“Once again, in response to a major disruption in the prevailing racial order—this time the civil rights gains of the 1960s—a new system of racialized social control was created by exploiting the vulnerabilities and racial resentments of poor and working-class whites. More than 2 million people found themselves behind bars at the turn of the twenty-first century, and millions more were relegated to the margins of mainstream society, banished to a political and social space not unlike Jim Crow, where discrimination in employment, housing, and access to education was perfectly legal, and where they could be denied the right to vote. …[Y]et the mass incarceration of communities of color was explained in race-neutral terms, an adaptation to the needs and demands of the current political climate.” p. 73
In the second half of Chapter 1, Prof. Alexander discusses the beginning and early rise of mass incarceration in the mid to late 20th century. Among some politicians and media outlets, the movement of African Americans from the South to Northern cities gave rise to talk of “crime waves” in those cities, and some civil rights activities were labeled “criminal.” Poverty was often viewed as a problem of character and culture rather than a problem with the economic system. When the Black Panther Party arose in the late 1960s, it was seen as a violent (and Communist) threat rather than a local provider of safety and services. In his 1968 bid for the presidency, Richard Nixon made it clear that he was the “law and order” candidate who would put down Black riots in cities, which occurred in the wake of Martin Luther King, Jr.’s assassination, and get control of inner-city criminals; he wanted white votes, and he got them by playing to the racist grudges of poor whites, just as conservatives had done 70 years earlier.
In the 1970s and 80s, the factory jobs, which paid comfortably and did not require higher education, began disappearing, and poverty spread in the cities of the North. Black communities were particularly hard hit and had little in the way of a safety net. During the Reagan years, African Americans were portrayed as welfare cheats, relying on handouts instead of working and abusing loopholes in system.
According to Prof. Alexander, President Reagan’s 1982 declaration of a “War on Drugs” was a major step in establishing the latest system of racial control – incarceration and post-incarceration removal of rights. She asserts that drugs were not a primary public concern at the time, and the intent was racist instead. Thus the dice were loaded when crack appeared in 1984. Crack was cheap and gave a quick high, making it popular in poorer communities. It devastated Black neighborhoods, where jobs had already been lost and poverty was systemic.
The response by politicians was more “law and order” rather than prevention and treatment. The Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986 established mandatory minimum sentencing for drug crimes and gave harsher sentences for crack than for its cousin, cocaine. In 1988, more federal laws were passed, expanding the use of the death penalty for drug crimes, establishing new mandatory minimums, and adding civil penalties.
Democrats got on board with harsh drug laws in order to wrest power from the Republicans. Doing so allowed them to appeal to poor whites who felt threatened by affirmative action in the tight job market. Bill Clinton established “three strikes and you’re out” sentencing, tightened welfare rules, diverted money into prison construction, and brought about rules allowing federal housing authorities to keep out those with a criminal record. Under Clinton, funding for federal housing was slashed by $17 billion (61%) while funding for corrections was increased by $19 billion (121 %).
Like crack in the 1980s, the opioid crisis is receiving extensive public and government attention, but the response to opioids has been largely focused on public health and treatment rather than mandatory minimum sentencing and the death penalty. This is a positive response in many ways, but is it because we’ve learned about addiction and criminalization? Or is it simply because opioids are hitting white, rural communities instead of black, urban communities? On another note, does the decriminalization of marijuana have anything to teach us anything about racism?