The New Jim Crow

I just read The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness,.  The author, Michelle Alexander, argues that  mass incarceration, and specifically the War on Drugs, has created a system that looks much like the old Jim Crow laws.  I approached the book with skepticism, thinking that although there is certainly some racial discrimination and disproportionately harsh effect on African American males in the criminal justice system, there's no WAY it's anything like Jim Crow - and I was astounded to see how powerfully she made her case.

The argument in brief is this:  Drug laws became much harsher in the early 1980s, and following that, drug convictions caused the prison population to explode.  Most of the people (around 90%) being arrested for drug crimes are black or brown, even though studies have shown that black and white people use and sell illegal drugs at the same rates.  At every stage of the criminal justice system - who gets stopped, who gets searched, who gets arrested, who gets better plea bargains and less severe charges, who gets tried in state v. federal court, who fares better in jury trials, etc. - black males receive dramatically harsher treatment than other groups.  A significant percentage of black males end up spending time in prison or on probation or parole for felony drug crimes (unlike other groups, and despite the fact that they are using and selling at the same rate as other groups).  Once you are labeled a felon, you automatically lose rights or face discrimination in a whole host of areas - voting, housing (both public and private), employment and professional licensing, educational loans, and public benefits - and it becomes really difficult to survive, let alone thrive, in mainstream society.  Often, this loss of rights hinders you for your entire life.  Because mass incarceration followed by loss of rights mostly affects African American men, it affects them in large numbers, and it affects them for their whole life, it creates a social order that looks a lot like the social order in the days of the Jim Crow laws.

At this point, it's important to acknowledge what I felt like was the major flaw in Alexander's argument:  the people who are subject to mass incarceration have violated a race neutral criminal law, and this is a *significant* difference from the Jim Crow laws that applied to all African Americans and no one else.  It might be because I was born in the 1980s and was fully indoctrinated into the War on Drugs rhetoric, but I think you can't just toss out drug laws.  Drugs wreak havoc in our society:  they cause collateral crimes of violence and theft, they destroy the lives of addicts, and they contribute to the abuse and neglect of children. It may be true that major reform is needed at every level of the system, but you can't just abolish drug laws, and you can't just forget that people have violated drug laws that are serving a legitimate purpose.

But putting that very significant issue aside, this book paints a vivid picture of how difficult every aspect of your life becomes once you are branded a felon, and it raises a whole host of issues, such as:

• What is the War on Drugs accomplishing, and specifically, is it accomplishing the goal of reducing drug use and drug related crime?
• Are prisons the best place to load up the dollars, or could the drug problem be addressed more humanely, effectively, and economically by focusing on education and treatment programs? 
• If mass incarceration is the appropriate solution to the drug problem, and if drugs are used and sold at equal rates by African Americans and Caucasians, then how do we get more of the white users and dealers convicted and incarcerated?    
• How do we create more fair treatment of African Americans at all levels of the criminal justice system?  And in portrayals of the criminal justice system by the media?  
• Why do we have mandatory minimum sentences on drug crimes?  Why can't we give judges the discretion to impose a harsh sentence where appropriate and a more lenient sentence where appropriate?  
• What is accomplished by not allowing felons or ex-felons the right to vote?
• Can we find a way to more narrowly tailor the restrictions ex-felons face, particularly in employment and housing?  Or come up with some separate program to support ex-felons as they re-enter society, so that they don't turn back to a life of crime because all the employment and housing doors are closed in mainstream society?  

If these ideas spark your interest - whether they strike you as right or wrong - then I would really suggest you read the book.  I have just skimmed the briefest surface in this post.  I don't fully buy into Alexander's thesis, but I learned a lot from this book and would highly recommend it.