> Even the most liberal thinkers routinely call for people they don't approve of to be thrown in jail.

Evidence or argument to support this? It seems false by definition.

Argument. :)

Tautologically, you're right. Liberal is people who wouldn't do this, therefore...

But, of people who would self-identify as liberal how many are in fact closet authoritarians? Lots!

The "why haven't any bankers been thrown in jail" trope has been repeated fairly often on both sides of the aisle.

Now here, "Most liberal" might be just talking about people still within mainstream thinking. Though many talk about not throwing people in jail for things like Marijuana, few talk about reducing sentences for non-drug related crimes (and pretty much no discussion on reducing it for violent crimes as well).

It all hinges on whether or not you look at the justice system as an agent for revenge or one of correction and rehabilitation.

Very true. It's one of those topics where people don't even start with the same axioms and definitions, so the discussion goes nowhere.

Personally, I was on the other side of the fence, until the constant evidence of the extreme suffering a large segment of the population goes through in prison convinced me that we're accomplishing immense amounts of harm this way.

I'm thinking of bloggers I subscribe to who are often characterised as Social Justice Warriors - people who are extremely liberal. Very often these people will call for Bush, Cheney et al. to be jailed for war crimes. They tend to want people perceived as financial beneficiaries of the "neo-liberal" orthodoxy (bankers etc.) to be jailed as white collar criminals too.

> [...] people who are extremely liberal.

In the American definition of the word.

Yes, always a source of confusion.