Spokane7
55°
January 16, 2012 in Opinion
Read this in honor of King
I have something for you.
In June 2010, I wrote in this space about a book, “The New Jim Crow,” by Michelle Alexander, which I called a “troubling and profoundly necessary” work. Alexander promulgated an explosive argument. Namely, that the so-called War on Drugs amounts to a war on African-American men and, more to the point, to a racial caste system nearly as restrictive, oppressive and omnipresent as Jim Crow itself.
This because, although white Americans are far and away the nation’s biggest dealers and users of illegal drugs, African-Americans are far and away the ones most likely to be jailed for drug crimes. And when they are set “free” after doing their time, black men enter a legal purgatory where the right to vote, work, go to school or rent an apartment can be legally denied. It’s as if George Wallace were still standing in the schoolhouse door.
“The New Jim Crow” won several awards, enjoyed significant media attention, and was an apparent catalyst in the NAACP’s decision last year to call for an end to the drug war. The book was a sensation, but we need it to be more. We need it to be a movement.
As it happens and not exactly by coincidence, Alexander’s book is being reissued in paperback this week as we mark the birthday of the man who led America’s greatest mass movement for social justice. In his battle against the original Jim Crow, Martin Luther King Jr., in a sense, did what Alexander seeks to do: pour sunlight on an onerous condition that exists just beyond the periphery of most Americans’ sight.
I want to help her do that. So here’s the deal. I’ll give you a copy of the book – auto- graphed by the author, no less – free of charge. You don’t even have to pay for shipping. All you have to do is tell me you want it and promise me you’ll read it.
In fact, make that the subject line of the email you send to request your copy: “I want it. I’ll read it.” Send it to lpitts@miamiherald.com. Make sure to include your contact information and mailing address. At month’s end, I’ll draw 50 names from a bucket and send out 50 books. If you work for the company that syndicates my column, or a newspaper that runs it, you can’t participate.
And here, let me make one thing clear. This giveaway is underwritten neither by my employer nor by Alexander’s publisher. Me, myself and I will pay for both books and shipping. I chose to do it that way in order to impress upon you how vital I personally feel it is that you read this book.
No, I have no financial interest in its success. I do, however, have tremendous emotional interest. Half a century ago, Martin Luther King and a cadre of courageous idealists made a sustained appeal to this nation’s misplaced sense of justice, forced Americans to see an outrage that was right in front of them yet, somehow, beyond their line of sight.
There could be no better homage to his memory than to do that again.
Leonard Pitts Jr. is a columnist for the Miami Herald. His email address is lpitts@miamiherald.com.
MAC firing begs explanation 
greenlibertarian on January 16 at 12:37 a.m.
Well if its that good, Mr. Pitt’s, I strongly encourage you to engage some of your well-to-do readers, and some of your doin’ alright colleagues to match your generous offer, and lets get 100, 200, 300, 500, heck, a thousand books sent out. Credited and anonymous donors needed.
Surely, it’s worth it. Pay it forward.
Ed Byrnes on January 16 at 1:41 a.m.
The drug war is a misguided failure that disproportionately harms our brothers, sisters and communities of color.
When one uses the raw frequency data in the report “Marijuana in Washington” by Jon Gettman, Ph.D. for a more sophisticated analysis an alarming pattern emerges: When one compares the cannabis arrest rates per 100,000 in the population, a Black Washingtonian is 290% more likely than their White counterparts to be arrested for cannabis. One should also keep in mind that 48% of all drug arrests in Washington are for cannabis and that cannabis possession arrests accounted for 90% of all cannabis arrests in Washington. Also consider that this misguided policy, implemented in a clearly racially disproportionate way, occurs at an annual cost of $170 million to arrest, prosecute and incarcerate people who use cannabis in our State of Washington.
Ending the drug war is a social justice issue.
Ed Byrnes
woamike on January 16 at 2:45 a.m.
Ed,
Man, you are grasping at straws. Pot is a “social justice” issue because blacks get busted more? Have you considered the possiblility they smoke it more per capita than whites? Or, that they may be more brazen when using it? Or, some other reason(s) not associated with discriminatory justice?
Please don’t tell me you’re going to jump on the Leonard Pitts “everything boils down to race” band wagon, are you?? “Clearly” implemented in a disproportionate way??? Sheesh. Did you go to the “figures lie and liars figure” school of stats?
You’re always trying to come up with euphemistic talk and shady reasoning to legitimize YOUR DRUG of choice. You talk of pot like it’s fine wine and now getting high is a “social justice” issue??? Face it, you just want to get high without having to worry about getting thrown in the can.
Frankly, as a fellow human being, your fixation on pot and the obvious major role in plays in your life is worrisome. There’s much more to life than getting high, bro.
WillyPeter on January 16 at 5:59 a.m.
“Social justice issue!” HOOT! …Thanx for the laugh to start my week, Ed.
mikeln on January 16 at 6:22 a.m.
When government makes money for the right wingers it’s all good. When it helps the poor it’s bad. The right makes money at both ends, selling drugs and then prosecuting those who choose to use them. Before you foolish right wingers put your foot on your mouth answer me this….why have the cost of drugs bought on the street stayed the same for the last 40 years while the legal drugs “pushed” by big pharma gone up? Why has big pharma been allowed to get half the country hooked on depression type drugs while the government, at great cost, is wageing a war on drugs? This is the worst case of eyes open wide blindness ever.
gmorton on January 16 at 7:36 a.m.
While the “War on Drugs” violates the civil liberties of everyone and should be abandoned forthwith, the “disproportionate impact” argument is largely a red herring.
Charges for possession of pot are often secondary to an arrest for something else. Since blacks are arrested (for all offenses) about 3 times as frequently (per capita) as whites (though they comprise 13% of the population, they commit nearly half the homicides and 55% of the robberies), they get busted for pot possession about 3 times as often.
http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2009/data/table_43.html
Black males are also about 4 times as likely to be on parole or probation at any time, so they get busted for pot possession as a probation violation 4 times as often.
Blacks apparently also take more risks in their purchases and use of pot, which makes them more likely to be arrested.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16600529
A revival of “Jim Crow” seems to have little to do with it.
misjustice on January 16 at 10:10 a.m.
I am going to stop at a bookstore tomorrow after work and purchase this book; it will be a great addition to my library.
Thank you Mr. Pitts for directing my attention to this important work!
The ususal suspects arguing against Mr. Pitts’ most recent article leads me to believe that he’s spot on; as usual.
And happy Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Day!
; )
Scoutster on January 16 at 1:54 p.m.
@woamike writes..
Face it, you just want to get high without having to worry about getting thrown in the can.
Uh, duh, yeah. Why would this be any of your (the state’s) business? If Ed or anyone else wants to do this thing and it doesn’t cause you any bother, why do you need to be involved?
Maybe it’s like a gun, eh? You know, like the sacred 2nd Amendment so many conservatives hold dear. It’s not a problem owning a gun, shooting a gun (within limits), cleaning a gun or sharing a gun. It’s a problem to hurt someone else with a gun.
So, maybe I just don’t think YOU should have a gun, because I don’t like them. In fact, no one should, because, well, just because I say so. Something might happen.
See how easy? Simple, too.
stitch on January 16 at 5:50 p.m.
Spot on as usual MisJ? When Mr Pitts stays away from race related issues, which is rare, he can have an harmonious effect..ie his Oct 2010 article re breast cancer..Don’t kid yourself, he does all he can to fuel the fire of racial unrest..I quote from his article Race distracts from deeper issues: “I keep thinking I should be mad at West Virginia. Not because Barack Obama was beaten like a red headed step child, to use my fathers expression”.. Don Imus got 86’d for using the term ‘Nappi headed”.. Both comments are equally inflammatory, yet Mr Pitts is allowed to continue his march against TODAYS caucasion race on a regular basis without as much as a hand slap..It does get old..
misjustice on January 16 at 6:03 p.m.
HEY, watch it stitch, I AM a redhead! Why are we used as an example? I need to write to Mr. Pitts to let him know HOW OFFENDED I AM!
; )
Seriously though, I don’t take Mr. Pitts’ opinion pieces as attacks on the “white” race (race is a false contruct btw), but I am pretty easy going and can dig deeper to discern his intent.
My suggestion to those that are so sensitive to his articles regarding issues of “race” is….are ya ready for it????….wait….wait…it’s commin’….DON’T READ MR. PITTS…
Yup, it’s that simple.
I happen to agree with him, you may not. But at any rate no one is forcing you to read his opinion piece. There, problem solved.
Of course, I am a Redheaded, Maoist, Zaoist, Communist, Socialist, Fascist, ‘Merican Hater; so what can one expect of a rebel like me?
; )
greenlibertarian on January 16 at 7:52 p.m.
I was expecting Rastafarianism, misjustice, a least a touch… ;)
–––––––––––––––––––—
woamlike,
You’re always trying to come up with euphemistic talk and shady reasoning to legitimize YOUR DRUG of choice. You talk of MD-20-20 like it’s fine wine and now getting drunk is a “social lubricant justice” issue??? Face it, you just want to get drunk without having to worry about getting thrown in the can.
Frankly, woamlike, as a fellow human being, your fixation on alcohol and the obvious major role in plays in your life is worrisome. There’s much more to life than wolf-whistling and getting drunk, bro.
stitch on January 16 at 8:11 p.m.
MisJ, what else is there to read on Monday morning? Mr Pitts sticks out like a 747 5 feet over ones house.. I to am “pretty easy going”, but dang it he sometimes crosses that line with his opinions where the Don Imus’s dare not tred..Am curious, if Mr pitts is not attacking the white race, then what is his point? When you dig deeper, what is his intent? I refuse to believe that you are a Maoist, Zaoist, Communist, Socialist, Merican Hater, whatever the heck all that means
Ed Byrnes on January 16 at 8:36 p.m.
Normally I will not respond to personal attacks, yet those who have supported me here give me a bit of inspiration.
If one looks at data from the NIDA annual survey on drug and alcohol use one will find that our black brothers and sisters use cannabis at a rate that is similar to whites. Their higher incarceration rates for the same behavior is evidence of disproportionality in the legal system.
If one looks at data about the NYPD “stop and frisk” approach they will see disproportionate application of the approach and numerous arrests of minority group members for simple possession of cannabis and no other offenses.
Assuming that because one uses cannabis occasionally means that is all that they do is about as accurate and logical as assuming that everyone who uses alcohol is an active alcoholic and a danger on the road, or that every member of the clergy is a pedophile because of the behavior of a few priests.
If I want to occasionally alter my own consciousness with a relatively benign plant then what is wrong with my insistence that the government stay out of this matter? Since when is wanting my basic right to liberty to be respected by an overreaching government a bad thing? I have never suggested in these forums that anyone’s basic rights be abridged by the government so please respect mine.
For those of you who are allegedly concerned for me please do not worry: In addition to being an active father with my two sons and an effective leader in my profession you will find me in my free time bicycling 1,000 miles and skiing 40 to 50 days each year, which are my major highs if you wish to call them that. If it puts your mind at ease I enjoy cannabis twice a month when I go to watch a friends band play.
My interest in this issue is that as a father I don’t want any law enforcement officer having any reason to harass, or do something worse to, my sons if they choose to experiment with cannabis when they are older, and as an educator and Sunday school teacher I want every young person to be similarly free of such a threat.
Ed
misjustice on January 16 at 8:45 p.m.
I don’t take it as an attack, even though I am a member of the dominate “white” culture. I take it as an observation, even though his opinion is one that I tend to agree with, I guess that as a member of the dominate culture that I realize that I have it pretty easy and it would take more than an author of an opinion piece to threaten my place in the world.
I hold privilege in this social construct, not due to anything in particular that I have done to earn it, merely because of the color of my skin; something that I have zero control over. And I wouldn’t change places with a person of color, ever. I don’t even give my skin color a second thought, because I don’t have to; the same can not be said for others, and I comprehend that.
When I look into the mirror all I see is a woman, not a white woman, just a woman; because I have the benefit of being white. Black women can not say the same; and I know that because of my studies in Sociology and interaction with people of color.
We did an “exercise” in one of my Soc classes that fully demonstrated that to me, it was a lesson that I will NEVER forget. The Prof asked us, “what do you see when you look in the mirror?” I answered, “messy hair, a few wrinkles”, etc…but a young lady in my class answered, “I see a black face staring back at me”…
My point is, I NEVER saw my “race” because as a member of the dominate culture I am not defined by my skin color; I have the privilege of “seeing” other things when I view myself in the mirror. Persons of color, those of minority status, are not afforded that luxury because they are reminded daily that they are “less than” the yardstick by which are all measured. And that yardstick is skin color; the dominate culture is the standard bearer against which all “others” are measured, and found wanting….
I think that Mr. Pitts’ intent is to make us think, make us examine our deeply held beliefs, and even to make us a little uncomfortable.
Isn’t that what great authors do? Challenge our mindset and our way of thinking of things so that we might question if what we “believe” is really true?
I can sit with my discomfort…can you?
greenlibertarian on January 16 at 8:51 p.m.
“beaten like a red-headed stepchild” phrase has been around for decades, maybe a century. It hasn’t any racial connotation to it whatsoever, and there are red-headed African Americans from time to time who probably get teased it for just like black friend of mine in Jr. highschool did before my parents white-flighted out of that district.
It’s as different from the usually pejorative term “nappy headed” as night and day. Since you’re ignorance of this, I propose you pay more attention, or do some research, which is literally at the tips of your fingers.
misjustice on January 16 at 8:52 p.m.
I imagine that Mr. Pitts would be pleased with our discussion on this thread; even though we may not agree with eachother, we have each been able to voice our opinions and have a forum where they can be expressed.
Yeah!
; )
Arch_Druid on January 16 at 10:32 p.m.
I have yet to see Leonard Pitts “attacking” the white race. Tolstoy, for anyone who doesn’t know much about history, happens to be a Russian author. A white guy whom Pitts praised in his column!
On the other hand, anyone who claims that a minority is “attacking” him when said minority is voicing an opinion, expressing a criticism, etc. may have a very serious problem that maybe needs a psychological counseling to properly correct.
Or admit it, you might have some left over bigotry. As it just means you can’t tolerate the idea that this minority can be free to say his piece like the rest of you. I’d have to say that his mere presence on the S-R opinion pages is by itself enough to make you uncomfortable. Would you be happier if a white guy discussed racial issues as thoroughly and as freely as Mr. Pitts himself? Or would you attack the fellow for being a lib-rul? You guys need to truly think about it.
gmorton on January 17 at 8:20 a.m.
Ed Byrnes wrote,
“Their higher incarceration rates for the same behavior is evidence of disproportionality in the legal system.”
No, it isn’t, Ed. See my comment above.
I agree with your take on the legality of pot, though, and with your reservations re: “stop and frisk.”
gmorton on January 17 at 8:46 a.m.
misjustice wrote,
“I answered, “messy hair, a few wrinkles”, etc…but a young lady in my class answered, ‘I see a black face staring back at me’…”
Thoughtful and insightful comment, misj.
You do draw an unwarranted conclusion, however. Any person who differs in some readily evident way from the norm in the community in which he is situated will be regularly reminded of that difference, if not constantly aware of it. That is an intractable consequence of any anomaly in a group – the eye immediately attends to the cornflower in a field of buttercups. Hence what the black woman you mentioned sees (and the whites in the room, if viewing the whole group, would see the same thing – they’d see the black woman first).
But then you say,
“Persons of color, those of minority status, are not afforded that luxury because they are reminded daily that they are ‘less than’ the yardstick by which are all measured.”
“Different” does not imply “less than.” If the black woman sees herself as “less than” the white women, as well as different, then something else is going on — something personal
(or perhaps cultural).
But probably you meant that she believes she is perceived *by others* as “less than” them. She should not, however, impute that prejudice to them until she has evidence of it, for each person she encounters. Otherwise she is harboring a prejudice of her own.