Post Racial America and Indirect Racism

  Since the end of the Civil Rights and Black Power movement, many white people have tried to distance themselves from being labeled a "racist". Although there are many other methods, the internet has long served as a safe medium for many people to voice their true feelings of other races in this current era called "Post-Racial America". With the beginning of George Zimmerman's murder trial, the judicial diarrhea of the US Supreme Court on the Voting Rights Act of 1964, and Paula Deen's (past) diarrhea of the mouth, the events of this week have removed multiple layers from the "Race Relations" onion of American society.

  There are 2 types of racism, both of which are common in the US, as defined by Kwame Ture (Stokely Carmichael) in his book Black Power : The Politics of Liberation(1967): Individual Racism and Institutional Racism.

  Individual racism is a small scale event between individuals or a small group of people in which one group acts against another based on an ideal that is intentionally or neglectfully racist. Paula Deen's "n-word" jokes are little more than examples of individual racism. Which, for those who didn't know, the law suit against Paula Deen was filed by a white employee, and it is about more than simple "n-word" jokes as described in this article from Black Legal Issues. Another example would be a group of Black guys beating up a white guy, just because he's white. As offensive as it may be, incidents involving individual racism do not have a lasting impact on the target group as a whole. But since it is on a person to person basis, the impact may last for the individuals involved. This factor is what allows racist ideals to be passed from generation to generation.

  Institutional racism is far reaching in the number of people it affects and is usually carried out by a group of people, although individuals can carry out this form of racism as well. This usually occurs when groups of people with racist ideals and states of mind get together - a majority of the time having positions of power. Where, as the picture above states, company policies, law enforcement practices, and legislative practices are created with the intention of harming, or infringing on the rights or progression of a designated group of people. These policies are designed and promoted as resolving a problem, but either intentionally or inherently create disparities through disenfranchisement, harassment, and other abuses of the negatively affected race. Some other race or group of races naturally benefits from it. The support for these forms of institutional racism comes from individual racists who would not want to openly express those views, or would otherwise be powerless to act on those views. Therefore they invest in or vote for, companies and politicians who will be able to deliver policies and business practices that have a similar ring to their racist ideals(although not explicitly stating so). The students of Prairie View A & M University's struggle for voting rights is a prime example of institutional racism, inspired by individual racists. Sporadic incidents of individual racism then begin to occur as a result of the policies and attitudes behind institutional racism.

  The Civil Rights and Black Power movements marked the end of the then commonplace overt racism. The passing of the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts, overt racism was outlawed. At that point, racial slurs took a back seat in the public eye, and made way for neutral terms like "criminals" and "illegals"(immigrants) to refer to a broad spectrum of people who will be affected by these policies. So we can ultimately define "Post-Racial America" as the period where it's OK to be racist(individually or institutionally) as long as you don't actually say that that is what you are doing. A period of time where race shouldn't matter, but it does, and unless there is a large enough group of people affected by it, there is no sure fire way to identify it.

  With a better understanding of what racism is and the different forms it can take, we can better prepare ourselves to develop and act on solutions to these problems. The problems of racism cannot be eliminated, but, similar to computer security, the threats or affect of those threats of institutional and individual racism can be transferred, delayed, or prevented from reaching fruition. By having a healthy and practical understanding of how racism works and the forms that it can take will help us to educate ourselves and others outside of the race in our continuing struggle is to secure economic, political, and social freedom and self-determination.

Peace

Discipline and Punish

Discipline and Punish

On September 21, 2011 the entire United States witnessed the lynching of a Black man. The execution of Troy Davis should serve as a wake up call for whites and others to a couple of factors many Blacks and other minority groups have known for decades. One, racism in the form of white supremacy is still just as powerful as t has always been. As much as people would like to ignore it or deny it, this is a known fact. Two, the entire criminal justice system, from the police to the courts, to the prisons, is flawed and easily corruptible. It is geared toward imposing the will of the white ruling class on the lower classes. The Troy Davis case proved both of these points.

The situation reminded me of Michel Foucault’s (pronounced me-shell foo-co) book Discipline and Punish. In the book, Foucault explained the evolution of capital punishment and the development of the prison system. He explained that originally governments used public torture and executions as the primary form of punishment for crimes. The idea was that the condemned would serve as an example and deterrent to other criminals – even for the smallest of offenses. The media’s depiction of medieval executions is somewhat inaccurate. During such public executions, the public would be comprised of those who supported the execution and those who opposed it. After the execution, riots would erupt between the opposing groups. Those executed were often seen as martyrs. When groups become organized and gain dominance during riots, those riots become revolutions. The fact that these riots occurred proved that public executions weren't an effective method of dealing with crime or dissident activists.

A more effective method of dealing with criminals was needed as society evolved with new forms of government and industrial technology. This led to the development of chain gangs and labor camps. The labor camps and chain gangs put the inmates to work deemed useful by the government and other special interests, there was still always a change for rebellion and escape. The chain gangs punished prisoners by assigning them to jobs that reflected the nature of their crimes. The prisoners were said to pay their debt to society by physically working to improve the aspects of society that they had previously damaged. This method of punishment was supported by many reformers because it was more humane than public torture and executions.

Over time, governments developed the prison as the main method of punishment. Prisons became a way of using the same method of punishment for all crimes. By observing, training, and controlling every aspect of the prisoner’s life governments and prison authorities sought to impress a generic ideal of discipline to all f its convicts. Foucault explained that this method of punishment was meant to create people who would easily return  society to hold positions in institutions that required the same discipline such as schools (as students), (blue collar) jobs, and the military. The general function of all four of these institutions is to break a person down mentally and/or physically so that those in control of those institutions can build the subjected people up to be who/what the institutions were designed to make them. In capitalistic countries, the ruling class wanted (and still wants those convicts to serve as the manpower behind the institutions that keep the ruling class in its position at the top rung of the economic and political ladder. Needless to say, prison also has a secondary affect on one’s financial health. It affects not only the prisoner’s ability to generate income, but forces his family to fill the void of financial support that is left by the inmate’s absence. And without the financial ability to join the ruling class (primitive accumulation of capital), according to Marx, one has no other choice but to become a member of the working class (which includes both the middle and lower classes), or the lumpen (the criminal segment of the working class). This explains why many of the people who are released from prison often return.

Most of the forensic methods used today are primarily for the purpose of finding a suspect guilty of a crime. Forensic evidence maintaining one’s innocence is mainly the other side of the coin. The criminal justice system operated the same in the early days of America and developed similarly leading to the current day. Discipline and Punish explained this process for the entire Western world. As a friend of mine put it, “Michael Foucault is the white man that every Black man needs to read.” (The same goes for Karl Marx and The Communist Manifesto as well.) Despite the evolution in the methods of punishment, little was done to secure safety nets for those who were wrongly accused, let alone provide effective methods of repairing the damage done to such individuals. Such is the case for Troy Davis and many other political prisoners like Mumia Abu-Jamal and Leonard Peltier.

Troy Davis’ case was questionable to begin with, given that 7 of the 9 primary witnesses claimed that they only testified against him due to pressure (meaning intimidation or threats) from the police. One witness was told that he would be charged as an accessory to the murder if he refused to testify against Davis. It’s actually very common for them to use such methods to extract information from someone, whether that information is correct or not. I’ve seen it personally a few times before I was educated on what was going on. Obviously, neither the police nor the courts would ever take responsibility for such actions. Needless to say, many will try to use the fact that 7 of the 12 jurors were Black to rove that Troy’s case is not an issue of race. The thing many don’t realize, or choose to ignore is that anyone of any race can be used to support white supremacy directly or indirectly.

To those who understand the concept of being “safe” when it comes to race, it’s obvious why Obama decided not to say or do anything to help. He was most likely advised not to comment, whether he personally wanted help or not – and he took that advice if that was the case. Regardless, Obama has never spoken out in favor of Black men, not even during his campaign when Diop Olugbala posed the question “What about the Black Community”. Although he ironically was a member of a church that, according to the media, supported Black Nationalism to some degree, he seems to have distanced himself from those circles.

Hundreds of thousands of people called for Troy’s clemency. Celebrities (such as Big Boi of Outkast), regular citizens, a former FBI director, and even George W. Bush (of all people) opposed Troy’s execution. The flood of calls, emails, Tweets, and petitions finally won Tory a temporary delay of his execution minutes before he was to be executed. The PEOPLE did that. The Supreme Court took hours reviewing the case only to maintain Davis’ guilt. Maybe they saw something no one else saw or paid attention to. And if that is the case, then those who opposed Davis' execution should study the court transcripts the same as every other court has. Otherwise, the highest court in the land refused to admit that the justice system failed and killed an innocent man.

Watching the Watchmen: Your Rights and the Police (Part 2)

This Is The Police: Put Down Your Camera

The link above is to an article describing an altercation in which a Black teenage girl recorded a police encounter while riding the bus (public transit). The officers took her phone, deleted the video, and detained her (kept her in the squad car, cuffed) for a while, then let her go.

I was in a similar situation this article a couple years ago ('09). My roommates had called me outside because one of our housemates (Jay) was being arrested suspected of drunk driving and evading the police. The police had said that they followed him from campus all the way back to our house. At the time he was going through some things, and was in a rut of depression and suffering from all the things that depression can bring.

I came outside with a pencil and paper, asking the officers for their information. The lady cop was cool, she just asked me to step back until they were done. I stepped from the edge of the carport, back to the front door (to give them distance). One of the other officers kept asking Jay direct questions like had he been drinking and why didn't he stop, etc. I kept yelling out to him that all he had to give them was his name and address, and to remain silent after that. Jay was wasted so he kept talking, but I kept yelling out the same thing. 

The officer that was asking the questions got mad and approached me telling me to go back in the house. He said I was interfering with his investigation. I told him that I was standing a safe distance away, that I had a right to be where I was, and a right to observe and record what they were doing. He said if I didn't go back in the house I'd be getting in the back of the squad car with my homeboy. I wouldn't move so he started counting, and one of my other housemates finally told me to just go inside. 

We all went back in the house(and locked the door). I opened the window to the front room, and kept writing everything down and saying the same stuff I had been yelling outside, LOL. Finally the officer told Jay that he "should listen to your homeboy because he's probably a criminal justice major", and then he looked at me and said "but we're trained professionals so we know more about what we're doing than you". I just said "OK" and wrote all that down. They arrested him, and I recorded everything that the housemates had taken out of his car before the officers had the car towed away. Afterwards, I went back outside to meet with the lady cop who came back and gave me the names and badge numbers of the other officers who were present. The one that had told me to go back in the house was quick to get back in his car.

First thing in the morning I called one of my mentors who is a law professor and asked him the procedure for filing a formal police complaint. I explained the situation to him, and he told me to type everything up and that he would make a few calls (he is well known around the school and town). "Jay" got out of jail the same day, didn't have to pay bail, got his car back, and all charges against him had been dropped. That part had more to do with the pull that the mentor had with officials around town, but if I hadn't reacted the way I did my homeboy would most likely be rotting in TDC (Texas Department of "Corrections") right now.

Expanding on the ideas covered in Part 1, these are examples of what can happen when you assert your rights, and how the police may react due to the fact that most of them don't really know how to react. Most of them are not used to their activities being observed or dealing with a citizen that knows his/her rights and asserts them properly. Whether your situation ends up like the sister's in the article, or like the one I just described, if we don't actively observe the police and assert our rights, we will continue to be victimized. Learn your rights, study the law, and prepare for whatever the response will be whenever you are tested.

Watching the Watchmen: Your Rights and the Police (Part 1)

This is a letter that I wrote to the editor of my school newspaper last month. I don't know if the editor just didn't get it or if I should have sent it to the newspaper repeatedly until the letter was published in the paper, but it was never published regardless. SO... here it is.

Keeping us informed of our rights as citizens in general and during police encounters was one of the primary goals behind the formation of many groups during the Civil Rights and Black Power eras, case in point: The Black Panther Party for Self-Defense. The BPP aimed to educate members of the Black community their legal rights as citizens and human beings, as well as how to assert and defend those rights. Although the BPP no longer exists, there are still groups and individuals who do wish to inform the Black community of their rights, and this work should continue.

On April 1st, SGA (Student Government Association) hosted an event titled "Your Rights and the Police" featuring members of the Prairie View police department, and various District Attorneys from Dallas County, many of which were PV alumni. The reason I attended is because the flier advertising the event stated that the panel would discuss our rights during police encounters in public, in our cars, and at home. I was disappointed to see that that did not happen.

The underlying message that I got from some of the panelists who spoke was that the police are being victimized by the media, we should not assert our rights and let the police do what they want during encounters. Others did speak to the fact that crooked officers exist, and gave advice on filing formal complaints and stressed the importance of keeping written or audio/video records of police encounters. Still, the problem that I have with a majority the information given during the event is that given the panel member's professions I believe they fully understand our rights and the benefits of asserting them, and chose not to fully inform us about them. As police officers and District Attorneys, their success is primarily driven by the public's ignorance of their rights and the law in general, especially in the Black community. This ignorance can be seen as a factor contributing to the high incarceration rate of Blacks in America.

"The [Miranda] warning, which is intended to inform you of your rights regarding police questioning, does not have to be read to you if you are not placed under arrest. The reason for this is that if you are not arrested for committing a crime, you are not going to trial, so you don’t need to be warned that what you say can be used against you during trial." (http://mirandarights.org/prearrestquestioning.html)

Although it is true that being responsible and not breaking the law is the best way to protect oneself during police encounters, the fact still remains that criminals and law abiding citizens alike are protected by the Constitution. We are protected from self-incrimination by the 5th Amendment, and protected from unwarranted searches and seizures by the 4th Amendment. During a police stop, it is my right to decide whether or not I will answer the officer's questions, or to say "I am going to remain silent" or "I do not consent to searches, or dog sniffs" whether I am breaking the law or not. It is also my right and responsibility to thoroughly READ the warrant, if presented, before allowing the police to conduct a search or arrest. If I am not breaking the law, I am simply asserting my rights as a citizen. If it should happen that I am found to be breaking the law, the fact that I asserted my rights may grant me some protection in court.

The message that the panel had regarding those statements is that if you had nothing to hide you wouldn't need to use those statements, which makes someone who does use the statements appear suspicious. The fact behind that assumption is that many people do not know that they have the right to make those statements during police encounters. For those who do know they may not feel comfortable doing so, or may be intimidated by the police and fearful of the consequences if they do use them. I believe if more people learned their rights and asserted them that it would make the people who currently assert their rights appear less suspicious.

The Texas Penal Code even goes as far as to give citizens the right to defend themselves in the event that an officer uses excessive force while conducting a search or arrest (Texas Penal Code - Chapter 9 - Subchapter C, Subsection C) Given the amount of police abuse and misconduct that occurs throughout the US involving Black people, it would be beneficial for citizens to know these rights and provisions given by law to citizens and officers alike. But, knowing the most probable consequences, that course of action is not advised unless a life-or-death situation immediately calls for such actions. Instead, one should record the altercation if possible (with a voice recorder, video camera, or even having someone on the phone to listen during the encounter). Always make sure that you get the name (with correct spelling) and badge number of every officer present at the altercation. Put it in writing as soon as possible, contact witnesses, and file a formal complaint against the officers with the police department and the American Civil Liberties Union(ACLU). You won't win anything arguing or fighting the police in the street, so record and document everything you can and use it against them in court.

Despite the methods of asserting and protecting one's rights, how would one know that they even had the right to defend themselves or someone else in that situation, alone not knowing that the concept of illegal searches, illegal arrests, and inadmissible evidence even exist without studying the law themselves or being informed by someone who has? I personally think every citizen, namely Black men and women, should own or find access to a copy of Black's Law Dictionary, know how to gain access to legal resources including the state and federal Constitution, and keep a copy of legal advice for handling police encounters with them in the car, at home, or somewhere close by.

The police and DA's have their responsibilities but we as citizens and members of the Black community also have the responsibility of protecting ourselves by learning, asserting, and defending our rights. We owe it to ourselves, the coming generations, and the members of the generations before us who fought for us to have those rights in the first place by learning what our rights are, how to exercise them properly, and using them to the best of our ability should our time come.

Prentice Sams

Resources For More Information

Texas State Constitution and Statutes
http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/

Texas Penal Code - Chapter 9 - Subchapter C, Subsection C
http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PE/htm/PE.9.htm#9.31

Exclusion from Criminal Liability - Personal Defense

(c)  The use of force to resist an arrest or search is justified:
    (1)  if, before the actor offers any resistance, the peace officer (or person acting at his direction) uses or attempts to use greater force than necessary to make the arrest or search; and
           (2)  when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to protect himself against the peace officer's (or other person's) use or attempted use of greater force than necessary.
 (d)  The use of deadly force is not justified under this subchapter except as provided in Sections 9.32, 9.33, and 9.34.


MirandaRights.org
http://mirandarights.org/
*This site also includes links to free legal advice

http://www.copwatch.org/
Focuses on resources for fighting police misconduct. Plus- strategies and techniques to combat police abuse, brutality, harassment, and corruption.

Flex Your Rights
http://www.flexyourrights.org/
* This site includes explanations of your rights and examples of how to exercise them.

WARNING: Although I deal with legal terms and ideas, I am not a lawyer, I've never been to law school, and none of the ideas expressed in the letter should be taken as professional legal advice.