What others think...

One of my friends who I work with helped me study for one of the exams. He had no idea of the subject and I studied by telling him what I knew about the course material. So, in reality it was like I was teaching him the things that we learned in class. If the conversation was taken out of context, the things that I was saying could have been in completely the wrong way. I was restated all of the goals and beliefs of white nationalist groups.  When it came to explaining the essay question from the first exam I had a summary of all the main points.  When I gave him an outline of what the white nationalist believed about the subject of the picture he was left sort of dumb founded. He couldn't really understand how they could get all of these really minute details from the dynamics of a race or religion. He knew of the surface racism that exists, but he didn't realize how deep  the hatred reached. I felt the same exact way he did.  I would never in a million years be able to dig that deep to find hateful things to say about people.

My roommate and I are in the white nationalists and ideologies class together.  Although we don't participate in discussions in class we discuss things between ourselves when class has been dismissed. She was pretty heated when we started talking about racism within politics. I am not a very political person and I don't follow any current events when it comes to politics. As a class we talked about racism in the the tea party.  She was telling me that she doesn't believe that just because you consider yourself a part of a political party that you are categorized as being racist. Things are not that black and white. I tried to have her explain to me why everyone is categorizing the Tea Party as racist. She told me that it is because these political people don't want President Obama in office anymore.  They only focus on his race as the reason why he is not excelling as president.  However, it is for many more reasons that just that. I really can't form an opinion on something I don't know much about, but I think that I agree with the fact that Obama came into office trying to fix something that not just one president could do. With this I don't think that white nationalist are as dumb as everyone is portraying them to be, they wanted America to see noted black person fail so they could get more support. I think they have succeeded in doing just that.

My boyfriend is looking to be a part of the law enforcement in Washington.  I discussed with him about the topic of my blog and how he felt about it.  We talked a little about the process in which he as going through in applying to be an officer.  I asked him if he felt like the criminal justice system was racist.  He gave the example of filling out the application for different departments. I guess they give a paragraph long disclaimer about how they do not hire people based on sex, age, religion, race, income, or personal values.  Then the next sections that they asked you to fill out is your sex and race.  If this issues truly didn't matter to them in the hiring process they wouldn't ask those questions at all. I completely agree. Getting hired should be solely determined on performance not what you look like. This could go both ways though.  If they wanted more diversity in their department they could choose a minority over someone who was higher qualified.  This could also go the other way in that they choose someone who was white but less able to do the job.  If they wanted to make this application process completely fair they would take out that section.

My friend pointed out how extreme white nationalist people are.  Taking this with the combination of people who are overly sensitive to racism heightens the problem with hate crimes, terrorism, and discrimination. I was telling him about the concept of lone wolves and how they work to support white nationalist groups.  He told me that he thinks that white nationalist groups target mentally unstable and vulnerable people to recruit.  That every group has an extreme member because they have never really felt like that were a part of something and now they are overly dedicated.  I think that they are called lone wolves for a reason.  They don't fit in and their are loners. So when a group takes them in they are willing to do anything for the good of the group, even if it is against the law.

Mainstream vs. Extreme

I remember in class talking about the mainstream and extreme when it comes to racism, also discussed by Jessie Daniels.  Extreme racism is obvious, easy to see, and usually really over the top and explicit.  Mainstream racism flies more under the radar and is hidden within our everyday and is not as easy to pick out.  I wanted to analyze two video games that represent these two ideals, Grand Theft Auto San Andreas and Ethnic Cleansing. 

Ethnic Cleansing would fall into the category of extreme racism.  It is obvious to see the goal of the game that it, in no way, is trying to hide its racist message. The player is able to choose between a Ku Klux Klan member or a SkinHead and involves the player running through the ghetto killing blacks and Latinos and then eventually killing Jews in the underground subway.  There is no subliminal messages that the player needs to decipher   The music playing in the background supports white pride ideologies and uses racial slang like the "n" word. There are missing posters of white children on the walls of rooms. I think that this video game is targeted towards children who are unable to see the hidden messages behind the game. 

It is clear that it was not the intent of the creator to spend too much time perfect the graphics of the game.  The images are very choppy.  These types of video games are in circulation to introduce racism into more of the mainstream games like Grand Theft Auto. Thus, these two tactics work together the get their message of white pride and hate towards other races across.  Below is a clip of Ethnic Cleansing so that you can see the comparison to that of Grand Theft Auto.

Grand Theft Auto is an example of a video game that has inherited mainstream racism.  The premise depicts Carl, a gang member, who is trying to learn more about the murder of his mother while expanding his business ventures. The players of the game are able to make the characters do many motions.  It is the person playing that creates the racism on their own. For example, they are able to run black people over with a car and use bombs explosions to simulate suicide bombers.  The video below relates  to my issue of police discrimination. Some user of the game created a video of why you can not trust a black man to be your partner as a police officer. He did this by using clips from the game. I think that mainstream racism is worse than extreme racism. You have to actually work towards making a mainstream video game into something racist.  So, those are the people with deeper rooted discrimination issues. 

Grand Theft Auto San Andreas

 Ethnic Cleansing

CARTOONS

Southern Poverty Law Center

The Southern Poverty Law Center, SPLC, is a non-profit organization in the United States that works to fight against white supremacist groups. The organization was founded in 1971 by Morris Dees and Joseph Levin.  It began as a civil rights law firm.  They provide legal representation for victims of hate crimes and for those that are affected by crime for traits that are out of their control.   The SPLC has been victorious in cases concerned with racial segregation and discrimination.  Since the organization is not run by the government they raise money through fundraising in order to afford the lawyers that they supply.

Though this is not directly connected to the discrimination within the criminal justice system the Sothern Poverty Law Center aids minorities against white nationalists. One issue that I have discussed in another post concerned how minorities are usually of low socioeconomic status and therefore cannot afford their own lawyer.  As a result the courts will appoint one to them.  This organization understands that justice needs to be brought to white nationalist members as well as proving the innocent. The SPLC provides well educated lawyers who care about the victims unlike those who are circulating in the system.  It also aims to connect the unfair treatment back to the core of the problem, the organization.  This can relate back to the discrimination of minorities and the criminal justice system.  Parts of the system may seem unfair when it should be rooted deeper into the entirety of the process.  It is the goal of the Southern Poverty Law Center to cripple the origination that discriminates.

It would benefit the organization if they were to branch out to demographics other than the southern state of the United States. There are hate crimes and discrimination that occurs more often in larger cities of poverty. Also, it would be effective if they were to expand their clientele to fighting controversial cases concerning race. The center provides hope for victims who experience discrimination and perhaps it will spark a sister organization representing discrimination within the criminal justice system primarily.  This way it will be one less legal factor working against minorities.

For more information on the Southern Poverty Law Center visit http://www.splcenter.org/

NAACP speaks up when Seattle officer's assault charges are dropped

The NAACP leaders of the Seattle chapter spoke out against the dropped charges against one of Seattle’s own police officers.  They claim that the department continues to use excessive force against minorities.  

The Seattle police officer, James Lee, was convicted with assault for kicking a man outside of a convenient store. Initially Lee was believed to use excessive force, a fine line for officers to cross, but then after Lee gave his statement.  After the statement was given Pete Holmes, a Seattle City Attorney, dropped a charge against a police officer.  This decision sparked the NAACP to make an official statement disagreeing with the conclusion.  President James Bible claims that the Seattle police department has problems that need to be addressed.  Bible uses past encounters of violent police tactics for cases he has represented as an example of his outrage.

In addition to the case of Darius Yearby, who was kicked by Officer Lee after being placed in handcuffs, there was Terry Jefferson.  Jefferson was pulled from his car and thrown to the ground resulting in the bruising of his face. Bible was disappointed to hear that all charges against these Seattle officers were dismissed.  However, Bible plans to work to ensure that enforcement is being regulated by Seattle Police Department’s Chief John Diaz and Mayor Mike McGinn.  However, he fears that since neither one of these men will be in their positions next year, officials will blame the problem solely of the leadership ethics.  So, now that they are gone there will be nothing to fear, but action will be to be taken eventually.

I think that, in order to make things fair, and it dispel all acquisitions of the Seattle police department being racist that they should take action with their law enforcement officials.   It is clear that there are imperfections in the system and it doesn’t benefit the reputation when you have a large organization like the NAACP speaking out against your department and questioning your integrity.  I mean, police are supposed to keep people safe, not hurt them no matter who it is.  I agree with James Bible in that Seattle officials are going to do their best to make it go away.  However, it is going to be difficult with a nationally known organization calling you out against racism.

Also, another argument was made about certain situations that don’t get handled the best way out of thousands of call they get frequently.  So, Sean Whitcomb, the Seattle department’s spokesperson,  is trying to down play the severity of the incident by saying that since this doesn’t happen very often it is not that big of a deal.  With this, he said they seek to do better but had no formal plans to address the issue at hand.  In other words, he is just telling the NAACP what they want to hear. 

American History X and Autobiography of a Recovering SkinHead: The Frank Meeink Story

I personally was not a fan of this movie and I would not choose to watch it if it was not shown in class. I had never heard of it, but many people that I talked to after watching it really liked it including my boyfriend.

American History X gives a fictional, though clear, example of an African American who was treated unfairly by the criminal justice system based on his race. Guy Torry's character, Lamont, is a black inmate who bonds with the main character Derek, played by Edward Norton.  Lamont was caught stealing a television from a store right next to a doughnut shop where he runs into three police officers. He was charged for assaulting an officer which landed him six years in prison.  Lamont had accidentally dropped the television on the officers foot and it was seen as intentional.  Though Derek was an active skinhead he did not think that was a fair sentencing for Lamont. Now, Derek, a white man had been convicted of murdering two men and only served three years in the movie.

This movie represents a clear depiction of the unfair treatment of criminals between races.  Even the ex-white nationalist character thought his friend was given a harsh punishment because he couldn't believe it at first.  You would think that they would try and find a witness to his crime if Lamont tried to fight the charges.  People want to buy into the stereotype that black men are violent that is why some things can be interpreted in the wrong way. The trends within the types of crimes, victims, and offenders have made it so that some races are represented falsely.  If the roles were reversed Derek may not have even served a day in jail where as Lamont probably would have gotten life in prison, or worse. African American men are seen as violent criminals by white nationalists, but most convictions made for black criminals are not for violent crimes.  In this film it was the police officer who determined the fate of Lamont.  Within the criminal justice system it is not uncommon for the arresting officer to influence the jury.  This illegal act is to ensure that jurors are not randomly selected and will grant them the decision they favor.

The book, Autobiography of a Recovering SkinHead: The Frank Meeink Story, follows a former skinhead member and his experiences of salvaging his life.  Meeink served as a SkinHead at the age of 13 and began recruiting members by 18 to join other Neo-Nazis. The big turn around in his life was when he was arrested and incarcerated with kidnapping and beating an opposing gang member.  All of his actions were caught on video tape. Frank Meeink is now an inspirational speaker to youth groups and works as a coach for a hockey league.

Meeink claims that this group that he was formerly a member of is, "nothing but violent."  He even calls himself a sick, twisted human being for being a part of it and the crimes that he committed for the group.  For a SkinHead, to say that his group was more violent than that of the race that they are trying to protect themselves from is interesting.  The only difference in the matter is that the SkinHead group thinks their actions are justified because it is their "job" to act this was and do these things.  They deny the existence of violence within their group and Frank Meeink is proof of that lie with the crime that he committed. So, how is it that black people are the ones who are labeled as destructive to others? White nationalist are the same if not worse in their actions, but to them it is okay because they have a obligation to their race.  And yet black with all this black people are considered the most violent of all criminals.

The Myth of a Racial Criminal Justice System

The Myth of a Racist Criminal Justice System was a book written by William Lee Wilbanks in 1987.  The book has opposing theories written dispelling what Wilbanks believes.  The Myth of a Racial Criminal Justice System is a book that aims to persuade readers of the idea that the criminal justice system is not racist.  The book doesn’t deny the existence of racism within the system but the criminal justice itself is not racist. It doesn’t use evidence of arrest data, charging, pleas, imprisonment rates, or parole decisions.  Methodological flaws and interpretation is the main focus. The text expresses Wilbanks analysis of how the criminal justice system can be broken up into right and wrong and his opinion of the matter.

William Wilbanks believes that most decisions in the criminal justice system are not based on discrimination.  However, they are based on the severity of the crime, amount of evidence, and prior criminal record. He is known for coining the term systematic racism in The Myth of a Racial Criminal Justice System.  Systematic racism is used as a standard to measure American criminal justice which disproves the presence of discrimination. Wilbanks argues the fact that for racism to occur that there needs to be discrimination in all aspects of the criminal justice system or none at all; a go big or go home ideology.  After reviewing he concludes that the system is not racist during all steps of the process.

William Wilbanks attempts to disprove an idea using logic.  However, the majority of scholars believe that there are certain biases that are evident in certain practices and policies.   The criminal justice system is not completely color blind though and the issue of racism which the system is not as black and white as Wilbanks believes.  Wilbanks makes it seem like whole is not racist by claiming that one innocent portion of the system is what make it so.  But, if one part of something is broken isn’t everything that the system contaminated.  It is like saying it is only a little racist, so it is not that big of a deal.  Besides he backs up his evidence with in his book with no statistics, only interpretations of what he thinks.  It gives proof that even someone who does not believe that the criminal justice system is racist does claim of the existence of it.  So there is such a thing as a middle ground.