2014 Shaping the Future of New York Fridays: 11:00-1:45 Boylan Hall, 2231

I fail to understand how anyone could be even the slightest bit surprised at the idea of discrimination in our justice system, especially since, as of late, we have become all too familiar with the injustices and racism inherent in so many of our police policies.  Stop and Frisk, for example, has dominated the New York media outlets in recent years, particularly because of the shocking extent of discrimination that it brings to light. In New York City, 80% of all stops made by NYPD officers were either black or Latino. The ignorance that that percentage implies is frankly just mind-boggling. In what may perhaps be the most egregious illustration of our country’s nearly irreparable level of racism, the U.S. Sentencing Commission divulged that “Black male offenders have continued to receive longer sentences than similarly situated White male offenders.” Black offenders receive sentences 10% longer than their white counterparts. There can be no greater indication of police and judicial contempt of Blacks in America than that extremely depressing, and slightly nauseating, reality.

While the concept of institutionalized racism did not catch me off guard, the crux of Michelle Alexander’s argument was, initially at least, a bit off-putting. The idea that our justice system was engineered to restrict the rights and liberties of black communities struck me as conspiratorial. Yet, as Alexander continuously and deliberately built her case, the possibility emerged that her seemingly outlandish claims could, in fact, contain some truth. If I understand the author correctly, our current state essentially arose from the political incentive to exploit the racist tendencies of Americans nationwide by “cracking down on crime,” which, at that point, was basically code for “discriminating against blacks.” Just the consideration of these concepts is enough to bring an entirely new perspective with which to view crime in America.

More like No duh!

While appalling, what it is shown in The New Jim Crow is hardly surprising. The United States is a country that decided Segregation was not okay only 60 years ago in 1954 and implemented the thought into society much later. Obviously, the war is not over.

I agree wholeheartedly with Michelle Alexander’s thought on mass incarceration in the United States being the new Jim Crow. I’d even argue that it is worse. There are more black men behind bars or under the watchful eye of the criminal Justice system than there were enslaved in 1850 and those numbers didn’t inflate like that after the start of the war on drugs by accident.

For example, Crenshaw High School in California in a middle class black community lost its accreditation in 2006. A black person can play by all the rules and follow the Horatio Alger script to success: study hard get good grades and once they get their diploma, it doesn’t mean a single thing. Black people can look at things like this happen in society for so long before they can ask what is the rational thing to do? Should I go to school and not get anything out of it or can I get in on this drug dealing business the CIA is pushing to urban citizens?

In a society that praises monetary value is it really a surprise that African-Americans try to attain personal respect the American dream by being a successful drug dealer? This is an economical decision, not a wicked and evil decision. These people aren’t selling drugs because they’re evil, they’re selling drugs so they can survive. Instead of helping offer African Americans other opportunities, they deem them immoral and evil and throw them in jail. Why is that? It’s because the government doesn’t care what happens to the African-Americans. They’d rather have them in jail and never have them vote again. The less African Americans that are capable of voting, the less resistance every year White supremacy has to deal with.

I found the reading for this week to be insightful, eye-opening and thought-provoking. Michelle Alexander constructs an argument around the idea that the system of mass incarceration in the United States today serves as a transfigured form of slavery or the Jim Crow laws, designed to oppress and control black people. Her claims were indeed sensational at first, but disturbingly real as she went on to present her evidence. While many of my fellow students have focused specifically on Alexander’s thesis in their responses, and how it made them feel, what struck me most in the reading was a particular excerpt that had nothing to do with incarceration, quoted from historian Loic Wacquant on page 26:

“Racial division was a consequence, not a precondition of slavery, but once it was instituted it became detached from its initial function and acquired a social potency all its own.”

I found this quote to be incredibly important and profound because it provided a small distinction in the history of slavery that makes a huge difference- slavery came before racism. Racism was simply a means created to justify the institution of slavery. I hope I’m not betraying my own ignorance by focusing on this quote; maybe this concept is obvious to most people. But the fact that slavery came before racism is so important, in my opinion, because it underscores the utter falsity of what it means to be a racist. I had always understood racism as a horrible concept that just existed, that began when white people came into contact with foreigners and genuinely believed that they were superior. But that is not the case, at least according to Wacquant and Alexander- the people who created racism didn’t even believe in it. Racism was created, it didn’t simply exist, and it was understood as a tool to justify the cruel enslavement of so many people. But racism spiraled and blossomed and spread to such a degree that its origins were forgotten. I perceived the idea of discriminating against others to be as old as time itself, but the specific concept of racism, according to this reading, has a concrete beginning, a concrete group of creators, and a concrete reason for being created.

We must remember that there is no original ideological basis for racism. I think that is a very important fact to highlight, for everyone, in order to fully understand the absurdity of what it means to be racist. And Alexander would argue that the absurdity of racism is something to highlight very heavily in our day and age, where we dangerously believe that racism is on the decline when it is simply being expressed through other outlets.