This work argues that the War on Drugs and policies that deny convicted felons equal access to employment, housing, education, and public benefits create a permanent under caste based largely on race.As the United States celebrates the nation's "triumph over race" with the election of Barack Obama, the majority of young black men in major American cities are locked behind bars or have been labeled felons for life. Although Jim Crow laws have been wiped off the books, an astounding percentage of the African American community remains trapped in a subordinate status - much like their grandparents before them. In this incisive critique, former litigator-turned-legal-scholar Michelle Alexander provocatively argues that we have not ended racial caste in America: we have simply redesigned it. Alexander shows that, by targeting black men and decimating communities of color, the U.S. criminal justice system functions as a contemporary system of racial control, even as …
This work argues that the War on Drugs and policies that deny convicted felons equal access to employment, housing, education, and public benefits create a permanent under caste based largely on race.As the United States celebrates the nation's "triumph over race" with the election of Barack Obama, the majority of young black men in major American cities are locked behind bars or have been labeled felons for life. Although Jim Crow laws have been wiped off the books, an astounding percentage of the African American community remains trapped in a subordinate status - much like their grandparents before them. In this incisive critique, former litigator-turned-legal-scholar Michelle Alexander provocatively argues that we have not ended racial caste in America: we have simply redesigned it. Alexander shows that, by targeting black men and decimating communities of color, the U.S. criminal justice system functions as a contemporary system of racial control, even as it formally adheres to the principle of color blindness. The New Jim Crow challenges the civil rights community - and all of us - to place mass incarceration at the forefront of a new movement for racial justice in America.
At the beginning of 2022, I set a goal to read at least 20 books this year that had been banned or threatened in Texas libraries or schools. My 20th book in that #FReadom journey was the 10th Anniversary edition of The New Jim Crow by Michelle Alexander. newjimcrow.com/
After finishing Alexander's profound work, I went back and reread her updated preface to the new edition, in which she captures the urgency of how the business of mass incarceration has evolved through privatized "e-carceration" and immigration detention.
Then I came across this deep dive by @aaronlmorrison published last month by AP, with personal stories of the impact of the drug war & mass incarceration. But I needed the context of Alexander's book to truly understand the massive scale of the whole story. apnews.com/article/war-on-drugs-75e61c224de3a394235df80de7d70b70
An important book on mass incarceration that describes the problem well, extrapolates reasons that cover part of the cause, and is slightly out of date - which the author acknowledges in her introduction to the 10th anniversary edition.
It is true that America was founded by white males who likely intended the vote to be controlled by landed gentry. It may be true that they were against women and people of color ever having any rights - or it may be that the concept was just outside of their experience. Regardless of this, the constitution has adapted somewhat, even if the supreme court has been shown to lag behind.
It is true that the white males of the south were solidly behind slavery, fighting a war to keep that right. It may be true that this was an extension of keeping the black man down so the poor white man …
An important book on mass incarceration that describes the problem well, extrapolates reasons that cover part of the cause, and is slightly out of date - which the author acknowledges in her introduction to the 10th anniversary edition.
It is true that America was founded by white males who likely intended the vote to be controlled by landed gentry. It may be true that they were against women and people of color ever having any rights - or it may be that the concept was just outside of their experience. Regardless of this, the constitution has adapted somewhat, even if the supreme court has been shown to lag behind.
It is true that the white males of the south were solidly behind slavery, fighting a war to keep that right. It may be true that this was an extension of keeping the black man down so the poor white man had something - or it may be that the main focus was more economic than racist initially. The related dehumanization of slaves, and later immigrants and criminals, was required to justify the mistreatment. That leads directly to the subject of this book.
The author spends a lot of effort connecting this history to racism, which may or may not have helped her cause. The history is important, but it doesn't reveal a better way to change the flawed system we have today. She also spent a lot of effort showing how time and time again the supreme court didn't help (or help enough). It appears to me that expecting the highest court in the land to interpret the constitution the way we commonly do is a fool's errand. I wanted to see more on changing the laws at the state and federal level, even amending the constitution where necessary. The laws we have today are "colorblind" and authorities cannot mention race as a reason - but that only covers the "by law" approach.
This book did an excellent job of pointing out the racism "in fact", if not by law. THIS is where things need to change. Time and time again I read about "discretion", which opens the door for "discrimination". Police officers have the discretion to choose who they stop and frisk. Prosecutors have the discretion to choose which charges to apply to a given detainee. Police departments have the discretion to handle crime quotas by targeting smaller (and non-violent) criminals instead of going after harder targets. This alone is why there are more black and brown people in the extended criminal justice system than whites, regardless of the seriousness of crimes committed.
Finally, the book touches on disenfranchisement of felons and the "business" of incarceration (and parole). These two facts are the largest reason why major change will be very difficult at the federal level when resisted by a political party that would like to remove the right to vote from as many as possible. In my opinion, some courage could be used to apply this at a state level. For instance, a state with legal marijuana should reprieve from prison all those who are only in for possession of what is now a legal substance. That reprieve should have no parole and a complete removal of any felony from the records. For those opposed, remember that these are not violent criminals, the supposed most important reason to crack down on crime. This first step legislation at a state level could go a long ways towards a federal solution.
So yes, a good book, it got me thinking. Some flaws, detailed above, lead me to say this is not a 5 star book, but well worth reading. A subsequent (and current) book on the topic is needed.
