The Redeem System – Ọmọ́làjà Mákinéé

The Redeem System: Abolishing Prisons, Rebuilding People

BY: OMOLAJA MAKINEE

Modern prisons do not rehabilitate. They warehouse failure.

Across republican States, prisons function as closed cages—architectures of punishment where human beings are immobilised, fed minimally, monitored relentlessly, and released psychologically fractured. They neither restore social responsibility nor correct behaviour; they merely suspend it. Worse still, prisons reproduce the very alienation and economic desperation that generates crime in the first place.

Ethnosocialism rejects this logic entirely. In its place emerges the Redeem System—a civilisational alternative that does not punish people by caging them, but confronts them with consequence, responsibility, and lived contrast.

1. Understanding Redeem Requires Understanding Ethnosocialism

To grasp the Redeem System fully, one must first understand the society it protects. Ethnosocialism is organised through:

Ethnopublicanism (peoplehood-based Statehood),
Populocracy (direct citizen law-making),
Commicracy (interpersonal governance through moral intelligence),
Ethno-corporatism (non-monetary economic production and distribution),
A non-monetary national economy where basic needs are guaranteed.

In this system:

Citizens do not labour merely to survive.
Economic life is equalised.
Work is contribution, not coercion.
Law and policies are prescribed by the people themselves.

Crime, therefore, is not simply a legal violation—it is a rejection of a collectively designed moral and economic order.

Redeem is the response.

2. Redeem Is Not a Prison — It Is a Counter-System

The Redeem System is a closed custodial city, not a prison complex. Where prisons cage bodies, Redeem confronts consciousness.

Redeem operates as a contained republican-capitalist environment, deliberately structured as the inverse of ethnosocialism. It exists to show—experientially—what life becomes when collective guarantees are removed and survival is once again monetised.

In simple terms:

Redeem is where offenders live inside the system they implicitly choose through their actions.

3. Life Inside Redeem: Capitalism as Consequence

Inside Redeem:

There is no entitlement-chips system.
There is no non-monetary economy.
There is no collectivised provision.

Individuals must:

Work for money,
Pay for housing,
Purchase food,
Cover healthcare,
Maintain daily survival independently.

No external bailouts. No family transfers. No ethnosocialist safety nets.

Redeem residents live under capitalist work-ethics, where failure to labour results in immediate deprivation—not punishment by guards, but by economic reality.

This is not cruelty. It is pedagogical consequence.

4. Why This Is Not Exploitation

Republican prisons often masquerade forced labour as rehabilitation while extracting value for private or State profit. Redeem rejects this entirely. Redeem labour:

Is not coerced by violence,
Does not enrich external elites,
Does not commodify incarceration.

Instead, labour in Redeem:

Restores agency,
Rebuilds discipline,
Teaches economic accountability,
Reconditions behaviour through lived responsibility.

People are not fed like animals. They are not infantilised. They are treated as adults facing consequence.

5. Governance of Redeem: Deliberate Authoritarianism

Redeem is not populocratic. This is intentional.

Redeem city operates under a centralised autocratic structure, administered by a Redeem-Governor, appointed by and accountable to the Secretariat–Ministry of HomeLand Affairs.

Within Redeem:

Rules are imposed, not debated.
Bureaucracy replaces commicracy.
Authority is vertical, not horizontal.

This internal dictatorship is deliberately designed to contrast with ethnosocialist freedom. It is a lived demonstration of what governance feels like when power is removed from the people.

Redeem does not mirror ethnosocialism. It negates it—by design.

6. Redemption Through Contrast, Not Suffering

Prisons aim to break people. Redeem aims to return people. The goal is not humiliation, but realisation. When individuals experience:

What it means to live without collective provision,
What it means to labour just to survive,
What it means to exist under imposed authority,

many rediscover the value of:

Shared law,
Collective responsibility,
Ethnopublic life.

Redemption becomes cognitive, not merely punitive.

7. Deterrence Without Brutality

Redeem is one of the most powerful deterrents imaginable—not because it is violent, but because it is honest. It reveals that:

Republicanism itself is a condition of survival labour.
Capitalism is not freedom, but endurance.
Monetary economies are redemption-less systems by default.

Crime is deterred not by fear of guards, but by fear of returning to a system where survival is transactional.

Redeem Versus Prison: A Structural Contrast

PRISON SYSTEM	REDEEM SYSTEM
Closed buildings	Open custodial city
Passive confinement	Active responsibility
Forced labour exist in some	Self-directed economic survival
State-fed dependency	Earned sustenance
Psychological degradation	Behavioural recalibration
Punishment	Redemption through contrast

8. The Failure of the Monetary System and the Logic of Inescapability

One of the most misunderstood aspects of the Redeem System is the question of escape. Critics instinctively measure Redeem against prisons and ask whether individuals might evade confinement. This comparison reveals not a weakness of Redeem, but the structural failure of monetary systems and the profound difference between ethnosocialist and republican orders.

In a monetary economy, escape from prison remains conceivable because survival remains monetised. A fugitive may steal, beg, work informally, or exploit black markets. Even while unlawfully at large, the individual continues to operate within the same economic architecture that sustains the rest of society. The system itself does not reject them; only the law does. Survival, therefore, remains possible. Redeem fundamentally alters this equation.

In an ethnosocialist society, survival is not mediated by money but by sole-right with the State. Every individual’s daily existence is structurally secured through two instruments:

Entitlement-chips, which provide access to basic necessities,
Corporatist Service Provision (CSP) cards, which regulate participation in productive and economic life.

These are not optional conveniences; they are the architecture of existence. When an individual enters Redeem, both cards are suspended. This suspension does not merely restrict economic participation—it severs the individual from the entire non-monetary survival system of the society. Outside Redeem, without entitlement-chips and CSP access, one cannot legally obtain food, shelter, healthcare, transportation, or employment. There is no parallel underground economy capable of sustaining life at scale, because the national economy itself is not monetised.

This is where escape becomes double jeopardy. To flee Redeem is not merely to escape confinement—it is to abandon survivability. An escapee faces only two possibilities:

Total Dependence on Others: The individual must rely entirely on another person to carry their survival burden indefinitely—housing them, feeding them, protecting them, and risking legal sanction and redemption by doing so. This dependency is unsustainable and socially visible.
Exile Beyond the Ethnopublic State: The individual must leave the country entirely and re-enter a foreign monetary system, where they possess neither citizenship privileges nor structural protection. Exile becomes the price of evasion.

Neither path offers freedom. Both produce prolonged deprivation, instability, and suffering. Importantly, escape is not presented as impossible. It is presented as irrational.

Redeem does not rely on its high walls, bars, or armed intimidation to prevent flight. It relies on a deeper deterrent: the knowledge that life outside the collective structure is harsher than accountability within it. The ethnosocialist system renders evasion more punishing than redemption.

In this way, the Redeem System exposes the ultimate failure of the monetary order. Monetary societies must rely on cages and coercion because survival remains detached from social belonging. Ethnosocialism requires neither. When survival is collectively guaranteed, withdrawal from the collective becomes its own sanction.

Escape from Redeem is therefore not a pursuit of freedom—it is the acceptance of a lifetime of precarity, deprivation, and social erasure. And for most, redemption becomes the only rational choice.

9. Reintegration, Not Release

Completion of Redeem is not mere release—it is reentry into ethnosocialist life. Individuals return with:

Renewed appreciation for collective provision,
Relearned discipline,
Reintegrated moral alignment.

They do not return indebted. They return re-socialised.

10. Redeem versus Prison versus Abolitionist Models: Three Competing Paradigms of Justice, Punishment, and Social Order

Modern societies oscillate between two dominant responses to crime: incarceration and abolitionism. The first cages; the second removes cages without replacing the conditions that generate harm. The Redeem System emerges as a third civilisational paradigm—neither punitive warehousing nor idealistic withdrawal of accountability, but a structurally enforced model of lived redemption.

To understand its significance, it is necessary to compare all three systems across their foundational assumptions, operational logic, and social outcomes.

A. The Prison Model (Republican–Capitalist Justice)

Core Logic: Punishment through confinement.

Economic Structure: Monetary economy.

Governance Style: Bureaucratic, hierarchical, coercive.

Republican prison systems are built on the assumption that crime is best managed through physical incapacitation. Individuals are removed from society, locked in closed buildings, and sustained at public expense with minimal agency or responsibility.

Prisons:

Treat prisoners as passive subjects.
Externalise survival (food, shelter, healthcare are imposed).
Separate punishment from lived consequence.
Reproduce violence, hierarchy, and criminal identity.
Allow escape without existential consequence due to monetised survival.

Prison labour, where it exists, often resembles institutionalised exploitation, benefiting private contractors or the prison apparatus itself. Rehabilitation is rhetorically invoked but structurally marginal. The prison does not reform; it warehouses. It does not restore social order; it postpones conflict.

B. The Abolitionist Model (Liberal–Postmodern Justice)

Core Logic: Elimination of punitive institutions.

Economic Structure: Monetary economy remains intact.

Governance Style: Decentralised, therapeutic, non-coercive.

Abolitionist models correctly identify the moral failures of prisons but often stop at negation. Their central proposition is that prisons should be dismantled without sufficiently restructuring the economic and social systems that generate harm.

Abolitionism emphasises:

Restorative justice.
Community healing.
Reduced incarceration.
Decriminalisation.

However, abolitionist frameworks suffer from a critical limitation: they operate inside the same monetary and republican structures that produced the prison in the first place. As a result:

Survival remains competitive and unequal.
Economic desperation persists.
Enforcement vacuums emerge.
Accountability becomes inconsistent.
Violent actors are often inadequately contained.

Abolitionism assumes moral transformation without structural transformation. It removes punishment without replacing the conditions that discipline behaviour. In doing so, it risks converting justice into moral aspiration rather than enforceable order.

C. The Redeem System (Ethnosocialist Justice)

Core Logic: Redemption through lived consequence.

Economic Structure: Non-monetary national economy.

Governance Style: Closed, autocratic custodial order within a populocratic State.

The Redeem System represents a fundamentally different philosophy: justice as experiential accountability. Rather than caging individuals or releasing them into unchanged conditions, Redeem relocates offenders into a closed custodial city that operates under the exact conditions ethnosocialism was designed to abolish:

Monetary survival.
Bureaucratic rule.
Imposed law.
Competitive labour.
No entitlement safety net, no welfare, and no external relief.

Within Redeem:

Individuals must work to eat.
Housing, healthcare, and survival are earned.
Economic failure has immediate consequences.
Authority is non-negotiable.
Inflation and deflation regulates monetary system like in third-world nations.
Life mirrors republican capitalism in its rawest form.

This is not cruelty. It is contrast. Redeem does not punish the body—it re-educates the will. It allows individuals to experience, daily and materially, the difference between:

A society organised for collective dignity, and
A society organised around survival competition.

Escape from Redeem is existentially irrational because survival outside the ethnosocialist framework is structurally impossible without exile or inconvenient dependency stripped of self-autonomy.

D. Comparative Framework Table

DIMENSION	PRISON SYSTEM	ABOLITIONIST MODEL	REDEEM SYSTEM
View of Crime	Moral failure / threat	Social harm	Breach of collective contract
Primary Tool	Confinement	Reconciliation	Lived consequence
Economic Logic	State-funded punishment	Market survival persists	Strictest monetary survival enforced
Agency of Offender	Minimal	High, often unchecked	Conditional, structured
Survival Responsibility	Externalised	Individualised	Fully internalised
Escape Consequence	Manageable	Irrelevant	Existential
Rehabilitation	Theoretical	Aspirational	Experiential
Public Trust	Low	Fragmented	High
Structural Coherence	Weak	Incomplete	Total

E. Why Redeem Succeeds Where Others Fail

The prison fails because it removes responsibility.

Abolitionism fails because it removes consequence.

Redeem succeeds because it restores both—without reproducing cruelty.

It is only possible because ethnosocialism has already guaranteed dignity, survival, and equality outside the custodial space. Redeem functions as a mirror society, revealing—by contrast—what is lost when one violates the collective order.

In this sense, Redeem is not merely a justice system. It is a civilisational boundary. It tells every citizen, without threat or spectacle:

This is the world you chose to leave behind. Redemption is the path back.

Conclusion: Ending Prisons by Ending Their Logic

The Redeem System abolishes prisons not by reforming cages, but by abolishing the logic that made cages necessary. It replaces:

Punishment with consequence,
Confinement with responsibility,
Surveillance with contrast,
Dehumanisation with agency.

Redeem is not soft. It is not permissive. It is structurally exacting. And it asks a final, unavoidable question of the offender:

If you violates a society that guarantees dignity, can you happily survive in one that does not?