Alexander claims in “The New Jim Crow” that the US went from 300,000 incarcerated people in 1980 to over 2.2 million by 2010 by arresting and locking up low-level non-violent drug offenders. This is simply factually false. As Marc Mauer, John Pfaff and others point out...
Most prisoners in state prisons (where 87% of US prisoners reside) are not there for low-level non-violent drug offenses. Good estimates put the percentages of such prisoners in state prisons at around 5-6%, at most. Most people in prison are there for violent or serious offenses
So a false narrative which frames the problem of racialized mass incarceration (“The New Jim Crow”) around low-level non-violent offenders implies that deep cuts in mass incarceration can be achieved “on the cheap,” that is, by releasing or diverting a lot of such offenders.
Suggesting that the problem of mass incarceration can be solved simply by showing more leniency for low-level non-violent offenders also invites a hardening of attitudes toward violent & serious offenders (studies I cite show this), making matters worse for them—the unforgiven.
So characterizing the problem of racialized mass incarceration in terms of low-level non-violent drug offenders leads to a false solution to the problem, namely, the release people convicted such crimes; this solution does not challenge our conventional moral framework or compass
Rather, the focus of the liberal New Jim Crow narrative on low-level-non-violent drug offenders reinforces—and is reinforced by—our conventional, traditional moral framework that sharply distinguishes morally, legally, and socially between violent and non-violent wrongdoers.
In “N*gga Theory” I frame an entirely new moral, legal, and political theory that replaces our current approach to violent offenders (which is rooted in values of retribution, retaliation, & revenge) with one rooted in restoration, rehabilitation, and redemption.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I’ve been formally notified by @USC officials that my tweets voicing outrage over Israel’s shredding of Palestinian children & other war crimes may constitute harassment of Jewish students & creation of a hostile environment for them!
Will they try to Asna Tabassum me?
A thread🧵
My anti-genocide tweets made me the subject of an “Internal Assessment Triage Team” (IATT) that includes EEO-TIX, the office of professionalism, campus attorneys, and others. I’m imaging these adults huddling together in a conference room parsing my tweets for actionable content.
"Love means never having to say you're sorry" is a catchphrase from the 70s.
My personal mantra chimes with it:
Tenure Means Never Having To Say You're Sorry—FOR TELLING THE TRUTH!
I became legal scholar to speak truth to power, not to be silent on issues that matter most.
President Folt, rather than apologizing for betraying the trust of our students by subjecting them to violent assaults by the LAPD, lies to cover her unconscionable actions—I was personally present & tweeted live from the start of the protests. Here’s the easily provable truth 🧵
It’s a brazen lie to say “people were assaulted” or “critical academic buildings blocked” by the peaceful students I stood w/ before the administration unleashed riot cops with guns, clubs, cuffs & pepper spray on students. The administration cannot lie its way out of this mess.
It should sadden but not surprise us that academic leaders who preach to students the importance of the search for truth resort to flagrant lies to save face and rationalize brutalizing peacefully protesting students. Our students see you President Folt and Provost Guzmán.
This critique of Critical Race Theory (CRT), like so many of its ilk, is muddled and filled with tendentious assertions masquerading as factual descriptions. It tries to disparage the academic integrity of CRT by grossly oversimplifying it, then conflating it w/ “pop antiracism.”
The author claims his critique of CRT centers on the “seminal texts” of “early critical race theorists,” a group of scholars writing from the time of Bell’s early work—the mid-1970s—through the time of Ian Haney Lopez’s early pieces, which first appear in the mid- to late-1990s.
Fine, but there were lots of different “early critical race theorists” toiling in the CRT vineyard during that timeframe (mid-70s to late-90s), and many neither fit his simplistic description of CRT nor hold many of the positions and motivations he attributes to us.
My #DerekChauvinSentencing remarks for news shows on Friday have earned me condemnation in some circles and support in others. Ibram X. Kendi (author of How To Be An Antiracist) and I, for instance, took opposite positions when commenting on Chauvin’s sentence for @CBSNLive.
Kendi’s position—shared by most everyone—was that Chauvin should get maximum punishment. His rationale: if Chauvin were Black, he’d get severe punishment (as I show in N*gga Theory, courts do mete out more draconian sentences to Blacks), so punish him with that level of severity.
For too many, racial equality means treating White wrongdoers with the same draconian severity we already apply to similarly situated Black ones. For them, equality in punitiveness is an equality worth striving for. I demur, for down that road racial injustice lies.
Chauvin’s status as a cop magnifies the gravity of his harm, so it’s certainly an aggravating factor. But intentionally inflicting twice as much suffering on him for that reason in the name of retribution reinforces a punitive moral framework that hurts more blacks than it helps.
If Chauvin had been sentenced to the presumptive 12.5 years, he would have had to serve at least 8.25 years (assuming good behavior), and most if not all of that time will be spent in “isolation for his own safety,” i.e., solitary, which @amnesty rightly recognizes as torture.
I have actively opposed the torture of prisoners that is the practice of solitary confinement—an 8X8 steel cage for at least 23 hours a day—for years, not only because it’s barbaric but also because it’s a form of barbarism the state disproportionately visits upon Black folk.
I’m taking a very unpopular position on #DerekChauvinSentencing, the same position I take on the appropriate punishment for violent wrongdoers and “moral monsters” in N*gga Theory—namely, we must resist seeking to gratify our retributive urge to maximize their punishment.
“I would hope that Judge Cahill sentences Chauvin to the maximum amount of time in prison,” a civil rights lawyer & activist said recently in a public forum held by the Legal Rights Center, a nonprofit group that provides indigent defense and advocates criminal justice reform.
Even activists who generally oppose mass incarceration too often revert to punitive and carceral attitudes when a violent crime has been committed against a member of a marginalized group, especially if the offender, like Chauvin, belongs to a socially dominant one.