Abolition vs. Prison Reform: Why Both Matter in the Fight Against Mass Incarceration

El Presynt writes how prison reform is a critical step in dismantling the systemic injustices of mass incarceration and building a more humane and effective approach to justice in America.

I hold two seemingly opposing views: abolitionism and prison reform. While they may appear contradictory, I believe both are necessary paths toward a shared goal—liberation from systems of oppression. As a proud abolitionist, an advocate for life without parole (LWOP) reform, and a supporter of prison reform, I want to explore the complexity of these ideologies and respond to a fellow writer’s take on the subject.

The Case for Prison Reform: Ending Incarceration at Its Roots

My views on abolition are simple: There is nothing humane, natural, or acceptable about slavery or its modern equivalent—incarceration. No other species on Earth locks up or tortures its own. We’ve been conditioned to accept this unnatural practice as normal, but in truth, it’s barbaric. Without that conditioning, society could function without prisons or carceral systems. I believe in that possibility, and in our ability to achieve it.

I’ve been shaped by the work of brilliant thinkers and writers who have illuminated the failures of mass incarceration and the prison industrial complex, such as Maya Schenwar, Demico Boothe, Victoria Law, Mariame Kaba, Razor Babb, Taj Mahon-Haft, Angie D. Gordon, and Joan Parkin. Their insights have deeply influenced my thinking.

Why Constructive Criticism Is Essential in Prison Reform Writing

In an article from Vanguard Incarcerated Press titled “Critical Accountability: Self-Censorship and the Role of Critique in Incarcerated Writing,” Angie D. Gordon emphasizes the need for accountability and critique within our community of incarcerated writers. I wholeheartedly agree. Free speech must come with a willingness to evaluate and improve our ideas.

In that spirit, I want to examine and challenge the stance of one of my contemporaries, Dymtri “Linus” Haraszewski. In his article “Prison Reform or Prison Abolition,” Mr. Haraszewski dismisses many who lack deep understanding of abolitionism, yet avoids offering practical strategies or frameworks for achieving it.

He writes, “The common attack against abolition becomes an objection that trying to eliminate prison is unrealistic and even downright irresponsible in the absence of a clear plan for what we would ‘put in their place.’ When I feel particularly snarky, I reply, ‘Well, what do you think we should replace cancer with when we remove it?’”

He also rejects prison reform entirely, saying it implies “a desire to improve something we wish to retain,” and argues that people often try to eliminate harmful things without understanding the consequences. With all due respect, these comparisons are flawed.

Why Comparing Prisons to Cancer Doesn’t Work

Equating prisons to cancer isn’t accurate. A more fitting analogy would be to treat crime as the cancer, not prison. After all, unlike chattel slavery, incarceration today requires justification—typically, crime. If we could meaningfully address crime, the justification for prisons would disappear.

Even that analogy, however, falls short. A better comparison, in my view, is to that of a generational heroin addict. Imagine someone born addicted, whose parents and grandparents were all addicts too. The addiction has become hereditary—a part of their DNA. Now imagine expecting that person to quit cold turkey. It’s not realistic.

Likewise, dismantling incarceration—a system embedded in our nation’s foundation and normalized for centuries—requires a gradual detox. It must happen in phases: mental, emotional, and spiritual rehabilitation. That’s where prison reform plays a vital role.

Redefining Prison Reform Through an Abolitionist Lens

Let’s consider the actual definition of reform (American Heritage Dictionary, 3rd Ed.):

• Verb: To improve by alteration, correction of error, or removal of defects; to abolish abuse or malpractice.
• Noun: A change for the better; correction of evils or abuses; action to improve conditions without radical change.

By this definition, prison reform doesn’t have to mean “making slavery more comfortable.” It can mean abolishing the malpractice of mass incarceration and transforming prisons into places of healing—mental, emotional, and spiritual detox centers.

Mr. Haraszewski and I both agree that merely refining the prison system isn’t enough. But I believe prison reform, when shaped by abolitionist ideals, can be a critical step toward real change.

Whether we use metaphors of cancer or addiction, the truth is clear: Society is sick. Incarceration has become a placebo—a lazy stand-in for real solutions to trauma, inequality, and mental health crises. As abolitionists, we must do more than criticize. We must offer visions of what can replace prisons. If we fail to propose alternatives, we are no better than a doctor who diagnoses a wound but neglects to treat it, allowing infection to set in.

From Mass Incarceration to Community Healing

I believe most of us understand that slavery in any form must end. The challenge is doing it with as little collateral damage as possible. The real barrier isn’t feasibility. It’s our society’s resistance to change and capitalism’s grip on power. Still, I believe a better future is possible.

Interested in reading more? Check out What Is Incarceration, Really? 

The post Abolition vs. Prison Reform: Why Both Matter in the Fight Against Mass Incarceration first appeared on Prison Writers.