a) You're saying "I know" and then repeating yourself. When you say "it consists of emotional and mental problems to commit crimes", I feel like you're implying that only people with "emotional and mental problems" (whatever those are) commit "crimes" (whatever those are) - when, in reality, this is not the case.
b) You're saying "that is what every anarchist talks about" to an anarchist who is not talking about that. I am telling you that there is no police conspiracy against the poor. What there is is a system that, by its very nature, enforces an oppressive existence upon a wide range of people. The police are tools of that system, not some kind of corrupt conspirator.
c) "If you believe in anarchy you have some sort of morals" - I disagree, depending on what you call morals. If you believe that abstract concepts like "good" and "evil" and "justice" are useful and can be a basis for decision-making, then I attest that I'm against morality.
f) Why are "psychopaths" exempt from this goal of "rehabilitation"? And why do you imagine that the goal of any anarchist society is to enforce a singular code of behavior on a populace?
g) So you're still saying that labor camps are the solution to "major crimes", which is still a wide generalization (or a label so vague that it's useless, maybe).
- 1) Lie detectors are unreliable to the point that they're not even admissible as evidence in the current American legal system. Gender is not necessarily connected to genitalia. And once again, this is not a problem with the method of inflicting consequences - this is a problem with the method of assessing whether a transgression has taken place.
- 2) Not really. I don't understand how it's contradictory to say that the concept of conflict-resolution or revenge perhaps ought to be driven primarily by the wishes of whoever was the target of transgression, but not with total disregard for its effect on others.
- 3) For some reason, you're assuming that extreme retaliatory violence would be something that happens easily or carelessly. You're also assuming that, in the event of being sent to a "rehabilitation center" under false pretenses, someone would be able to easily clear up the mistake and get out within a week - which, honestly, makes no sense to me. How is this any different from a prison and what makes you think it would be easier to clear up false-pretense imprisonment in a labor camp compared to false-pretense imprisonment in modern society?
I don't know why you assume that there is only one potential form for anarchy to take in some idealized anarchist future. As it turns out, anarcho-syndicalism is only one form of anarchism. I have no interest in formulating a new society based on town hall voting to determine proper morality and codes of law.