[Toshi]

http://books.google.com/books?id=RMbDiacb8cIC&printsec=frontcover&dq=the+new+jim+crow&hl=en&src=bmrr&ei=VrIoTvaNL-fL0QGo2f39Cg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=book-preview-link&resnum=1&ved=0CDYQuwUwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false

Anyone read it? I'm going to in the next few weeks.

Excerpt from its introduction (p. 13):

We avoid talking about caste in our society because we are ashamed of our racial history. We also avoid talking about race. We even avoid talking about class. Conversations about class are resisted in part because there is a tendency to imagine that one's class reflects upon one's character. What is key to America's understanding of class is the persistent belief--despite all evidence to the contrary--that anyone, with the proper discipline and drive, can move from a lower class to a higher class. We recognize that mobility may be difficult, but the key to our collective self-image is the assumption that mobility is always possible, so failure to move up reflects on one's character. By extension, the failure of a race or ethnic group to move up reflects very poorly on the group as a whole.

What is completely missed in the rare public debates today about the plight of African Americans is that a huge percentage of them are not free to move up at all. It is not just that they lack opportunity, attend poor schools, or are plagued by poverty. They are barred by law from doing so. And the major institutions with which they come into contact are designed to prevent their mobility. To put the matter starkly: The current system of control permanently locks a huge percentage of the African American community out of the mainstream society and economy. The system operates through our criminal justice institutions, but if functions more like a caste system than a system of crime control. Viewed from this perspective, the so-called underclass is better understood as an undercaste--a lower caste of individuals who are permanently barred by law and custom from mainstream society. Although this new system of racialized social control purports to be colorblind, it creates and maintains racial hierarchy much as earlier systems of control did.

 

[Toshi]

Background information, for those of you who may have read the above and not known what the author is going on about:

http://bjsdata.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/p01.pdf

First off, we incarcerate a much higher percentage of our total population than any other nation. Russia is the only other one that even comes remotely close. Top 5 states for incarceration rates, descending order: LA, MI, TX, OK, AL. Bottom 5, ascending: ME, MN, ND, RI, NH.

Second, blacks and Hispanics are extremely overrepresented. Table 16, 2001 data: # sentenced/100k prisoners: 896 overall; 462 white; 3,535 black; 1,177 Hispanic. Keep in mind that only about 12.9% of the population is black/part-black (2000 Census data: http://www.census.gov/prod/2001pubs/c2kbr01-5.pdf).

Thirdly, black prisoners are much more likely to be incarcerated for drug offenses than those of other ethnicities. Table 19, drawing from the state prison data: 27% black prisoners in for drug offenses as compared to 15% for whites, 7% for Hispanics.

Put all of this together and you can see that a substantial fraction--approaching unity in poor neighborhoods--of the black population (especially young, black males) are felons, and are thus now members of the undercaste about which the above author writes.

 

[Toshi]

What will follow are somewhat random quotes as I go through the book:

The fact that more than half of the young black men in any large American city are currently under the control of the criminal justice system (or saddled with criminal records) is not--as many argue--just a symptom of poverty or poor choices, but rather evidence of a new racial caste system at work.

Mass incarceration, like Jim Crow, helps to define the meaning and significance of race in America. Indeed, the stigma of criminality functions in much the same way that the stigma of race once did. It justifies a legal, social, and economic boundary between "us" and "them."

There was no contradiction in the bold claim made by Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence that "all men are created equal" if Africans were not really people.

 

[sanjuro]

You are going to have to skip to the magic solution.

While there is no doubt that too many blacks go to prison, without a total revision of our current social and economic system, I don't see any easy answers.

 

[Toshi]

More quoted passages. I run out of preview pages in Google Books at page 58, so the rest will have to await me checking out a paper copy of the book from my local, socialist public library:

History reveals that the seeds of the new system of control were planted well before the end of the Civil Rights Movement. A new race-neutral language was developed for appealing to old racist sentiments, a language accompanied by a political movement that succeeded in putting the vast majority of blacks back in their place. Proponents of racial hierarchy found they could install a new racial caste system without violating the law or the new limits of acceptable political discourse, by demanding 'law and order' rather than 'segregation forever.'

The success of law and order rhetoric among working-class whites and the intense resentment of racial reforms, particularly in the South, led conservative Republican analysts to believe that a 'new majority' could be created by the Republican Party, one that included the traditional Republican base, the white South, and half the Catholic, blue-collar vote of the big cities. Some conservative political strategists admitted that appealing to racial fears and antagonisms was central to this strategy, though it had to be done surreptitiously.

Condemning 'welfare queens' and criminal 'predators,' [Reagan] rode into office with the strong support of disaffected whites--poor and working-class whites who felt betrayed by the Democratic Party's embrace of the civil rights agenda. As one political insider explained, Reagan's appeal derived primarily from the ideological fervor of the right wing of the Republican Party and 'the emotional distress of those who fear or resent the Negro, and who expect Reagan somehow to keep him 'in his place' or at least echo their own anger and frustration.

My comment about this last quoted passage: Sounds a hell of a lot like the Tea Party of today, only inserting Hispanics as well as Blacks instead of "Negros"!

 

[Toshi]

In October 1982, President Reagan officially announced his administration's War on Drugs. At the time he declared this new war, less than 2 percent of the American public viewed drugs as the most important issue facing the nation. This fact was no deterrent to Reagan, for the drug was from the outset had little to do with public concern about drugs and much to do with public concern about race. By waging a war on drug users and dealers, Reagan made good on his promise to crack down on the racially defined 'others'--the undeserving.

Later [in September 1986], … [President Reagan] signed the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986 into law. Among other harsh penalties, the legislation included mandatory minimum sentences for the distribution of cocaine, including far more severe punishment for distribution of crack--associated with blacks--than powder cocaine, associated with whites.

Few criticisms of the legislation could be heard en route to enactment. One senator insisted that crack had become a scapegoat distracting the public's attention from the true causes of our social ills, arguing: "If we blame crime on crack, our politicians are off the hook. Forgotten are the failed schools, the malign welfare programs, the desolate neighborhoods, the wasted years. Only crack is to blame. One is tempted to think that if crack did not exist, someone somewhere would have received a Federal grant to develop it."

Beginning in the 1970s, researchers found that racial attitudes--not crime rates or likelihood of victimization--are an important determinant of white support for 'get tough on crime' and antiwelfare measures. … The War on Drugs, cloaked in race-neutral language, offered whites opposed to racial reform a unique opportunity to express their hostility toward blacks and black progress, without being exposed to the charge of racism.

At the end of this last chapter that I was able to read, the author notes that President Clinton--he who oversaw the execution of a mentally deficient black murderer while on the primary trail, made welfare much more stringent, and instituted an extremely "one strike and you're out" policy allowing for people with even one marijuana possession charge against them to be kicked out of federally subsidized housing--actually ramped up the War on Drugs (and the war on poor people in general) more than any prior president…

 

[$tinkle]

so it would seem that only this particular minority group (defined with sharp lines, of course) which has not risen above "the system" is due to institutionalized racism. full stop.

in stark contrast to our justice system, her arguments are unoriginal, pedestrian, hackneyed, arbitrary, and have all the depth of amy winehouse as of 16 hrs ago

this woman is a boob, yet a very well compensated one, i'm sure

 

[sanjuro]

so it would seem that only this particular minority group (defined with sharp lines, of course) which has not risen above "the system" is due to institutionalized racism. full stop.

in stark contrast to our justice system, her arguments are unoriginal, pedestrian, hackneyed, arbitrary, and have all the depth of amy winehouse as of 16 hrs ago

this woman is a boob, yet a very well compensated one, i'm sure

As a strong individualist, I disagree with the idea that society keeps down a whole group of people, I am curious to see the conclusions.

I also strive for the answers to poverty, and understanding the causes is critical.

 

[stevew]

I also strive for the answers to poverty, and understanding the causes is critical.

throw money at it.

 

[X3pilot]

throw money at it.

And a large dose of white guilt...

 

[Toshi]

so it would seem that only this particular minority group (defined with sharp lines, of course) which has not risen above "the system" is due to institutionalized racism. full stop.

in stark contrast to our justice system, her arguments are unoriginal, pedestrian, hackneyed, arbitrary, and have all the depth of amy winehouse as of 16 hrs ago

this woman is a boob, yet a very well compensated one, i'm sure

How do you explain the Republicans' cynical, and ultimately effective, ploy to capture the racist white Southern vote once the Democrats (finally) jumped in behind the civil rights movement in the 1960s?

How else do you explain the sudden push for a War on Drugs dating back to 1982? This was before crack. This was at a time when no one seemed to really care about the issue, until hysteria was generated in order to manufacture support for the cause, until people caught on that it wasn't about drugs but instead about keeping the scary black man out to rape ur white wimmenz in his place.

 

[sanjuro]

How else do you explain the sudden push for a War on Drugs dating back to 1982? This was before crack. This was at a time when no one seemed to really care about the issue, until hysteria was generated in order to manufacture support for the cause, until people caught on that it wasn't about drugs but instead about keeping the scary black man out to rape ur white wimmenz in his place.

Probably a combination of increased interference in South-of-the-Border politics plus a diminishing of mafia corruption.

 

[Toshi]

Probably a combination of increased interference in South-of-the-Border politics plus a diminishing of mafia corruption.

You're assuming that the War on Drugs was a response to increased drug activity.

But was it?

The whole "tough on drugs"/tough on crime was coined by Nixon and his cronies and finally pushed through to fruition by Reagan, Bush-the-first, and, ironically, Clinton (remember "3 strikes and you're out"? That's Clinton.).

The clear implication behind these policies is that the drug users and dealers are minorities… I've certainly had that stereotype pushed on me from the media for many years. But is it true? Do you know this to be true? It's certainly true that most people imprisoned for drug crimes are minorities, but how much of this is due to racial profiling, selective enforcement, vastly inequitable sentencing laws for "black drugs" (crack) vs. "white drugs" (cocaine), and sentencing disparities at the level of individual judges?

 

[sanjuro]

You're assuming that the War on Drugs was a response to increased drug activity.

But was it?

The whole "tough on drugs"/tough on crime was coined by Nixon and his cronies and finally pushed through to fruition by Reagan, Bush-the-first, and, ironically, Clinton (remember "3 strikes and you're out"? That's Clinton.).

The clear implication behind these policies is that the drug users and dealers are minorities… I've certainly had that stereotype pushed on me from the media for many years. But is it true? Do you know this to be true? It's certainly true that most people imprisoned for drug crimes are minorities, but how much of this is due to racial profiling, selective enforcement, vastly inequitable sentencing laws for "black drugs" (crack) vs. "white drugs" (cocaine), and sentencing disparities at the level of individual judges?

Uh, I went to high school in the Bronx. I know crack sentencing is worse than cocaine, but I didn't fear for my life in black and Hispanic neighborhoods because the gov't created a market for drugs.

 

[$tinkle]

I also strive for the answers to poverty, and understanding the causes is critical.

as much as i love to watch Lockup - and i do - it's better for me to understand the causes of success. but there's not as much sensationalism & judgment behind that

And a large dose of white guilt...

i don't think the author intended the race discussion to include that

How do you explain the Republicans' cynical, and ultimately effective, ploy to capture the racist white Southern vote once the Democrats (finally) jumped in behind the civil rights movement in the 1960s?

first, i would point out your false premise, seeing how republicans were pushing more civil rights legislation (blocked by democrats) starting in the 50's (actually 80 years earlier, but i'm talking about the final surge resulting in the CRA of 1964, which btw was voted against in higher number by dem MoC).

How else do you explain the sudden push for a War on Drugs dating back to 1982? This was before crack. This was at a time when no one seemed to really care about the issue, until hysteria was generated in order to manufacture support for the cause, until people caught on that it wasn't about drugs but instead about keeping the scary black man out to rape ur white wimmenz in his place.

i would explain the WOD was "sudden" in name only, and that blacks rape blacks in much greater number -- then, and now.

The clear implication behind these policies is that the drug users and dealers are minorities

it appears you're claiming a policy is racist at the exact point it "traps" more minorities than whites

It's certainly true that most people imprisoned for drug crimes are minorities, but how much of this is due to racial profiling, selective enforcement, vastly inequitable sentencing laws for "black drugs" (crack) vs. "white drugs" (cocaine), and sentencing disparities at the level of individual judges?

selective enforcement would have to be more prevalent in urban areas for 2 reasons: more opportunities for cheek turning, and higher likelihood of having cops be accused of racism for -- you guessed it -- pinching a minority.

notice how deftly this thread has gone from "black" to "minority", which drifts from the huckster's cash cow of "how whitey is keeping the black man down"

 

[Toshi]

Southern Democrats in the 1950s and 1960s were unabashedly racist, and didn't support the CRA. No contest. Northern Democrats and Republicans got it passed… then Republicans re-invented themself to support "state rights" (codeword for "go ahead and party, segregationists" as far as I can tell) and then the admittedly ingenious "tough on crime" platform.

My page 53 quote is again relevant:

Beginning in the 1970s, researchers found that racial attitudes--not crime rates or likelihood of victimization--are an important determinant of white support for 'get tough on crime' and antiwelfare measures. … The War on Drugs, cloaked in race-neutral language, offered whites opposed to racial reform a unique opportunity to express their hostility toward blacks and black progress, without being exposed to the charge of racism.

 

[dante]

Thank god there's no apparent racism in hiring practices...........

 

[$tinkle]

The War on Drugs, cloaked in race-neutral language, offered whites opposed to racial reform a unique opportunity to express their hostility toward blacks and black progress, without being exposed to the charge of racism.

how do you not howl when you read this?
heads-i-win-tails-you-lose ftw

Thank god there's no apparent racism in hiring practices...........

having been granted admission to college under AA, it is here where Lakisha and Jamal are likely to have been brainwashed by some northeastern liberal to believe the claptrap of "no matter when you fail, it's whitey's fault; but your achievements are your nubian fate". you think i should hire someone this cynical?

[of course i see what i did there]

a mind is a terrible thing to waste

 

[Toshi]

how do you not howl when you read this?
heads-i-win-tails-you-lose ftw

I'll update you on whether or not I feel howling is in order after I read the rest of her book, wherein she'll lay down her evidence.

 

[Toshi]

Assuming I do find her evidence compelling, the more long-lived amongst you may well be wondering how this might affect my stance on affirmative action.

I'll revisit that when and if that time comes, but heading into reading the book I see no reason that my current stance need change: I am and have always been for equality of initial opportunity, roughly defined as from the pre-natal period to the age of majority (or the time at which the youth decides to tell the world to **** off and drops out from school, at which point I personally cease to care).

If backed up by sufficient evidence to justify its lofty claims, then a system of pervasive, institutionalized racism-as-enacted-through-the-War-on-Drugs would definitely qualify as an effect that I'd feel should be addressed, as it would most definitely affect children.

 

[stevew]

And a large dose of white guilt...

it makes the world go round....

 

[johnbryanpeters]

Southern Democrats in the 1950s and 1960s were unabashedly racist...

And in essence became the southern Republicans...

 

[stevew]

And in essence became union workers

.........

 

[$tinkle]

i wonder how the author will explain away uppity unions:
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/union2.t02.htm

alternatively, she could again blame the republican boogey-man. i'm sure there's an angle there that even occam's razor can't shake

 

[Silver]

And in essence became the southern Republicans...

Yeah but Lincoln freed the naggers in the first place, and he was a Republican, so present day racism if fine.

 

[jimmydean]

Thank god there's no apparent racism in hiring practices...........

I remember reading that study and wasn't surprised, sadly. I don't think anyone should be judged based on the name they were given, or choose to use. I also think that parents in general don't think about the effect the name they give their child.

My ex-wife for instance. She chose a good name for our child, then decided to spell it like a jackass (after a surfer). In the 15 years he has had his name, I don't recall a single person saying it correctly.

Name: Cheyne (Shane)

 

[eaterofdog]

As far as the pseudo-African names go, it's considered a clear sign that the person is going to bring their culture of poverty into your workplace. Poor work ethic, atrocious English, theft, huge attitude problem, etc. Then the person starts screaming racism and lawyers when any of these performance issues is approached. This is not always true, but it's a good enough rule of thumb that it's quietly adhered to. I'm not defending this at all, it's just the way it is.

 

[DaveW]

My ex-wife for instance. She chose a good name for our child, then decided to spell it like a jackass (after a surfer). In the 15 years he has had his name, I don't recall a single person saying it correctly.

Name: Cheyne (Shane)

As you are also the child's parent, I think you carry some responsibility for this......

 

[$tinkle]

As far as the pseudo-African names go, it's considered a clear sign that the person is going to bring their culture of poverty into your workplace. Poor work ethic, atrocious English, theft, huge attitude problem, etc. Then the person starts screaming racism and lawyers when any of these performance issues is approached. This is not always true, but it's a good enough rule of thumb that it's quietly adhered to. I'm not defending this at all, it's just the way it is.

but what do you do about george washington? check for the occurrence of 'carver'?

#whitepplsproblems

 

[jimmydean]

As you are also the child's parent, I think you carry some responsibility for this......

Since we are divorce and she was awarded custody, my powers were limited to the choice of name only. The spelling was all her.

Under normal circumstances, you are correct.

 

[jimmydean]

As far as the pseudo-African names go, it's considered a clear sign that the person is going to bring their culture of poverty into your workplace. Poor work ethic, atrocious English, theft, huge attitude problem, etc. Then the person starts screaming racism and lawyers when any of these performance issues is approached. This is not always true, but it's a good enough rule of thumb that it's quietly adhered to. I'm not defending this at all, it's just the way it is.

And if the name was changed later, it may even be worse.

I wonder what Ochocinco has to say about the issue facing blacks with crazy names.

 

[Westy]

I read about a study last year that tracked child names with the education level of the mother. Poorly educated mothers are more likely to come up with names that sound like their mothers were stupid. Kids with stupid names performed at a lower level even when compared to their siblings that might have had regular names. In other words give your daughter a stripper name and they are more likely to become a stripper.

I can't find the study but it listed names strongly linked to poor education. There were just as many if not more redneck names than anything else.

 

[$tinkle]

are you suggesting richard robert =/= ricky bobby?

 

[X3pilot]

I tutored a black kid named Teflon. Seriously.

 

[$tinkle]

it's like rain on your jump-the-broom day:

Come, listen all you gals and boys,
I'se just from Tucky hoe;
I'm goin' to sing a little song;
My name's Jim Crow.

First on de heel tap, den on de toe,
Ebery time I wheel about I jump Jim Crow.
Wheel about and turn about and do jis so,
And ebery time I wheel about I jump Jim Crow.

 

[eaterofdog]

I tutored a black kid named Teflon. Seriously.

Haha like Tron or Lysol from Chappelle.

 

[Andyman_1970]

As far as the pseudo-African names go, it's considered a clear sign that the person is going to bring their culture of poverty into your workplace. Poor work ethic, atrocious English, theft, huge attitude problem, etc. Then the person starts screaming racism and lawyers when any of these performance issues is approached. This is not always true, but it's a good enough rule of thumb that it's quietly adhered to. I'm not defending this at all, it's just the way it is.

We had an engineer here, Tyrone, who after lying on his interview (said he was proficent at NASTRAN and was not), would regail us of how smart he was and how awesome he was at Sikorsky, and several times a week fall asleep at work. I'm talking full on snoring at his desk. He was bumping 300 lbs, and was a single father of 4 kids.

Now at first I had compassion on him, esspecially being a single dad, that has to be rough. He got caught sleeping enough that it was addressed from HR. He produced a diagnosis of some sleeping disorder and got one of those contraptions you wear at night so you can breath.

Weeks later and he's still sleeping. He gets moved to my department, and I'm told to "mentor" him. So after multiple coaching sessions of how to navigate the companies various systems he still didn't catch on. So one day I told him " go down to the airplane, write down the part number, and we'll look the drawing up". He went to HR and complained that I was giving him work beneath his ability. I explained the coaching, the sleeping, the absenteeism, the 4 hours to go to a 20 minute parent teacher conference, etc. to no avail. I got tagged in my HR file and repremanded, no recourse on my part of course

8 weeks later we had a round of lay offs (early 2009 when the economy was on life support) and I walked him out as one of those folks getting cut.

In my 12 years here in Arkansas I've worked with hundreds of black folks, and had never run into the sterotypical "If you critisize/coach/reprimand me because I sleep on the job your racist" type until Tyrone..............

 

[sanjuro]

As far as the pseudo-African names go, it's considered a clear sign that the person is going to bring their culture of poverty into your workplace. Poor work ethic, atrocious English, theft, huge attitude problem, etc. Then the person starts screaming racism and lawyers when any of these performance issues is approached. This is not always true, but it's a good enough rule of thumb that it's quietly adhered to. I'm not defending this at all, it's just the way it is.

Well, here is a more informed study, part of the Freaknomics book: http://www.slate.com/id/2116449/.

There was also a famous segment on 60 Minutes about Strive, which focused solely on improving atrocious inner city attitudes: http://www.veoh.com/watch/v207496092SK4cszT?h1=STRIVE+60+Minute+Feature+(Part+1)

 

[$tinkle]

 

[X3pilot]

Typical Nawlins obit

25 years IS a lifetime in the Big Easy...