace than “modal” jazz. “Bebop”, in its time, was routinely described as such things as “memorable”/”planned”/”short” (Michael Cuscuna, jazz producer), and also as an “anagram of blues and gospel” and “vigorously creative” (David H. Rosenthal, in his jazz “exposé”, Hard Bop). On the other hand, Dirk Sutro, in Jazz for Dummies (another installment of the “intro series” to (insert topic here) that has become popular with people learning about topics), described “modal” jazz as (more qualitative traits 1^st, then more quantitative traits):

-       typically CDEFGAB, with “C” starting everything off

-       B♭ appearing less often than those notes

-       C “Ionian” being the dominant note above all others

-       C/F/G/A/D/E all being present on the “pentatonic scale”

-       Slow-moving, yet not quite as slow as “cool jazz”

-       More “harmonic” than any other jazz styles

-       More “melody” than “progression”/”transition”

-       More use of bass pedals, multiple keys being played at once (“polytonality”), and “droning” sounds, where the same note gets extended longer than usual

To that end, the album’s 1^st track, “So What”, started off with every “D” note (known as “Dorian mode”), transitioning to E♭ “Dorian”, and then back to “D” “Dorian” – overall, in the same structure used mostly in rock music, but also, perhaps most famously, in a certain tune from the Wizard of Oz “soundtrack”. Continuing on, “Freddie Freeloader”, featuring the fast-paced piano work of Wynton Kelly, was mostly B♭, and progressed into A♭7 near its end, instead of the more typical B♭7. “All Blues”, the 4^th track, owing to its name, was played in 6/4 time, exclusively featuring 7^th chords, and an E♭7 in a “G” key, with a “vamp” noise reverberating from the bass throughout the tune. Last but not least, “Flamenco Sketches” technically has no melody, yet pianist Bill Evans is usually credited with giving the tune its 4-bar Cmajor7/G9suspended4 form, with “C”, “A♭”, “B♭”, and “G” notes being played throughout the tune. Overall, the album almost perfectly encapsulated what Davis and the rest of his “crew” wanted from the album: a slower pace than any of the performers’ previous works, particularly any of Davis’ works, since he was the almost undisputed leader of the recording group, despite not having his quintet to support him at too many points in the recording process.

            Davis himself noted the significance of Kind of Blue in a 1986 interview with jazz pianist-turned-NPR host Ben Sidran, on his show, “Sidran on Record”:

"’So What" or Kind of Blue, they were done in that era, the right hour, the right day, and it happened. It's over [...]. What I used to play with Bill Evans, all those different modes, and substitute chords, we had the energy then and we liked it. But I have no feel for it anymore—it's more like warmed-over turkey.”

Davis might have dismissed his own work, but others certainly didn’t, as evidenced by the rankings for the album over the years:

-       1977: Billboard Jazz #37

-       1987: Billboard Top Jazz #10

-       1994: Colin Larkin, author of Top 1000 Jazz Albums: #1

-       2001: Billboard Top Internet #14

-       2002: Library of Congress – 1 of 50 “culturally significant” recordings selected for historical preservation that year

-       2003: Rolling Stone “500 Greatest Albums” list - #12

-       12/16/09: U.S. House of Representatives voted unanimously (409-0) to “affirm” the album as a “cultural national treasure”

-       gold in Belgium

-       platinum in Australia/Italy/the U.K.

-       quadruple platinum over here in the U.S.

…why not let an 8/1/01 article from NPR’s “Jazz Profiles” finish this?

“Musicians from all genres perform, record and study the album's songs, and the influence of the songs on culture beyond music continues to grow. Drummer (Jimmy) Cobb says it all comes down to simplicity — the reason Kind of Blue has remained so successful for so long, and because of its inherent balance, historian Dan Morgenstern adds, the album never wears out its welcome.”

chapter 6: Yobito-san's major league distractions

     While all the ruckus was taking place at both Narita Airport and Tokyo Station, Yobito-san was nowhere to be found; it was presumed that he had escaped the task force-vs.-dual syndicates-standoff right around the time Shinoda called in the Mexican drug cartel troops to shut down as many of the exits of Narita Airport as possible. Apparently unaware of the ongoing situations unfolding with both sets of opposing groups, he headed off to the Tokyo Dome to catch the international matchup featuring the Yomiuri Giants and the Lotte Giants, from Busan, South Korea, before another sellout crowd of 46,125 that was even more unaware of the dual political crises than he was. The game started off as a "pitchers' duel" through its first 4 1/2 innings, with both teams combining for four hits (two apiece) off starting pitchers Toshiya Sugiuchi and Song Seung-jun; after that, however, with Yomiuri shortstop Hayato Sakamoto hitting a three-run homer off Seung-jun in the bottom of the sixth inning, knocking him out of the game, and catcher Kang Min-ho answering with a two-run shot of his own for Lotte in the top of the seventh inning, causing him to also get pulled from the game in favor of a bullpen pitcher. Entering the game in the bottom of that inning in relief of Seung-jun, "sidearmer" Chong Tae-hyon promptly shut down the Yomiuri bats, and Jim Adduci hit another three-run homer for Lotte to give them a sudden 5-3 lead after almost five full innings of almost no offense whatsoever. That lead held, as Tae-hyon continued his mastery of Yomiuri, giving the South Korean visitors what would become a 6-3 win, with Min-ho hitting his second homer of the game, a solo shot, in the top of the eighth inning to seal the win once and for all. Immediately following his team's win in its impromptu visit to Japan, Lotte manager Lee Jong-un was informed by another CIA agent, Rick Ableton, about the ongoing situations, and pressed to return to South Korea A.S.A.P.:
          "Mr. Lee... There's been a set of standoffs unfolding throughout your team's time here, and it was recommended by one of my fellow agents in the middle of one of the situations, Dean Hannelman, that you return, preferably to Seoul, before either of the situations spreads through any other parts of Tokyo, and escape the worst of these crises."
     Given the "distraction" nature of baseball in both countries, Lee was, naturally, reluctant to evacuate his team so soon, but after agent Ableton informed Yomiuri manager Kaoru Okazaki of the same crises, he returned to Lee to make another pitch for the team's safety, and he accepted that offer to get evacuated from Tokyo by the authorities. As soon as both teams, the Yomiuri fans comprising the majority of the 46,125 in attendance, and the Lotte fans traveling in from Busan and Seoul were all safely evacuated from the Tokyo Dome immediately following the game, the CIA agents showed up to survey the area for any potential secret yakuza activities, since the members might very well have used the guise of having the game going on around them to set up their nefarious plans. Once they found no visible evidence of any "pre-planning" by any yakuza members, the agents suddenly got a surprise phone call from Yobito-san, who was somehow still roaming inside the Dome, wondering, more or less, "where the game had gone":
          "I just sat through this whole game, expecting there to be the usual post-game activities inside and around the Dome, including the Tokyo Dome City outside... Where is everybody?"
  (A): "Forget about any of those "post-game activities" this time around... What's more important is that you either stay far away from any areas of this building normally "open to the public", or leave now, in order to ensure your continued safety!"
 (H):   "If I were you, I would stay out of the line of sight of anybody with even a hint of tattoos, 'cause as I'm sure you very well know by now, that's how "they" get their targets - they look for people wandering around by themselves, and they smuggle 'em off to nobody-knows-where for the horror show of their lives!"
          "So, does that mean I'll have to avoid the box office, press box, stands, and other "open" areas of this dome for the time being, if I'm not already outside before then?"
  (A):  "If you do get caught, you might as well-"
  (H, interrupting): "...forget about your life!"
  (A, taken aback by said interruption): "...uuuummmmmm... just do what my counterpart just told you, and you should be just fine..."
          "I think I might as well flee the premises, then, before any of my former men notice me trying to avoid them deep inside this building..."
     Meanwhile, in the aforementioned Tokyo Dome City just outside the Dome, there was a somewhat hastily assembled gathering of FARC rebels, led this time by Joaquín Gómez, whose faction within FARC, the Southern Bloc, was reportedly responsible for former Colombian Senator Ingrid Betancourt's 2002 kidnapping, the 2003 car bombing outside El Nogal nightclub (popular with visiting businesspeople and diplomats), and just the most overall conflicts with various Colombian governments, to plan the group's infiltration of the Dome:
          "Oye, señores del FARC! Si nuestra plan de infiltración de este Dome sera exitoso, tendremos de ejecutar nuestra comunicación con los japoneses 'al pie de la letra'! En seguir hacia al dentro de esta maravilla de la ingeniería, nosotros, en paralelo con los del 'yakuza', buscaremos al palco donde la prensa se ocupa en todos los juegos de beisbol, los conciertos, y toda esa *****, y trataremos de robar todos los equipos de transmisión en ese palco de la prensa, para poder burlarse de todos los ratones de todos los equipos de todos los leyes habidos y por haber, tanto japonés como colombiano, estadounidense, ya los saben... Así que '¡a entrar!' ha sido declarado!"
     Due to the FARC rebels' sudden movements into Tokyo, the law enforcement agents were initially caught off-guard, but, once word arrived into the combined team's headquarters in a top secret location inside Narita Airport, which could not, try as they might, get found out by the rebels, they scrambled all of their people, leading to the start of an all-out offensive on both sides in the middle of the Japanese capital...

some thoughts on "solitary confinement"

If you were stuck in a holding cell, by yourself, somewhere far from home, how long would it take before you considered yourself legally insane? Millions of prisoners in hundreds of maximum-security prisons have had to face those situations firsthand over the years. The question of whether or not solitary confinement causes mental health disorders has also occurred in various social experiments over the years. Those social experiments varied in severity, but the one effect they had in common was the inspiration for other social experiments loosely based upon their more (in)famous counterparts. No matter whether the experiments explored any psychological aspect, from solitary confinement, to waterboarding, to separation, or anything else, they were all inspired by real-life prison conditions at maximum-security prisons nationwide. The more (in)famous social experiments include the Stanford Prison Experiment, the Concord Prison Experiment, the Rosenhan Experiment, the Milgram Experiment, & the Rat Park Experiment, among others. Other social experiments, such as the Third Wave, have not quite been considered as repressive or oppressive as the aforementioned prison experiments, but their effectiveness in exposing overly conformist behavior in people or groups exposed, willingly or not, to charismatic influences by outside sources, such as other people or organizations created to influence everybody outside their initial influence. Despite prison officials’ continued insistence that solitary confinement is more effective than general imprisonment, data over the course of many months, years, and decades has shown more mental impairment from prisoners placed in solitary confinement than prisoners kept in the general prison population for the entirety of their stay in prison. The Constitution also makes a strong case against solitary confinement, banning “cruel & unusual punishment” & leading to many lawsuits by prisoners, the ACLU, and other groups generally stating that solitary confinement both leads to lifelong mental impairments in its prisoners, while also violating the Constitution’s 8^th Amendment at the exact same time.

        Despite the overwhelming use of the term “solitary confinement” in public, one state has used different terminology for the concept, as New York has differed by calling it “disciplinary segregation” instead of “solitary confinement”. The term for the actual buildings is also different, as most states refer to the buildings as “Special Housing Units”, others refer to them as “Special Management Units”, and California uniquely refers to them as “Security (instead of “Special”) Housing Units”.  No matter what the buildings have been called, the effects have almost always been the same. According to psychiatry professor Jeffrey L. Metzner, MD, & Human Rights Watch executive Jamie Fellner, Esq., the effects of solitary confinement have been the same for all solitary confinement prisoners, but the severity of the effects have varied: “Isolation can be psychologically harmful to any prisoner, with the nature and severity of the impact depending on the individual, the duration, and particular conditions (e.g., access to natural light, books, or radio). Psychological effects can include anxiety, depression, anger, cognitive disturbances, perceptual distortions, obsessive thoughts, paranoia, and psychosis.” (Metzner/Fellner, 2010, paragraph 3) They then go on to claim that the general public prefers that prisoners get punished instead of treated: “Despite significant improvements in correctional mental health services, often related to litigation and development of standards and guidelines by the National Commission on Correctional Health Care (NCCHC), the American Psychiatric Association (APA), and other professional organizations, in many prisons the services remain woefully inadequate. Relative to the number of prisoners needing help, there is an insufficient number of qualified staff, too few specialized facilities, and few programs. Mindful of budget constraints and scant public support for investments in the treatment (as opposed to punishment) of prisoners, elected officials have been reluctant to provide the funds and leadership needed to ensure that prisons have sufficient mental health resources. Twenty-two of 40 state correctional systems reported in a survey that they did not have an adequate mental health staff.” Metzner and Fellner’s opinions throughout the report state that prisoners should be treated, some mental health clinicians prefer seeing prisoners in solitary confinement, and that allowing prisoners to meet every so often for evaluations could prove to be more effective in the long run than keeping them locked down for extended lengths of time each day.

        Tracy Hresko has been a Pace University law professor for the past few years. In April 2006, Hresko published a detailed report on not only the effects of solitary confinement, but what Hresko believes is officials’ law-based justification for sticking prisoners in solitary confinement instead of rehabilitating them. In the aforementioned report, Hresko stated that there was a lack of options on prisoners’ part to challenge unfair placement by prison officials: “Despite the lack of official policy surrounding use of solitary confinement, common criteria for its imposition in both state and federal prisons include "gang activity and disruption of the orderly operation of a prison, both inclusive catchall criteria." Prison administrators are not required, moreover, to provide even minimal standards of due process protection to inmates sentenced to solitary confinement; inmates have no rights to written notice, to present witnesses or evidence, to be represented by an attorney or to undergo a formal hearing. In fact, the Supreme Court in Hewitt v. Helms held that prison administrators are only required to engage in an "informal, non-adversary review" of the information supporting an inmate's punishment of solitary confinement, including whatever statement an inmate wishes to submit after the start of their confinement.” Hresko mentions immediately afterward that it costs $50,000 per year to keep just one prisoner in solitary confinement, “compared with $20,000 per year for inmates kept in the general population.” (Hresko, page 14) In examining the conditions of typical prisons, Hresko then mentions that courts “typically examine only the physical conditions of the solitary confinement cell – “light, ventilation, bedding, and basic elements of hygiene” - and the extent to which the inmate’s most basic needs are met.” (Hresko, page 15) The Constitution’s 8^th Amendment is mentioned just below that statement, except in the context that psychological torture of any kind doesn’t constitute a violation of that amendment to most courts and judges. Another prison-related lawsuit, Newman v. State of Alabama, found that “the Constitution does not require that prisoners, as individuals or groups, be provided with any and every amenity which some person may think is needed to avoid mental, physical, and emotional destruction.” (Hresko, page 16)

        The 8^th Amendment to the Constitution states that “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” Despite those rights protections, prisons everywhere have continually committed human rights violations similar to those of typical dictatorial regimes. Even the most decorated of Americans have spoken on the effects of either their solitary confinement, or that of somebody else, as 2008 presidential nominee and current Arizona-based Senator John McCain wrote in one of his Vietnam War memoirs: “It’s an awful thing, solitary; it crushes your spirit and weakens your (mental) resistance more effectively than any other form of mistreatment.” (Gawande, 3/30/09, paragraph 19) The innate fear of solitary confinement isn’t just limited to prisoners of war, however; a lawsuit by 12 prisoners at the Florence Administrative Maximum Facility back in May 2012 alleges brutal Constitutional and human rights violations. Andrew Cohen of The Atlantic mentions the following: “The lawsuit seeks no money damages, but instead aims to require federal officials to treat mentally ill inmates in accordance with existing law. The case demands a measure of accountability from a sprawling bureaucracy that seems to answer to no one.” (Cohen, 6/20/12, paragraph 2) The “bureaucracy” mentioned there doesn’t just exist at the modern-day ADX; it existed at Alcatraz, and it exists at all other maximum-security prisons nationwide.

Adding to the aforementioned “bureaucracy” are various harsh laws designed in their very nature to restrict prisoners from the moment they step into the courtroom to the moment they either leave prison or die. The most draconian of those laws is the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1996, which Congress and President Clinton had the absurdity to pass and sign into law. The act states that the law “…shall not grant or approve any prospective relief unless the court finds that such relief is narrowly drawn, extends no further than necessary to correct the violation of the Federal right, and is the least intrusive means necessary to correct the violation of the Federal right.” On the other hand, however, it also states “No action shall be brought with respect to prison conditions under section 1983 of this title, or any other Federal law, by a prisoner confined in any jail, prison, or other correctional facility until such administrative remedies as are available are exhausted.” (Phillips, 6/1/13, paragraph 2) That provision effectively forces prisoners through every level of the legal system before they can file a lawsuit against their correctional facility.

Despite prison officials’ continued insistence that solitary confinement is key to successfully deterring prisoners from committing future crimes, data from inside reports suggests that prisoners actually end up more dangerous upon exiting prison than upon committing their initial crime(s). Some prison officials have been absolute believers in the “solitary confinement is beneficial” mindset, only to change their minds completely upon either getting information from “insiders” or actually visiting prisons to see the harsh conditions for themselves. One of the most notable opinion changes by a local, state, or federal correction official is Mississippi’s corrections commissioner, who fought a September 2007 ACLU lawsuit (unrelated to the aforementioned Florence ADX lawsuit) a few years ago that hoped to force a few solitary confinement-based prisoners completely out of their prisons. Early on in the litigation process, Epps stated that “(Solitary confinement) was the culture, and I was part of it.” (Goode, paragraph 14) After the lawsuit against Mississippi by the ACLU was settled, Epps’ opinion had been changed so completely that he was suddenly against solitary confinement, after being for it just days earlier: “If you treat people like animals, that’s exactly the way they’ll behave,” Epps proclaimed upon the lawsuit’s conclusion. (Goode, paragraph 16)

In the midst of that lawsuit, both sides made their cases for and against solitary confinement. James F. Austin was a prison consultant tasked with questioning Mississippi Department of Corrections officials. A court had ordered the state to improve conditions in its notorious “Unit 32”, and the state hoped to improve conditions to the point where prisoners didn’t feel trapped, but also to the point where they didn’t feel comfortable, either. Emmitt L. Sparkman, state deputy corrections commissioner, claimed that Dr. Austin told the state officials who hired him to suggest changes to their highest-security prison that “‘You tell me what kind of person needs to be locked up,’” and “There was an incredible explosion in the prison population coupled with a big infusion of gangs, riots were occurring. Prison officials were literally losing control.” (Goode, paragraph 19/21) The year before the ACLU v. State of Mississippi lawsuit, Florida State University criminology professor Dr. Dan Mears surveyed hundreds of prison officials in dozens of prisons nationwide, and upon the conclusion of his surveys, stated that the main reasons why officials were placing more and more prisoners in solitary confinement were “increasing safety, order and control throughout prison systems and incapacitating violent or disruptive inmates.” (Goode, paragraph 25) Asked to “dig deeper” into his findings, Dr. Mears proclaimed maximum-security prisons in general “a big, very costly experiment,” and he also asked the rhetorical question “Who were the worst of the worst?” (Goode, paragraph 25/26)

Over the course of many decades, solitary confinement has proven to be one of the most truly “cruel and unusual punishments” inflicted upon humans by other humans. Its Constitution-violating principles have led to numerous lawsuits, as well as an equal number of laws attempting to stop such suits. The number of federal prisons has dropped drastically over the years, but the ones that remain, such as Leavenworth, the ADX, Tamms, and others keep classic maximum-security prison tactics going to the present day, which if allowed to continue, could set a disturbing precedent for many future maximum security prisons if the prison population remains anywhere near its levels from recent decades.

WORKS CITED:

Solitary Confinement and Mental Illness in U.S. Prisons: A Challenge for Medical Ethics

Jeffrey L. Metzner/Jamie Fellner, Human Rights Watch; The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, vol. 38, #1, 2010

In the Cellars of the Hollow Men: Use of Solitary Confinement in U.S. Prisons & its Implications Under International Laws against Torture Tracy Hresko, Pace University International Law Review, 4/1/06

“Is Long-Term Solitary Confinement Torture?” Atul Gawande, The New Yorker, 3/30/09

“Supermax: The Constitution and Mentally Ill Prisoners” Andrew Cohen, The Atlantic, 6/20/12

“Prisons Rethink Isolation, Saving Money, Lives and Sanity” Erica Goode, The New York Times, 3/10/12