Hello readers and welcome to my analysis of The New Jim Crow; a book by writer and civil rights advocate Michelle Alexander. I greatly appreciate your presence, even though it may only be digital, and I hope to alleviate any confusion among the complex facets of race/racial issues that you may have.
The New Jim Crow is a text that certainly pertains to America's failure to achieve racial equality. In this book, Alexander examines the methodology and effects of discriminatory practices occurring throughout America's history, such as Slavery, the Jim Crow South, and most prominently Mass Incarceration.
In this post, I will discuss the first 97 pages of this book which includes "Introduction", "The Rebirth of the Caste" and "The Lockdown."
Introduction
Alexander begins her book with an anecdote regarding an African-American man: Jarvious Cotton.
"Jarvious Cotton cannot vote. Like his father, grandfather, great-grandfather, and great-great-grandfather, he has been denied the right to participate in our electoral democracy. Cotton’s family tree tells the story of several generations of black men who were born in the United States but who were denied the most basic freedom that democracy promises—the freedom to vote for those who will make the rules and laws that govern one’s life. Cotton’s great-great-grandfather could not vote as a slave. His great-grandfather was beaten to death by the Ku Klux Klan for attempting to vote. His grandfather was prevented from voting by Klan intimidation. His father was barred from voting by poll taxes and literacy tests. Today, Jarvious Cotton cannot vote because he, like many black men in the United States, has been labeled a felon and is currently on parole." (1)
Alexander's anecdote highlight's Cotton's inability to vote, a right that every American should be afforded, and emphasizes the historic repeated practices denying voting rights to African-Americans. This anecdote also highlights the versatility of this suppression; it includes denying voting rights by way of Klan intimidation, literacy tests, and correctional status. Beginning her book with this anecdote allows Alexander to clearly illustrate that systems of mass discrimination evolve to be regarded as socially acceptable. Alexander certainly validates her subtitle: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness by promoting this idea of the evolution of mass discrimination from the moment her readers first lay their eyes on the page.
The Rebirth of Caste
This chapter focuses on exploring the aforementioned idea that systems of racial control evolve to maintain social acceptance. It details the journey from Slavery to The Jim Crow South, to our current system: Mass Incarceration.
The title of this chapter carries some weight. By bluntly describing the system of racial control we currently observe with the word "Caste," Alexander appeals to the pathos of her readers. The term "Caste" is originally from Indian society. In India, there was, although some argue that is it still very much alive, a system that concretely and harshly separated members of Indian society into socioeconomic groups.
Alexander uses the word "Caste" to compare the harsh separation of the Indian people to the current separation of races in America. This comparison highlights the close relationship between socioeconomic status and race.
This chapter also specifically discusses the means by which racial discrimination is facilitated regarding mass incarceration. The most notable of these discussed means is the War on Drugs.
Alexander writes:
"The level of public concern about crime and drugs was only weakly correlated with actual crime rates, but highly correlated with political initiatives, campaigns, and partisan appeals." (55)
By detailing the correlation between public concern and political initiatives, she highlights the discriminatory nature of American politics. The War on Drugs is simply a political tool to incarcerate a certain group of people: People of Color. The United States Government is given an excuse to discriminate all in the name of public safety.
The Lockdown
In this next chapter, Alexander examines the judicial precedents and common practices that pertain to arrests as part of the War on Drugs. She challenges the financial motivations of numerous law enforcement agencies in cooperation with the federal government and highlights that persons of color are subjected to racial profiling that can lead to their arrest.
One of the most prominent topics discussed in this chapter is the fourth amendment. The fourth amendment establishes protection from unreasonable searches and seizures. Alexander argues racial profiling resulting in drug arrests frequently violates the fourth amendment, and yet our judicial branch of government allows this practice to continue. The courts uphold that if a law enforcement officer obtains consent from an individual, the search of an individual's belongings cannot be considered "unreasonable."
Alexander writes:
"The overwhelming majority of people who are confronted by police and asked questions respond, and when asked to be searched, they comply . . . This is no secret to the Supreme Court. The Court long ago acknowledged that effective use of consent searches by the police depends on the ignorance (and powerlessness) of those who are targeted." (66)
Police are able to approach anyone they choose, more often than not they choose people of color, and ask for consent to search their property. If they receive such consent, according to the Supreme Court they are not in violation of the fourth amendment.
By highlighting the sinister nature of these racially motivated searches, Alexander appeals to pathos and draws bitterness towards law enforcement agencies from her audience. With the statement "effective[ness] . . . depends on the ignorance (and powerlessness) of those who are targeted." (66) Alexander prompts her readers to recognize the discriminatory behavior of law enforcement and leaves her audience with a sense of pity for those whose race prohibits them from receiving fair treatment from the people who are supposed to keep them safe.
The New Jim Crow is a text that certainly pertains to America's failure to achieve racial equality. In this book, Alexander examines the methodology and effects of discriminatory practices occurring throughout America's history, such as Slavery, the Jim Crow South, and most prominently Mass Incarceration.
In this post, I will discuss the first 97 pages of this book which includes "Introduction", "The Rebirth of the Caste" and "The Lockdown."
Introduction
Alexander begins her book with an anecdote regarding an African-American man: Jarvious Cotton.
"Jarvious Cotton cannot vote. Like his father, grandfather, great-grandfather, and great-great-grandfather, he has been denied the right to participate in our electoral democracy. Cotton’s family tree tells the story of several generations of black men who were born in the United States but who were denied the most basic freedom that democracy promises—the freedom to vote for those who will make the rules and laws that govern one’s life. Cotton’s great-great-grandfather could not vote as a slave. His great-grandfather was beaten to death by the Ku Klux Klan for attempting to vote. His grandfather was prevented from voting by Klan intimidation. His father was barred from voting by poll taxes and literacy tests. Today, Jarvious Cotton cannot vote because he, like many black men in the United States, has been labeled a felon and is currently on parole." (1)
Alexander's anecdote highlight's Cotton's inability to vote, a right that every American should be afforded, and emphasizes the historic repeated practices denying voting rights to African-Americans. This anecdote also highlights the versatility of this suppression; it includes denying voting rights by way of Klan intimidation, literacy tests, and correctional status. Beginning her book with this anecdote allows Alexander to clearly illustrate that systems of mass discrimination evolve to be regarded as socially acceptable. Alexander certainly validates her subtitle: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness by promoting this idea of the evolution of mass discrimination from the moment her readers first lay their eyes on the page.
The Rebirth of Caste
This chapter focuses on exploring the aforementioned idea that systems of racial control evolve to maintain social acceptance. It details the journey from Slavery to The Jim Crow South, to our current system: Mass Incarceration.
The title of this chapter carries some weight. By bluntly describing the system of racial control we currently observe with the word "Caste," Alexander appeals to the pathos of her readers. The term "Caste" is originally from Indian society. In India, there was, although some argue that is it still very much alive, a system that concretely and harshly separated members of Indian society into socioeconomic groups.
(Image from Deutsche Welle)
This chapter also specifically discusses the means by which racial discrimination is facilitated regarding mass incarceration. The most notable of these discussed means is the War on Drugs.
Alexander writes:
"The level of public concern about crime and drugs was only weakly correlated with actual crime rates, but highly correlated with political initiatives, campaigns, and partisan appeals." (55)
By detailing the correlation between public concern and political initiatives, she highlights the discriminatory nature of American politics. The War on Drugs is simply a political tool to incarcerate a certain group of people: People of Color. The United States Government is given an excuse to discriminate all in the name of public safety.
The Lockdown
In this next chapter, Alexander examines the judicial precedents and common practices that pertain to arrests as part of the War on Drugs. She challenges the financial motivations of numerous law enforcement agencies in cooperation with the federal government and highlights that persons of color are subjected to racial profiling that can lead to their arrest.
One of the most prominent topics discussed in this chapter is the fourth amendment. The fourth amendment establishes protection from unreasonable searches and seizures. Alexander argues racial profiling resulting in drug arrests frequently violates the fourth amendment, and yet our judicial branch of government allows this practice to continue. The courts uphold that if a law enforcement officer obtains consent from an individual, the search of an individual's belongings cannot be considered "unreasonable."
Alexander writes:
"The overwhelming majority of people who are confronted by police and asked questions respond, and when asked to be searched, they comply . . . This is no secret to the Supreme Court. The Court long ago acknowledged that effective use of consent searches by the police depends on the ignorance (and powerlessness) of those who are targeted." (66)
Police are able to approach anyone they choose, more often than not they choose people of color, and ask for consent to search their property. If they receive such consent, according to the Supreme Court they are not in violation of the fourth amendment.
By highlighting the sinister nature of these racially motivated searches, Alexander appeals to pathos and draws bitterness towards law enforcement agencies from her audience. With the statement "effective[ness] . . . depends on the ignorance (and powerlessness) of those who are targeted." (66) Alexander prompts her readers to recognize the discriminatory behavior of law enforcement and leaves her audience with a sense of pity for those whose race prohibits them from receiving fair treatment from the people who are supposed to keep them safe.
Hi Colby!
ReplyDeleteGood analysis! You clearly understood the chapters and Alexander's arguments. I would love to hear more of your personal opinions on the racial issues in the novel as well as your view on the writing and ideas of Michelle Alexander.
Looking forward to reading your future posts on this "novel"
Hi Georgia,
DeleteThanks for the support for my first post! I'm really enjoying this piece so far and I hope you are too. I think that having this dialogue will be very enjoyable in the future and I'm glad that we're paired together. I personally agree with the vast majority of what Michelle Alexander is writing. However, there are a few slight doubts that came across in this first reading. I, like you, agree with Alexander to an extent. I think that our country has made more progress than she is letting on, especially in regards to electing Barack Obama. Alexander kind of denounced his triumph as an outlier to our cultural principles, but I think that his election goes to show more than she's giving it credit for. Electing the first African-American president, for two terms nonetheless, emphasizes the progress that America has made. The institutions of slavery and the Jim crow south are quite different than Modern America, but I would have to agree that there is room for a lot more progress to be made.
Thanks!
Hi Colby, This is a powerful and important book. I'm so glad you are all reading it. It is such an IMPORTANT book. I'll watch for more blog posts about it from you!
ReplyDeleteHave you seen the documentary 13th? http://www.avaduvernay.com/#/13th/ I think you will (might? should?!) watch it. It looks at the criminalizing of African Americans & how our criminal justice system fails them. I watched it 2 summers ago - powerful. I was hopeful, this fall, when felons who have served their time in Florida prisons were granted the right to vote.
Hi Ms. Walton,
DeleteI saw 13th a few years ago when it first came out and I thought it was fantastic. I definitely plan on watching it again because I, like you, think it's a very powerful documentary and a fantastic supplement to this book. Thanks for your response!
Colby, good use of images and quotations from the book in your discussion of the stylistic choices.
ReplyDelete