In
doing last Thursday’s reading as well as this weeks reading, I began to form a
connection between Lind’s article Imprisoning
Women: The Unintended Victims of Mass Imprisonment and Alexander’s chapter
“The New Jim Crow.” The connection I formed was how the unintended imprisonment
of mass amounts of women consequently affects black youth and ultimately leads
to the continuation of the caste system. Alexander has consistently made the
point the majority of people in jail are black men; however if we are to
consider Lind’s point that the War on Drugs has also led to substantially more
women ending up in jails, ultimately many black youth are left without
families. Therefore Alexander’s argument that, “throughout the black community,
there is widespread awareness that black ghetto youth have few, if any,
realistic options, and therefore dealing drugs can be an irresistible
temptation (Alexander, 2010, p. 209),” is just the inevitable out growth of a
system that targets all people residing in inner cities and creates a pattern
in which others are forced into drugs to survive. Alexander goes on to argue
that, “for ghetto youth, drug sales…are often a means of survival, a means of
helping to feed and clothe themselves and their families. The fact that this
“career” path leads almost inevitably to jail is often understood as an
unfortunate fact of life, part of what it means to be poor and black in America
(Alexander, 2010, p. 209).” This should not be a fact of life. In a country
that promotes equality for all, it should not be that the fact of life for most
white suburban kids that they will get an education and go to college, but for
others the fact of life is a bad education with the better option being to
start a life outside of school. Therefore, the connection I am beginning to
make is that the new caste system is a multi-faceted system that perpetuates
and builds off of it’s many different sections.
If one were to stop and think about the
implications of this system, it becomes evident that it is not just mass incarceration, but a total
system that allows mass incarceration to go unquestioned. For example, we know
that the majority of black men are in prisons, but as more black women are
ending up in jail, black youth are forced into situations in which getting
involved with drugs is not necessarily something they want to do but something
they need to do to survive. While we
could argue that if they were to stay in school and get an education then maybe
the system could change, it is hard to think about staying in a failing school
in which the odds are also against you, as a solution to the problem. Furthermore
as Alexander uses Tommie Selby’s argument, “individuals are forced to make
choices in an environment they did not choose. They would surely prefer to have
a broad array of good opportunities (Alexander, 2010, p. 217).” Therefore
people are being forced to make decisions they do not want to make as a result
of the conditions the rest of society has provided them with. As Alexander
says, “the genius of the current caste system…is that it appears voluntary
(Alexander, 2010, p. 215).” It is genius precisely because it seems voluntary
and therefore it goes unquestioned by those in positions of power,
predominantely whites who are unaffected by such conditions. If those in power
do not see a problem, then there is no need to “fix” anything; however there is
nothing voluntary about a system that has been created to promote one group’s
status in society and take away from others. Furthermore, it is easy for
outsiders to say they should just not sell drugs or be involved in crime if
they know the negative outcomes, but is that outcome worse than the conditions
of inequality that are already being subject to? And what happens when the only
option many of the black youth are left with is crime?
Our
capitalist society is built off a need for an underclass. It is easy for this
to remain true under the current system in which blacks end up in jail a
disproportionate amount. Ultimately this leads me to consider Alexander’s use
of Tommie Selby’s question of who’s responsibility is it to provide a better
set of circumstances to people suffering in this caste system? And furthermore
to what extent is this actually possible? This is inevitably a question of
morals. My argument would fall into a category of we are all to some extent
responsible and also are all responsible to provide better circumstances;
however this is not an easy task as we would not be competing with individuals,
we are competing against a system that has been embedded within the structure
of our society. Furthermore, the changes that would need to occur, as Jackson
argues, would involve a redistribution of the properties, which inevitably
means a change in elite status. Therefore, after reading Jackson, it seems as
though the only real answer is for a mass change to occur, but the likely hood
that mass changes will occur is slim. Therefore my closing question is, to what
extent are those in positions such as ours (educated, in college at a private
university) responsible for changing these conditions? While I am a proponent
of education for all, merely changing who can and will be educated does not
seem like enough in this situation. But would reallocating funds from prisons
to education be the realistic start for change in our society?
Anna’s point that the current system of mass incarceration has created a caste system that is “is a multi-faceted system that perpetuates and builds off of it’s many different sections” is an extremely important and interesting one. I realize now that before this week’s readings, I had not fully considered the effects of mass incarceration on groups other than black males. What I found most interesting was the analysis of mass incarceration’s effect on women, both in that having a husband in prison has large ramifications on a woman’s role as a mother, but also that recent legislation that has risen out of the war on drugs has also directly affected women. In Imprisoning Women: The Unintended Victims of Mass Imprisonment, Chesney-Lind describes two phenomena, “gender-blind sentencing,” and the “increased policing of women’s behavior while on probation or parole,” and argues that these phenomena have both played important roles in the perpetuation of women’s imprisonment (91). The thoughtful consideration of both of these aspects of female incarceration involves the question of whether or not women should be treated the same as men in the criminal justice system, or the idea of “vengeful equity” (Chesney-Lind 91). While the idea of “vengeful equity” seems reasonable and perhaps “the socially just thing to do” at first, after consideration and reading Chesney-Lind’s article, I strongly agree with Chesney-Lind that our criminal-justice system needs to take into account the special needs of women rather than treating men and women as exactly the same.
ReplyDeleteChesney-Lind argues that because most women are not violent criminals, they should be let back out into society. I agree with this point. However, I also believe that releasing women from of prison is not a drastic enough step to be wholly reformative; like Anna and Olivia discuss above, there needs to be an emphasis on traditional and non-traditional education programs for women, so that many women have an easier time reentering society. The implementation of programs which would allow ex-convict women to gain high school (or even college) diplomas could potentially help get more women off the street and keep more women out of prison, and this a goal that our society definitely needs to strive towards.
I find the juxtaposition of Anna’s potential plan of action regarding the “mass change” (a reallocation of funds from prisons to education) and Jackson’s plan of action regarding this “mass change” (a violent revolution) to illustrate the impact that race and socio-economic status have on both the urgency a person feels and the ideology behind said person’s viewpoint regarding the issue of mass incarceration and its broader racial implications. I don’t mean to throw Anna under the bus (sorry, Anna); I’m just using her as an example of what I guess can be considered the “privileged white view” of the issue of mass incarceration. I suppose I fall under this group, too. Anyway, I’m not agreeing or disagreeing with Anna’s plan for “mass change,” I’m just simply acknowledging that her plan would fall under the category of “reform,” not “revolution,” as articulated by Jackson. He states, “revolution within a modern industrial capitalist society can only mean the overthrow of all existing property relations and the destruction of all institutions that directly or indirectly support existing property relations…anything less than this is reform” (7). He continues by explaining that “Government and the infrastructure of the enemy capitalist state must be destroyed to get at the heart of the problem: property relations. Otherwise there is no revolution” (8). Allocating funds to education would definitely be considered the reformation of governmental infrastructure, as opposed to its entire eradication. That’s not to say it wouldn’t work, or that it’s not a good plan. I just want to consider that Anna’s plan of the reformation of governmental infrastructure probably comes from the fact that to a white, college-educated female, the issue of the mass incarceration of blacks is not urgent enough to call for a violent revolution. In Jackson’s point of view, this issue had become so pressing, so relevant, that there was no other option other than a violent revolution. Which is why he was a Black Panther, and also formed his own militant prison group.
ReplyDeleteAnna’s claim that racism goes “unquestioned by those in positions of power, predominately whites who are unaffected by such conditions” reminded me of a conversation I feel like I have all the time. I’ve heard many white people who have struggled in their lives, but who have ultimately succeeded, argue that they faced odds just as daunting as poor black people. Since they overcame their obstacles, surely anyone who hasn’t just isn’t trying hard enough. Compounding that type of thinking is the presence of illustrious success stories. It amazes me how many people still insist that because we now have a black President, racism is gone. The same argument is made; if President Obama allegedly wasn’t held back by his race, what is everyone else’s excuse? As Alexander says, “the genius of the current caste system [. . .] is that it appears voluntary” (215). Because it has been drilled into our brains that we live in a meritocracy and that we get what we work for, it can be genuinely difficult to readjust our thinking to accommodate the realities of institutionalized racism.
ReplyDeleteI agree with all of the previous comments that the reallocation of funds and education that is of a high quality and that is accessible to all are important steps toward a solution. But that won’t even come close to fixing anything. As Anna reminded us, capitalism requires an underclass. The ruling class has amassed such incredible wealth and power that they will not be affected by lower dropout rates. With our current economic and political policies, the wealthiest Americans are virtually untouchable. And since those organizations and individuals benefit directly from the prison system, as well as the constant availability of fresh, cheap labor, there is really no way for us to change the system as a whole. Education will only help individuals; ending injustice would require an overhaul of our entire system, which doesn’t seem likely to happen any time soon.
I think Rachel made a really interesting point in recognizing that for many of us, our sense of urgency in the need for change is influenced by our privileged position in society. Despite the frustration I feel when I read for this class, it is hard for me to fully understand Jackson's compelling call for revolution, simply because I am so far removed from the impacts of the system of mass incarceration. The disconnect in the frustrations of those directly affected by the system and outsiders who study the system academically became particularly pronounced to me in Blood in My Eye. I believe that most of the readings we have examined thus far have been written by academics with little first-hand experience with incarceration and their suggestions for diplomatic political reform reflect that experience. Jackson, however, captures the sentiment of those who have actually suffered the consequences of a system of mass incarceration. He makes the argument that "[t]he only effective challenge to power is one that is broad enough to make isolation impossible, and intensive enough to cause repression to affect the normal life style of as many members of the society as possible" (29). As Alexander repeatedly suggests, however, those suffering under a system of mass incarceration lack the political power and resources to influence diplomatic change. This is also apparent in Chesney-Lind's discussion of female imprisonment, in which she notes that "[b]ecause women tend to be working at the lowest levels of the drug hierarchy, they are often unable to negotiate plea reductions successfully" (89). I think this exemplifies the need for a heightened sense of urgency among those who aren't directly impacted by this system.
ReplyDeleteAs many people have discussed, Alexander elucidates how our current caste system appears voluntary. This is something I have observed even within our Colgate community. Although many privileged white students are bothered by the racial divisions in the Colgate social scene, they are disproportionately underrepresented when it comes to actually taking action. I think that even within Colgate, there is an idea that minority students are under-represented in Greek life simply because they prefer to not be involved. This explanation ignores the structural and social influences that contribute to this disparity. Moreover, students' willingness to take action exemplifies the discrepancy in the sense of urgency experienced by those directly affected by racism.
ReplyDeleteStereotypical images of angry black men make change even more challenging, as those marginalized by a racial system of incarceration have to walk a fine line in advocating for themselves. I agree with Britt that awareness is the first step towards change. However, I think further steps can be taken by first recognizing racial inequality within our own community. The campus climate survey overwhelmingly suggests that upper-class, white, male students are most satisfied with their Colgate experience. While these students might still recognize social inequality, their privileged position dampens the sense of urgency they feel in addressing it. In order to bring about real social change for the system of mass incarceration, it is crucial that the people who wield real political power, who, generally speaking, are not directly affected by the system, work towards serious policy change. Jackson argues that "a people can never be so repressed that they can't strike back in some way" (33). While this is an important point, I think that solutions could be reached far more peacefully, diplomatically, and quickly if those who aren't marginalized by this system choose to take real political action. In relation to Britt's point, I think we can apply what we discuss in this class to our own lives by first addressing social division within our own community. If privileged, white students were more vocal in their dissatisfaction with racial divisions at Colgate, real change could ensue and we could all gain a lot more from our liberal arts education. Perhaps change within our own community can one day be translated into the national political change that we so urgently need.
Reading the Alexander chapter for today brought up ideas in my head from earlier this semester when we were discussing the power of photographs. The problem raised by photographs representing torture or topics of the like, is that once you view these pictures, once a topic like this is even brought up in your company, it feels wrong not to react. There is a basic human instinct that kicks in telling you to help the person in need. But how can we help, how can a person so far removed from the situation make a difference? Often the common response is to distance yourself from the situation, the only way you can make yourself feel somewhat "okay" about what you saw or what news you heard, is to accept that you can do nothing about the situation. This type of thinking validates "ignoring" the issue at hand, and we spent the first part of the semester trying to understand what the proper response to these forms of media are, if there are any. In the same respect, Alexander speaks to people "knowing" but "not knowing" about the problems with mass incaration in our society. "Denial may be neither a matter of telling the truth nor intentionally telling a lie. There seem to be states of mind, or even whole cultures, in which we know and don't know at the same time"(Alexander 182). I think the first step to fixing this cycle, to bringing about a reform that could put an end to racial discrimination and the government policies that perpetuate them, is to raise a genuine awareness of the issues at hand. It is not enough for people to "know" what is going on. We know about a lot of things like global warming, poverty, and starving people throughout the world, but we are never forced to confront these problems. I'm not sure how to make that happen, I don't know if anything in my post made any sense. But the point I am trying to get across is that in order for change to be made, it is imperative that people no longer turn their heads to the issues at stake. People must be made aware of the problems, in a way that sparks change.
ReplyDelete