Criminal Justice Reform and The New Jim Crow

For a long time, I hesitated to read the New Jim Crow by Michelle Alexander.

I knew that it would tell me some overwhelming truths and that, as a passionate advocate for criminal justice reform for years, would make the fight seem even more difficult.

But that isn't what happened. If anything, it has fueled this passion to a greater degree and I am grateful for taking the time to read her work.

To give you a brief understanding, my history with the criminal justice system does not involve the self. I have as of this writing never been arrested or received anything worse than a traffic ticket. I have had encounters with law enforcement, some negative and some unremarkable, but for the most part, I've been pretty clear of it. Much of this, of course, has to do with being white.

I started to feel there might be injustice in the system early on and I am not entirely sure what sparked it. I remember the television show COPS being played when I was very young and feeling a sense of disgust by it. Watching people, in their lowest of low moments, being handled by the police, whether they were a criminal or not.

I couldn't understand why drug policy existed and why drugs were used to trap people in cages. Still, in my early days of criminal justice reform, I was very much attached to centrist, respectable reform. I supported the system as it was, I thought it just needed some tinkering. As the years have developed and shaped my views, though, I have come to realize that the entire system needs to be reshaped and reformed, at all levels. If reading is not your forte, I recommend the film 13th.

Like many white criminal justice advocates, I believed that the true flaw in the criminal justice was a classist issue. I still, of course, believe that the system is very classist and favors all types of affluency. That is not in debate. However, as the years have gone by and especially after reading Alexander's analysis, it is undeniable that the criminal justice is inextricably a racial caste system.

But there are many questions that the average thinker might have on that matter. I will do my best to answer them but mind you, I am no scholar, unlike Alexander. So your best bet is to definitely read the book.

The criminal justice system exists to create crime, not eradicate it. 

Particularly, as we delve into the war on drugs, you will see a trend. The war on drug began to develop shortly after the Civil Rights movement reached it's peak. Gradually and over time. In 1972, the United States housed approximately 350,000 in prison walls. Today, that number is an astronomical 2 million plus.

It was 1971 when President Richard Nixon declared the War on Drugs but it did not amp up for some time, especially into policy.

At the time of Nixon's declaration, only about 2% of Americans believed that drugs were a prominent problem in the nation. That's a very small number for a President to make a full declaration of war! It was a fierce media campaign littered with propaganda and fearmongering that by 1989, 64% of the American public believed drugs were the nation's largest problem.

Shaping the war on drugs took strategy. For example, the Department of Justice eliminated nearly all the budget to fight so-called white collar crime and reallocated such funds to instead fight street drugs at a federal level. With that in mind, the Controlled Substance Act of 1970 was passed to criminalize drugs at a federal level and create federal penalties to enforce upon the land for offenders of all types, taking precedence over even the most violent of criminal infractions.

So, why this dramatic refocus? Why a fear campaign based on what was perceived to be a very minimal problem at the time (remember, 2%). The answer is simple and very unpopular but can't be overstated: racism.

But why so coded?

The Civil Rights Movement had done marvelous work to change the narrative. White Southerners had touted "Segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever!" But the hard work of the many activists in the era proved to put a dent on this plan. Between 1955 (Brown v Board) through 1964 (the Civil Rights Act), segregation was falling apart. Freedom rides and brave activists challenged segregation laws and brought national conversations to the injustices of the Jim Crow system.

With the Civil Rights Act cutting Jim Crow off at the legs in 1964, the political arena had to shift. Racial language was no longer going to rattle the public conscious. They wanted the Civil Rights era "trouble" to end and the only way to do that would be to eliminate the segregationist laws. Suddenly, :it wasn't segregation forever in the strategy.

However, before the official end of the Civil Rights movement as we knew it, politicians began code-switching. Because the segregation and state's rights conversation was becoming moot, the focus switched to law and order. In essence, law and order became the new segregation now, segregation tomorrow and segregation forever.

Nixon aide admits what the war on drug was really all about.

Poor People's Movement

An interesting aspect of a unified poor people's movement is sure to set bells into the elite in our Capitalist system. As the history has shown us, it is an uprising of the poor that brings the most dangerous threat to the elite. In order to resolve this, a racial caste system becomes necessary. Alexander explains this in great detail throughout the book.

In fact, when slavery was abolished, according to Alexander, newly freed slaves had what she referred to as a "moment in the sun". So much so, that the poor whites began to fear they would be relegated to the bottom of the caste system with these new rights.

In 1870, 15% of all the federal representatives were black, Black people were gaining power and at fierce momentum. During this phase known as reconstruction, from 1863 to 1877, black prospering became a nuisance to the political agenda and to the ignorant poor whites. However, the very last thing the elite wanted at the time was a multiracial alliance.

In order to achieve this, laws were enacted known as Black Codes to develop a sense of racial order. One such law was known as vagrancy, which required newly freed slaves to provide proof of employment and should they fail to do so, considered them criminals. With the provision in the 13th amendment that allowed for those duly convicted of a crime to work in force servitude, this essentially placed the black man back on the plantations, much to the satisfaction of the poor whites.

Convict leasing as it was called was this system of control. Black people found themselves criminalized for everything, including criminal mischief or even making insulting gestures.

Gradually, as the Southern Democrats began to regain control of the system, order was to be restored. Jim Crow laws were developed under the guise of protecting white people and black people from each other. This relegated black people to a certain part of town and certain sections of public accommodations, as well as employment opportunities. Eventually, Jim Crow would become known as the system. The Plessy v. Ferguson case of 1896 affirmed what is known as the separate but equal doctrine.

But this wouldn't be the first time that racial order had to be restored. After the fall of Jim Crow in 1964, many race activists, including Dr. Martin Luther King, began to switch focus from civil rights to economic rights. The Poor People's Campaign was organized by Dr. King and the Southern Christian Leadership Council in 1968.

In fact, Dr. King formally announced: "We have moved from the era of civil rights to the era of human rights."

The FBI was so concerned with this movement, in fact, (just as it was with civil rights) that they began to monitor and attempt to infiltrate the movement. This was known as Operation POCAM.

With the racial under caste system nearly devoid, restructuring a movement that was interracial was remnant of a time where poor whites and blacks fought together, threatening the very structure of the capitalist regime..

As such, Dr. King had to be eliminated and the movement was set up for immediate failure. And with the problem out of the way, the Nixon administration began working on the new racial caste system, the criminal justice system.

Developing a System

As stated prior, in 1970, only 2% of Americans actually believed that drugs were a serious problem in this nation. The hype needed to grow to sell this narrative. Media campaigns were distributed through film, television, school education, PSAs and radio to talk about the dangers of drugs.

With the Controlled Substance Act of 1970 starting the launch of this campaign and fund allotment for drug enforcement, the war was in it's earliest of phases. By 1985, crack was introduced into poor black communities and by 1986, crack became the biggest news story to sweep the nation as the newest danger to the American way.

In 1988, legislation was passed that would disbar individuals with a drug offense from public housing, student loans, welfare benefits and called for mandatory minimums, unprecedented law for the federal system at the time.

In 1988, the Edward Byrne Grant established that federal aid would be given to police departments, including providing of military grade equipment, to police departments that actively fought the war on drugs.

By 1991, 1/4 of the criminal justice system was made up of young black men, most of which had been convicted of a non-violent drug offense.

In 1992, President Bill Clinton ran on a tougher on crime campaign and endorsed three strikes and you're out crime policies. In 1994, he passed a crime bill that, in part, authorized $16 billion to building prisons and expanded monies into state police forces. As such, we saw the largest increase of inmates in the history of the nation.

How Consent Search Fuel the Drug War 

Race neutral codes had to be used to ensure that this new racial caste system could be successful in a supposed colorblind era. In order to do this, police had to be given incentive and extra discretion to find drug users.

Initially, police chiefs and governments opposed this focus. Feeling they had stronger priorities, they weren't all to excited to make drug crime their primary battle. However, with the financial incentives becoming all to great to pass up, the police departments developed a cultural switch.

Police have discretion to stop motorists for a plethora of offenses, often even some of which seem to cause no apparent danger to the public. Included in this list would be a broken tag light or a California stop and roll.

Police often coerce passengers into consenting to searches of their vehicles, because most people, but especially people of color, would not have the nerve to deny consent to these searches. As such, police would find themselves able to legally search vehicles and in many cases, finding drugs or other illegal activity.

This isn't limited to traffic stops. This can happen on buses or even when traveling on foot. Because consent automatically grants an officer the right to search without probable cause, many people find themselves in a heap of trouble because they unwittingly forego their right to privacy.

Despite the fact that no evidence exists to suggest white people do less drugs than black people, black people are more likely to face punishment for drug crime. In fact, 3/4 of the prison population now consists of black or Latino people for non-violent drug crime.

Even the sale of drug is more likely to be attributed to white youth between 12-17, according to Alexander, yet black people are still more likely to wind up imprisoned.

Crack cocaine, a drug known to be more prominent in the black community, for example, is by design, given harsher sentences than it's more white preferred counterpart, powder cocaine.

Racial disparity in criminal justice.

The Prison Label

Alexander extends the notion of the problems in the system to go far beyond prison walls. In fact, she uses the term the prison label to describe felons, whom she has stated are in second class citizenry.

Some people never face prison at all, with prosecutors having the right to load up charges and public defender offices being grossly underfunded, people who are charged with drug crimes are very likely to accept plea bargains instead of risking mandatory minimum sentences. Even if they are innocent, they are more likely to plea guilty to avoid 20-30 year sentences and as such become branded as felons without ever stepping foot in state prison.

When you have the prison label, you are often excluded from public housing, employment opportunities, student loans, certain private housing, voting in certain states, serving on juries and many other aspects of society. Sometimes these bans are permanent. On top of the social stigma of the felony label, such disenfrachisement from society will increase the odds of recidivism.

But what about white people caught in the system?

Alexander makes note of the fact that in this racial caste system, unlike Jim Crow, white people wind up in the caste system. Although the number is much smaller than of their black counterparts, the war on drugs certainly harms white people and white people are definitely disenfranchised in society.

In fact, Alexander explains this as collateral damage, a true aspect of any war. Just as innocent people are caught in the crossfires of the supposed war on terror overseas, so are people within this war on drug. The target may be black and brown people but inevitably, some white people will fall victim to the war as well. In fact, this is necessary in this supposed colorblind era in order to maintain a racial caste system. Some white people will, in essence, need to be relegated to second class citizenry in order to maintain the belief that the system is just and non-biased.

However, the effects of this system is largely upon the backs of black and brown people in society. In fact, the war on drugs is so effective, and the law and order rhetoric is so effective, that media depictions from every angle have criminalized black and brown people to such an extent that many people believe or assume black and brown people must be criminals, even if such is not true.

Racism with the criminal justice system.

Parallels between Jim Crow and Felony Status 

Prior to 1964, black people could be declined employment on the sole basis of race.

Currently, employers may discriminate at-will against those with felony convictions. White felons are more likely to get offered work than black felons--in fact, they're more likely to get offered work than black non-felons.

Prior to 1965, laws made it exceedingly difficult for black people to register to vote or to participate in voting and government.

Currently, several states do not allow people with felony records to vote or participate on juries.

Prior to civil rights, housing authorities, whether public or private, could deny black people housing on the basis of race.

Today, felons can be disbarred from housing.

For a more defined list and understanding, view this powerpoint.

My white readers; It is time for us to stand together to end this racial caste system once and for all. We must not continue to be duped into a caste system under the guise of law and order. Once we are able to break the chains for people of color, we can finally unite and do the work that the freed slaves and the poor whites tried to do in reconstruction. And the work that Poor People's Campaign tried to do in the late 1960's. Once every man is free, we can finally all be free from the despicable spell of capitalism, greed, poverty and pain. But we cannot do it if we continue to live a "colorblind" life where we fail to acknowledge the reality of racism.

We must dismantle the criminal justice system, restore the rights back to those who've lost them and amplify the voices of the most marginalized. We must not allow the system to continue to let us believe we are better than "them".

We must fight.

Much love,
ArchAngel O:)

Showing Up Against Hate is Important

Every Friday for the last several Friday's, the Wall of Love has formed in Ybor City. A concept of Out and Loud Tampa, an intersectional LGBTQ activist group, the Out and Loud team gather protesters en masse to stand against the famous hate preachers of Ybor city.

Larry Keffer is a street preacher and founder of the Biblical Research Center. He spends his evenings, along with a group of other vested preachers, yelling into the bullhorns preaching the supposed word of God to the public.

I've seen them there for years, usually ignored them. Most people ignore them in fact. They continue walking along and act as though they're not here. Occasionally, I would see people engage them, whether it is in a heated rage or an attempt to have a civil conversation.

Aaron Munoz and team at Out and Loud finally decided that ignoring was not enough. With 2016 the deadliest year for trans women, but especially trans women of color, and now with the arrival of a Trump administration, it is no longer the time to be quiet.

Some people might view the work of Out and Loud and similar protesters as counterproductive or disruptive. Some people will call them whiners with no purpose or vision or even bullies.

Often times, the free speech defenders will chime in how we are disrupting another group's free speech. Listen when I tell you...free speech only protects you from government persecution, not the persecution of the public. Unless the police arrest Larry and his crew for their speech, their free speech has not been violated.

But why is the work Out and Loud doing so important right now? I mean, with the Republican Congress, isn't there more important fish to fry?

Let me explain it this way. One of the most powerful ways for laws to be effective is not through their existence on paper but rather the cultural norms surrounding them. Jim Crow laws were effective because they went mostly unchallenged for a long time, people just culturally accepted them. What, I think, Out and Loud is doing is taking a stand culturally, regardless of the face of law. Even if the most oppressive, backwards anti-LGBTQ laws come into force, they are only as good as the community's perception of them.

For example, currently in many localities, it is perfectly legal to turn away gay and trans people for goods and services. However, after seeing how successfully Out and Loud has rallied a community, do you think a business would make the unwise decision to use such leeway in the law?

Probably not. Because we will tear it up!

Aside from that though, the most important aspect of this is our protection to the next generation of LGBTQ. They are the most vulnerable and will take the largest backlash from this administration. It is our work, our suffering, and the suffering of the LGBTQ elders before us that allowed the way for the gay youth to be more openly accepted and less stigmatized. Now all of that work is threatened and at-risk.

I remember being a young gay coming out to Ybor to party and having those hateful signs in my face with an angry man of God yelling his rhetoric. I remember that.

We are doing a huge service to the youth of today to let them know we are not going to stand by and watch them get hurt. We are a huge community, yes full of shade, full of internalized oppression and full of problematic behavior, but nonetheless a huge community. We will love and protect one another. We will take the streets to make sure our young gay and trans future feel protected and secure.

It's just what we are going to do.

I don't expect those outside of the community to get it--and at this point, I really don't care,

The work we are doing is amazing and crucial in these trying times and we will continue to be heard.

Much Love,
ArchAngel O:)