I think everyone would agree that we would see far less crime in a society where everyone's basic needs (at least) are guaranteed, and where you've decriminalized a lot of dumb stuff we have criminalized today. So with two important exceptions, we're talking about imprisoning people for serious crimes with major harms done to victims.
Another big part of this is what "prison" might look like in a post-capitalist world. This would be a good starting point. If that's what separation from the main body of society looks like (instead of the horrors associated with traditional prisons), you can start to square the circle between "prison of any kind is bad" and "there are some crimes that are serious enough that you can't just let the offender walk more or less free." Make involuntary separation from society the only negative to the greatest extent possible; otherwise, focus on genuine rehabilitation and (to the extent the victim wants to engage) making amends.
The two exceptions I see to only imprisoning people for serious crimes with major harms done to victims are (1) people who repeatedly harm others in small enough ways that any individual case wouldn't merit imprisonment, and (2) people who refuse to engage with a justice process for even one of these smaller crimes. Think bar fights. Individually, most are not a big enough problem that they would merit imprisonment. But what if someone starts a bar fight every weekend? Or what if they start one, but refuse any responsibility, refuse to make amends to the victim, and generally refuse to participate in any sort of non-carceral option? Using the threat of short-term incarceration (especially if incarceration looks like the above) is a good way to get people to take whatever else is on the table seriously.
Are Prisons Obsolete? by Angela Davis is a seminal text directly on abolition. Not too long. This is probably the oldest thing on here so some of the information might be dated, but the concepts still apply.
The New Jim Crow by Michelle Alexander is more of an overview of the carceral state in general and how racist it is specifically. It's good reading if you're trying to get solid abolitionist critiques of the criminal legal system, but I can't recall exactly how much it talks about abolition itself. It does touch on meaningful reforms that are happening right now, like reducing or eliminating cash bail.
https://www.commonjustice.org/danielle_sered -- have not read this org's blog or her book, but it's referenced in the above interview and seems interesting and on-topic.
These aren't written for a public audience to the extent the above are, but they're shorter articles and (hopefully) available free on Google Scholar or wherever you can pirate academia. They're also more decarceration than outright abolition, but there's considerable overlap in concepts and facts:
Unstitching Scarlett Letters by Brian M. Murray, 86 Fordham L. Rev. 2821. Also not explicitly abolitionist, but details the abolitionist argument about how damaging even minor contact with the system can be.
Handbook of Basic Principles and Promising Practices on Alternatives to Imprisonment, by the U.N. Office on Drugs & Crime, U.N. Sales No. E.07.XI.2. Not abolitionists globally, but abolitionist on drugs.
A Decade After Decriminalization, by Jordan Blair Woods, 15 U. D.C. L. Rev. 1. Looks at drug decriminalization in Portugal; the largest and oldest attempt to significantly scale back the carceral state.
Successful Alternatives: Juvenile Diversion and Restorative Justice in Suffolk County, by Daniel F. Conley et al., https://perma.cc/SB6L-SDPS . This is about the Boston DA's office under Rachael Rollins, who is doing decarceration, but is not an abolitionist. Still offers plenty about how to handle crimes without imprisonment.
Decarcerating America, by Mirko Bagaric and Daniel McCord, 67 Buff. L. Rev. 227. More on decarceration, but this focuses on how it can be done without increasing crime, which is a classic argument against abolition.
I think everyone would agree that we would see far less crime in a society where everyone's basic needs (at least) are guaranteed, and where you've decriminalized a lot of dumb stuff we have criminalized today. So with two important exceptions, we're talking about imprisoning people for serious crimes with major harms done to victims.
Another big part of this is what "prison" might look like in a post-capitalist world. This would be a good starting point. If that's what separation from the main body of society looks like (instead of the horrors associated with traditional prisons), you can start to square the circle between "prison of any kind is bad" and "there are some crimes that are serious enough that you can't just let the offender walk more or less free." Make involuntary separation from society the only negative to the greatest extent possible; otherwise, focus on genuine rehabilitation and (to the extent the victim wants to engage) making amends.
The two exceptions I see to only imprisoning people for serious crimes with major harms done to victims are (1) people who repeatedly harm others in small enough ways that any individual case wouldn't merit imprisonment, and (2) people who refuse to engage with a justice process for even one of these smaller crimes. Think bar fights. Individually, most are not a big enough problem that they would merit imprisonment. But what if someone starts a bar fight every weekend? Or what if they start one, but refuse any responsibility, refuse to make amends to the victim, and generally refuse to participate in any sort of non-carceral option? Using the threat of short-term incarceration (especially if incarceration looks like the above) is a good way to get people to take whatever else is on the table seriously.
deleted by creator
Transformative justice encompasses both left stuff and lib shit, it is a broad spectrum of ideas
Are Prisons Obsolete? by Angela Davis is a seminal text directly on abolition. Not too long. This is probably the oldest thing on here so some of the information might be dated, but the concepts still apply.
The New Jim Crow by Michelle Alexander is more of an overview of the carceral state in general and how racist it is specifically. It's good reading if you're trying to get solid abolitionist critiques of the criminal legal system, but I can't recall exactly how much it talks about abolition itself. It does touch on meaningful reforms that are happening right now, like reducing or eliminating cash bail.
A few interviews/podcasts:
These aren't written for a public audience to the extent the above are, but they're shorter articles and (hopefully) available free on Google Scholar or wherever you can pirate academia. They're also more decarceration than outright abolition, but there's considerable overlap in concepts and facts:
Unstitching Scarlett Letters by Brian M. Murray, 86 Fordham L. Rev. 2821. Also not explicitly abolitionist, but details the abolitionist argument about how damaging even minor contact with the system can be.
Handbook of Basic Principles and Promising Practices on Alternatives to Imprisonment, by the U.N. Office on Drugs & Crime, U.N. Sales No. E.07.XI.2. Not abolitionists globally, but abolitionist on drugs.
A Decade After Decriminalization, by Jordan Blair Woods, 15 U. D.C. L. Rev. 1. Looks at drug decriminalization in Portugal; the largest and oldest attempt to significantly scale back the carceral state.
Successful Alternatives: Juvenile Diversion and Restorative Justice in Suffolk County, by Daniel F. Conley et al., https://perma.cc/SB6L-SDPS . This is about the Boston DA's office under Rachael Rollins, who is doing decarceration, but is not an abolitionist. Still offers plenty about how to handle crimes without imprisonment.
Decarcerating America, by Mirko Bagaric and Daniel McCord, 67 Buff. L. Rev. 227. More on decarceration, but this focuses on how it can be done without increasing crime, which is a classic argument against abolition.
deleted by creator