The Angola Rodeo, a tradition held annually in the Louisiana State Penitentiary, is an event inmates die for. Danger not only subsists in the race itself, but also in the fact that the rodeo doesn’t seem problematic on the surface. The inmates are completely aware of the risks which they are willing to take on for their own fun; they even sign a legal release indicating their free will and waiving culpability of the State of Louisiana. Not only so, it’s a scarce opportunity for them to feel liberated, a way of fighting boredom, the only chance to meet the general public or even their families, and the only chance to make big money in a place where they make 4 cents an hour. While this may seem like a fair bargain, it’s important to point out that there is an intuitive moral unease about the Angola Rodeo. It forces one to question whether the prisoners are actually practicing free will, or if certain underlying forces are nullifying a person’s right to a complete free will, or if there are unseen motives that facilitate the actions of the inmates. The Angola Rodeo is an exploitation and a wrongful contract in ways that there is unequal bargaining position and racism.
The Angola prisoners do have the right to the freedom of labor, as written in the Constitution, regardless of the possible threats it may pose to the enjoyment of one’s life or welfare (Lochner vs. New York). They are knowingly taking the risks of participating in the rodeo, and ultimately enjoying themselves with what they are doing. However, the issue at hand goes beyond the question of constitutionality. Controversy arise because their labor contracts have unequal bargaining powers that force inmates to enter an unfair and exploitative labor contract. Unequal bargaining position derive out of the fact that despite the apparent compensating differentials, the risks that inmates take outweigh their benefit. There is no equal bargaining power in the Angola Rodeo not only between the inmates and the prison system, but also in relative comparison with non-inmates. Bargaining power is unequal between inmates and the prison system because inmates are naturally at a subordinate position to the prison. They are forced to sign papers that transfers responsibility of any disasters not onto the authorities, but onto themselves. Insecurity of safety is thus created by the system’s denial of responsibility, making the bargaining position of prisoners low. One could argue that such systematic problem is inevitable; however, this inevitability is precisely what makes the contract unfair. Systematic subjugation could fairly exist, but it still cannot be a reason as to why an inmate should suffer an inferior bargaining that forces him to engage in a dangerous contract. Furthermore, the unequal bargaining position in comparison to prisoners to non-prisoners makes the incentives for participating in rodeos for inmates are far too greater than it is for anyone else participating in a similar event. The inmates get to make more money than they could elsewhere, would get a chance to see the public or their families, and a chance to escape the repetitive prison life, which is far too greater of benefit compared to cowboys outside of prison. The condition of being an inmate discredits fair contracting- as the grounds for what they are obtaining are enormous and irrefusable. One may object that the scale of joy or benefit a cowboy achieves is subjective, and that a non-prisoner cowboy could obtain just as much benefit from doing his job as an inmate would. However, the original argument that inmates have far greater incentives is especially true because these inmates would not have chosen to be a cowboy had they not been inmates. In other words, that they were only forced to choose an option based on availability. Adding to …show more content…
The Angola Rodeo really might be a gift of opportunity that the prison is offering to the inmates, and perhaps the inmates really think so as well. But, despite the fact that the inmates and the prison may be mutually benefiting, objections arise because allowing exploitation is not okay. Allowing exploitation is injecting more racial inequality, allowing unequal bargains, and affecting not just the men in prison but the entire society’s perception, and thus must be criticized and
The Angola prisoners do have the right to the freedom of labor, as written in the Constitution, regardless of the possible threats it may pose to the enjoyment of one’s life or welfare (Lochner vs. New York). They are knowingly taking the risks of participating in the rodeo, and ultimately enjoying themselves with what they are doing. However, the issue at hand goes beyond the question of constitutionality. Controversy arise because their labor contracts have unequal bargaining powers that force inmates to enter an unfair and exploitative labor contract. Unequal bargaining position derive out of the fact that despite the apparent compensating differentials, the risks that inmates take outweigh their benefit. There is no equal bargaining power in the Angola Rodeo not only between the inmates and the prison system, but also in relative comparison with non-inmates. Bargaining power is unequal between inmates and the prison system because inmates are naturally at a subordinate position to the prison. They are forced to sign papers that transfers responsibility of any disasters not onto the authorities, but onto themselves. Insecurity of safety is thus created by the system’s denial of responsibility, making the bargaining position of prisoners low. One could argue that such systematic problem is inevitable; however, this inevitability is precisely what makes the contract unfair. Systematic subjugation could fairly exist, but it still cannot be a reason as to why an inmate should suffer an inferior bargaining that forces him to engage in a dangerous contract. Furthermore, the unequal bargaining position in comparison to prisoners to non-prisoners makes the incentives for participating in rodeos for inmates are far too greater than it is for anyone else participating in a similar event. The inmates get to make more money than they could elsewhere, would get a chance to see the public or their families, and a chance to escape the repetitive prison life, which is far too greater of benefit compared to cowboys outside of prison. The condition of being an inmate discredits fair contracting- as the grounds for what they are obtaining are enormous and irrefusable. One may object that the scale of joy or benefit a cowboy achieves is subjective, and that a non-prisoner cowboy could obtain just as much benefit from doing his job as an inmate would. However, the original argument that inmates have far greater incentives is especially true because these inmates would not have chosen to be a cowboy had they not been inmates. In other words, that they were only forced to choose an option based on availability. Adding to …show more content…
The Angola Rodeo really might be a gift of opportunity that the prison is offering to the inmates, and perhaps the inmates really think so as well. But, despite the fact that the inmates and the prison may be mutually benefiting, objections arise because allowing exploitation is not okay. Allowing exploitation is injecting more racial inequality, allowing unequal bargains, and affecting not just the men in prison but the entire society’s perception, and thus must be criticized and