Democracy in Captivity

Who ought to govern those held in custody, and by what right? Democracy in Captivity examines various efforts to answer these questions, centring on two case studies at custodial institutions: the rise and demise of patient self-governance at St. Elizabeths Hospital in Washington, DC, between 1947 and 1965, and the prisoner-organised governance of Massachusetts's Walpole State Prison following a 1973 prison-guard strike.

As Christopher D. Berk shows, the promise of these initiatives was tempered by the custodians' backlash against their wards' attempts at self-rule. This backlash arrived not only in the blunt forms of restraint chairs, riot gear, and a surgeon's scalpel but also as more covert measures taken under the cover of so-called democratic management—which in turn entrenched disenfranchisement and naturalised authoritarian rule.

Turning from these case studies to a wider consideration of custody and democracy, Berk explores pathologies that have captured the politics of punishment, with pressing implications for the practice of democracy both inside and outside custodial institutions.