If you are a cold hearted utilitarian, the answer is no, we should not massively increase the death penalty, because it will worsen the diplomatic situation, increase racial hostilities, and move the Overton window on “killing vile people,” such that assassinations, coups and other instability would feel less shocking and be more likely to succeed.
it will worsen the diplomatic situation
Which diplomatic situation? Many countries execute criminals, and that doesn’t much impact their foreign affairs. Foreign affairs is driven by things that impact other countries, not domestic affairs.
increase racial hostilities
Did you know that black people in the USA are more likely to advocate for a tough on crime policy? After all, most crime is intraracial, and therefore it’s them who have to live with it.
“killing vile people,” such that assassinations, coups and other instability would feel less shocking and be more likely to succeed
Or it’ll move the overton window that killing people will result in a swift execution such that people are less likely to do it. Are China and Iran less stable today as a result of their liberal application of the death penalty—or is that basically completely irrelevant to their problems? This is a claim which you could argue whichever way you want depending on how you felt like it. Making assertions is not evidence.
Many countries refuse extradition to the US if there is a chance of the death penalty.
The problem is that people are scope-insensitive, and one wrongly executed person becomes a martyr for a long time. People are still angry about George Stinney’s wrongful execution in 1944.
The feeling of a lot of people is if normal people go to jail for minor things, Trump or Clinton should definitely go to jail for a long time. There is a visceral sense of unfairness that the elites get to be more vile than ordinary people who go to jail, get executed, etc. but don’t face the same consequences because they do evil legally, because there is diplomatic immunity, presidential immunity, and all this stuff that your average Joe does not understand.
If normal people who are vile get executed, then people will crave the blood of elites they perceive to be even more vile. Japan in the 1920s and 1930s had endless political assassinations because people had the system of morality where “vile people should be killed.”
Alas, you are right that we can never know which way the causality goes. I am admittedly only stating my belief without proving it.
I think Singapore actually implements a system with a lot of executions and corporal punishment which you are in favor of, and they actually do have very low crime. I attribute the low crime more to their high wealth, and their other draconian policy of overwhelming surveillance (which I also disagree with but have to admit does work, maybe you can debate it next time).
Which diplomatic situation? Many countries execute criminals, and that doesn’t much impact their foreign affairs. Foreign affairs is driven by things that impact other countries, not domestic affairs.
Did you know that black people in the USA are more likely to advocate for a tough on crime policy? After all, most crime is intraracial, and therefore it’s them who have to live with it.
Or it’ll move the overton window that killing people will result in a swift execution such that people are less likely to do it. Are China and Iran less stable today as a result of their liberal application of the death penalty—or is that basically completely irrelevant to their problems? This is a claim which you could argue whichever way you want depending on how you felt like it. Making assertions is not evidence.
Many countries refuse extradition to the US if there is a chance of the death penalty.
The problem is that people are scope-insensitive, and one wrongly executed person becomes a martyr for a long time. People are still angry about George Stinney’s wrongful execution in 1944.
The feeling of a lot of people is if normal people go to jail for minor things, Trump or Clinton should definitely go to jail for a long time. There is a visceral sense of unfairness that the elites get to be more vile than ordinary people who go to jail, get executed, etc. but don’t face the same consequences because they do evil legally, because there is diplomatic immunity, presidential immunity, and all this stuff that your average Joe does not understand.
If normal people who are vile get executed, then people will crave the blood of elites they perceive to be even more vile. Japan in the 1920s and 1930s had endless political assassinations because people had the system of morality where “vile people should be killed.”
Alas, you are right that we can never know which way the causality goes. I am admittedly only stating my belief without proving it.
I think Singapore actually implements a system with a lot of executions and corporal punishment which you are in favor of, and they actually do have very low crime. I attribute the low crime more to their high wealth, and their other draconian policy of overwhelming surveillance (which I also disagree with but have to admit does work, maybe you can debate it next time).