Hi Tony! We used to be pen pals through the SF Zen Center Prison Correspondence Program and we lost touch. I sent you many letters but I'm guessing you didn't receive them. Maybe you continued sending me letters for a while as well. Are you still incarcerated? I would be very happy to re-connect. I hope you are doing well. I just returned from a silent Buddhist meditation retreat with my oldest child, and I thought of you and tried to look you up, but I can't find an address. Let me know if you receive this and would like to start corresponding again!
Appreciate your repost. While I do not agree with all that you say, or particularly not with the spirit in which you say it, you still make a few decent points, especially with regards to asking I mates themselves what they feel they need in a climate of reform. Of course now, in 2026, it appears ever more likely that this part of the conversation is rather moot anyway, with he ascendance of social conservatism and it's childish reliance on punishment to solve all problems (or to satisfy the populace, at any rate, which obtains votes, which is all that ultimately matters to the political class...though that quaint conceit may be on its way out the window now as well). Take care and please do continue to write. You are seen!
Hello! I appreciate your perspective and agree almost entirely. Unfortunately I suspect you're wrong about the historical low support for capital punishment. though there is no justification for it and all your criticisms are terribly valid, it seems the new political climate will be much more open to state murders than even just a year or so ago. We may be in for some dark times ahead, my friend. If you've not yet read them, let me suggests the novels The Handmaid's Tale (Margaret Atwood) and The Parable of the Talents (Octavia Butler). The latter in particular will blow your mind with its horrific prescience. 😞
He signs off with a reference to collecting memorials for "Whispers" (likely another inmate), tying back to themes of humanity in prison. This structure is logical—acknowledging support first, then dismantling accusations methodically—while weaving in personal anecdotes and broader philosophical points. Tone and Style Haraszewski's tone is remarkably civil and engaging, blending empathy ("I'm genuinely sorry to hear about your friend"), self-deprecation ("that would be some astoundingly efficient work, wouldn't it?"), and intellectual curiosity. He avoids direct insults, using irony and puns to lighten heavy topics (e.g., "nuts" double entendre; "herding cats"). This contrasts sharply with Tenzin's vitriol, labeling him a "child predator" and demanding studies on pedophiles. His style is conversational yet erudite, referencing Haidt, accessible yet showcasing education despite incarceration. The response humanizes him, portraying a reflective person wronged by systemic biases (e.g., media "garbage in, garbage out"), aligning with his blog's themes of criminal justice flaws. Effectiveness As rebuttal, it's highly effective for neutral/sympathetic readers like Guy, bolstering credibility via evidence (prison demographics) and transparency. It counters Tenzin's misconceptions: Prison violence: Clarifies no claim Black inmates avoid beatings entirely—only not disproportionately inside prisons, supporting "coppism." Conviction: Critiques distorted portrayals without outright denial, stressing unbalanced reporting. Her loss: Expresses sympathy, distinguishes inmate-vs-guard violence, de-escalating while validating pain. For Tenzin, it likely falls flat—her follow-up doubles down, criticizing his "Whispers" epitaph as insulting. Intellectual engagement doesn't sway her emotional bias or demands for confession. Overall, it strengthens his Between the Bars community by modeling resilience and critical thinking. Strengths Empathy/Restraint: Avoids escalation in heated exchange. Educational Value: Explains prison acronyms (SNY, NDPF, SHU), deepening incarceration/race discussions. Humor as Deflection: Puns disarm hostility without trivializing. Philosophical Depth: Links defense to tribalism/media bias. Inclusivity: Invites dialogue ("you're welcome to continue reading"). Critiques/Weaknesses Length/Density: Five pages may deter readers or overwhelm Tenzin. Defensiveness on Conviction: Skirts case details, seeming evasive to skeptics. Neologisms/Tangents: "Coppism" etymology clever but pedantic. Humor Risks: Cheeky wordplay (e.g., "Master Baiter") may undermine seriousness for sensitive readers. In summary, this impressive, nuanced response humanizes a marginalized voice, challenging assumptions about crime, race, and justice. It critiques systems effectively. It underscores Between the Bars' value in amplifying incarcerated perspectives, turning antagonism into reflection. Haraszewski emerges thoughtful & resilient.
Dymitri: I must say BRAVO to this. I wish I had been in lived when the original controversies we're still fresh. I'm impressed by your composure and thoroughness in response to rather aggressive critics. That said I'd like to show you what the AI returned when I asked it to critique your reply. It's rather long but I believe you'll find it enlightening.
From Grok, Jan 4th 2026:
Dymitri Haraszewski's response to Tenzin (and secondarily to Guy) on his Between the Bars blog post "The Presumption of Whiteness" is a masterclass in measured, intellectually rigorous rebuttal, especially considering the context: Haraszewski is writing from prison, responding to a deeply hostile commenter who accuses him of being a child predator, dismisses his observations on police violence, and ties his arguments to personal resentment over his conviction. The reply, dated July 27, 2023, and structured as a multi-page comment response, demonstrates patience, wit, and a commitment to clarity while navigating emotionally charged topics like race, police brutality, prison dynamics, and media misrepresentation. Below, I'll analyze its structure, tone, effectiveness, strengths, and potential critiques, drawing on the original post's theme (Haraszewski's argument that police violence stems more from "tribalism" or "coppism" than pure racism, based on his prison experiences) and the visible comments for context. Structure and Content Overview The response is divided into five pages, starting with an apology for the delay (due to mail issues in prison) and addressing both commenters systematically: Page 1: Greets Guy appreciatively, then pivots to Tenzin, speculating on her sources (e.g., Google searches yielding biased "hit pieces") and critiquing how media and prosecutors distort narratives around convictions. He emphasizes that such portrayals reduce complex humans to "cartoon villains," denying access to balanced views. Page 2: Debunks Tenzin's exaggerated claim of him having 350 "victims" using simple arithmetic, highlighting its absurdity. He introduces humor with wordplay (e.g., "Master Groomer" as synonymous with "Master Baiter") and questions the credibility of sources that propagate such claims. Pages 3-4: Clarifies prison terminology (e.g., SNY as "Sensitive Needs Yard," not just for sex offenders) and defends his experiential authority, noting his time across various prison levels. He reiterates his original post's point about non-disproportionate violence against Black inmates in prison (contrasting with societal patterns) and sympathizes with Tenzin's loss of a friend to inmate violence. Page 5: Engages Tenzin's neologism critique ("coppism") by tracing it to broader "groupishness" (citing Jonathan Haidt), praises her phrase "serval predilections" with cat-themed puns, and ends on a forward-looking note about evolving as a "warrior for justice" while inviting constructive dialogue. He signs off
(BTB restricted the length. I shall post a part 2)
Thanks for writing! I finished the transcription for your post.
To be clear, another person finished this transcription long ago but forgot to check the box that it was done. So have no fear, your work is being seen in it's original handwritten form and also in a transcribed and fully searchable version. You are seen!
Thanks for writing! I finished the transcription for your post.
Actually the transcript was already completed, but the previous transcriber forgot to check the box saying it was finished. So have no fear! Your work is up it's original handwritten form, as well a searchable transcribed version in its entirety. You are seen! Take care.
RSS
Best,
Allyson
Take care and please do continue to write. You are seen!
I appreciate your perspective and agree almost entirely. Unfortunately I suspect you're wrong about the historical low support for capital punishment. though there is no justification for it and all your criticisms are terribly valid, it seems the new political climate will be much more open to state murders than even just a year or so ago. We may be in for some dark times ahead, my friend. If you've not yet read them, let me suggests the novels The Handmaid's Tale (Margaret Atwood) and The Parable of the Talents (Octavia Butler). The latter in particular will blow your mind with its horrific prescience. 😞
Please keep writing. You are seen!
He signs off with a reference to collecting memorials for "Whispers" (likely another inmate), tying back to themes of humanity in prison.
This structure is logical—acknowledging support first, then dismantling accusations methodically—while weaving in personal anecdotes and broader philosophical points.
Tone and Style
Haraszewski's tone is remarkably civil and engaging, blending empathy ("I'm genuinely sorry to hear about your friend"), self-deprecation ("that would be some astoundingly efficient work, wouldn't it?"), and intellectual curiosity. He avoids direct insults, using irony and puns to lighten heavy topics (e.g., "nuts" double entendre; "herding cats"). This contrasts sharply with Tenzin's vitriol, labeling him a "child predator" and demanding studies on pedophiles. His style is conversational yet erudite, referencing Haidt, accessible yet showcasing education despite incarceration.
The response humanizes him, portraying a reflective person wronged by systemic biases (e.g., media "garbage in, garbage out"), aligning with his blog's themes of criminal justice flaws.
Effectiveness
As rebuttal, it's highly effective for neutral/sympathetic readers like Guy, bolstering credibility via evidence (prison demographics) and transparency. It counters Tenzin's misconceptions:
Prison violence: Clarifies no claim Black inmates avoid beatings entirely—only not disproportionately inside prisons, supporting "coppism."
Conviction: Critiques distorted portrayals without outright denial, stressing unbalanced reporting.
Her loss: Expresses sympathy, distinguishes inmate-vs-guard violence, de-escalating while validating pain.
For Tenzin, it likely falls flat—her follow-up doubles down, criticizing his "Whispers" epitaph as insulting. Intellectual engagement doesn't sway her emotional bias or demands for confession.
Overall, it strengthens his Between the Bars community by modeling resilience and critical thinking.
Strengths
Empathy/Restraint: Avoids escalation in heated exchange.
Educational Value: Explains prison acronyms (SNY, NDPF, SHU), deepening incarceration/race discussions.
Humor as Deflection: Puns disarm hostility without trivializing.
Philosophical Depth: Links defense to tribalism/media bias.
Inclusivity: Invites dialogue ("you're welcome to continue reading").
Critiques/Weaknesses
Length/Density: Five pages may deter readers or overwhelm Tenzin.
Defensiveness on Conviction: Skirts case details, seeming evasive to skeptics.
Neologisms/Tangents: "Coppism" etymology clever but pedantic.
Humor Risks: Cheeky wordplay (e.g., "Master Baiter") may undermine seriousness for sensitive readers.
In summary, this impressive, nuanced response humanizes a marginalized voice, challenging assumptions about crime, race, and justice. It critiques systems effectively. It underscores Between the Bars' value in amplifying incarcerated perspectives, turning antagonism into reflection. Haraszewski emerges thoughtful & resilient.
I must say BRAVO to this. I wish I had been in lived when the original controversies we're still fresh. I'm impressed by your composure and thoroughness in response to rather aggressive critics. That said I'd like to show you what the AI returned when I asked it to critique your reply. It's rather long but I believe you'll find it enlightening.
From Grok, Jan 4th 2026:
Dymitri Haraszewski's response to Tenzin (and secondarily to Guy) on his Between the Bars blog post "The Presumption of Whiteness" is a masterclass in measured, intellectually rigorous rebuttal, especially considering the context: Haraszewski is writing from prison, responding to a deeply hostile commenter who accuses him of being a child predator, dismisses his observations on police violence, and ties his arguments to personal resentment over his conviction. The reply, dated July 27, 2023, and structured as a multi-page comment response, demonstrates patience, wit, and a commitment to clarity while navigating emotionally charged topics like race, police brutality, prison dynamics, and media misrepresentation. Below, I'll analyze its structure, tone, effectiveness, strengths, and potential critiques, drawing on the original post's theme (Haraszewski's argument that police violence stems more from "tribalism" or "coppism" than pure racism, based on his prison experiences) and the visible comments for context.
Structure and Content Overview
The response is divided into five pages, starting with an apology for the delay (due to mail issues in prison) and addressing both commenters systematically:
Page 1: Greets Guy appreciatively, then pivots to Tenzin, speculating on her sources (e.g., Google searches yielding biased "hit pieces") and critiquing how media and prosecutors distort narratives around convictions. He emphasizes that such portrayals reduce complex humans to "cartoon villains," denying access to balanced views.
Page 2: Debunks Tenzin's exaggerated claim of him having 350 "victims" using simple arithmetic, highlighting its absurdity. He introduces humor with wordplay (e.g., "Master Groomer" as synonymous with "Master Baiter") and questions the credibility of sources that propagate such claims.
Pages 3-4: Clarifies prison terminology (e.g., SNY as "Sensitive Needs Yard," not just for sex offenders) and defends his experiential authority, noting his time across various prison levels. He reiterates his original post's point about non-disproportionate violence against Black inmates in prison (contrasting with societal patterns) and sympathizes with Tenzin's loss of a friend to inmate violence.
Page 5: Engages Tenzin's neologism critique ("coppism") by tracing it to broader "groupishness" (citing Jonathan Haidt), praises her phrase "serval predilections" with cat-themed puns, and ends on a forward-looking note about evolving as a "warrior for justice" while inviting constructive dialogue. He signs off
(BTB restricted the length. I shall post a part 2)
Hope you will continue to contribute to between the bars. Your voice is heard.
This too was already completed. Please do continue to write.
To be clear, another person finished this transcription long ago but forgot to check the box that it was done. So have no fear, your work is being seen in it's original handwritten form and also in a transcribed and fully searchable version. You are seen!
Actually the transcript was already completed, but the previous transcriber forgot to check the box saying it was finished. So have no fear! Your work is up it's original handwritten form, as well a searchable transcribed version in its entirety. You are seen!
Take care.