Jena 6 Case Study
22) Why did the Jena 6 draw such attention? Why does Alexander think civil rights organizations have not devoted enough attention or resources to resisting mass incarceration and the drug war?
The Jena 6 case follows the history of six black kids that beat a white classmate, they were charged with attempted murder. Nevertheless, people stood up for them, according to Alexander people only did this because the topic around their sentencing was controversial due to the practice of hanging nooses from a tree in the school’s courtyard.
Alexander goes on to mention that only few Americans recognize the problem of mass incarceration, which poses a barrier for public understanding since people are not aware of the racial targets of the system. She …show more content…
What are each of her five arguments against affirmative action, as she fleshes them out on pp. 231-238? What is your own assessment of all her arguments relevant to this question?
Alexander indicates that colorblindness only blinds people from the real inner workings of the War on Drugs. The criminal justice system ignores race through this “veil” called colorblind, similarly, advocacy groups refuse to acknowledge that the mass incarceration issue was born out of necessity for political gain, which meant that a certain group needed to be discriminated for the gain of others. Alexander explains that the current system of mass incarceration actually hurts Negro communities by locking them up and limiting their upward mobility after release. In her view, mass incarceration is a failure to prevent crime as it actually creates more crime by limiting job opportunities to former convicts; however, the system as a race control tool works …show more content…
Through Alexander’s book, the realization that the War on Drugs was started out of political gain disregarding the suffering of others is a bitter pill to swallow. The New Jim Crow, as Alexander calls it, is in charge of keeping the black man in his “place” – marginalized. To achieve this in the age of “colorblindness,” it strategically managed to discriminate most minorities by labeling them as felons. I was ok up until that point, I came to accept (as many) that maybe minorities like to get into trouble every so often. Yet, by adopting Alexander’s view, it became evident that this system is set out to do more than punish offenders. It deprives ex-offenders from obtaining public assistance, housing, voting, and even getting a job! Or in other words, the War on Drugs allowed for “legal” discrimination. Of course after being released they will end up in ghettos where –guess what? – There is strong law enforcement presence which facilitates the repetition of the
The Jena 6 case follows the history of six black kids that beat a white classmate, they were charged with attempted murder. Nevertheless, people stood up for them, according to Alexander people only did this because the topic around their sentencing was controversial due to the practice of hanging nooses from a tree in the school’s courtyard.
Alexander goes on to mention that only few Americans recognize the problem of mass incarceration, which poses a barrier for public understanding since people are not aware of the racial targets of the system. She …show more content…
What are each of her five arguments against affirmative action, as she fleshes them out on pp. 231-238? What is your own assessment of all her arguments relevant to this question?
Alexander indicates that colorblindness only blinds people from the real inner workings of the War on Drugs. The criminal justice system ignores race through this “veil” called colorblind, similarly, advocacy groups refuse to acknowledge that the mass incarceration issue was born out of necessity for political gain, which meant that a certain group needed to be discriminated for the gain of others. Alexander explains that the current system of mass incarceration actually hurts Negro communities by locking them up and limiting their upward mobility after release. In her view, mass incarceration is a failure to prevent crime as it actually creates more crime by limiting job opportunities to former convicts; however, the system as a race control tool works …show more content…
Through Alexander’s book, the realization that the War on Drugs was started out of political gain disregarding the suffering of others is a bitter pill to swallow. The New Jim Crow, as Alexander calls it, is in charge of keeping the black man in his “place” – marginalized. To achieve this in the age of “colorblindness,” it strategically managed to discriminate most minorities by labeling them as felons. I was ok up until that point, I came to accept (as many) that maybe minorities like to get into trouble every so often. Yet, by adopting Alexander’s view, it became evident that this system is set out to do more than punish offenders. It deprives ex-offenders from obtaining public assistance, housing, voting, and even getting a job! Or in other words, the War on Drugs allowed for “legal” discrimination. Of course after being released they will end up in ghettos where –guess what? – There is strong law enforcement presence which facilitates the repetition of the