"'Today’s lynching is a felony charge. Today’s lynching is incarceration. Today’s lynch mobs are professionals. They have a badge; they have a law degree.’” p.205 (quoting a minister in Waterloo, Mississippi)
“How fascinating, [historians] will likely say, that a drug war was waged almost exclusively against poor people of color—people already trapped in ghettos that lacked jobs and decent schools. They were rounded up by the millions, packed away in prisons, and when released, they were stigmatized for life…. Historians will likely wonder how we could describe the new caste system as a system of crime control, when it is difficult to imagine a system better designed to create—rather than prevent—crime.” p. 219
In the second half of Chapter 4, Prof. Alexander discusses the mental and emotional impact of the lifelong shame and social stigma that attaches to the labels “criminal” and “felon.” She points out that this stigma can exist even without an actual felony charge—that black men in poor neighborhoods who have not been swept into the criminal justice are treated like future criminals anyway.
There is a widespread perception that prison has become a rite of passage for young black men, even a point of pride. Prof. Alexander asks whether this is true and determines that in fact, prison time is an event that causes both the incarcerated and their families to feel shame. A family member’s incarceration is often not talked about outside the immediate family, giving rise to isolation and alienation. In fact, a deep silence arising from “pluralistic ignorance” about mass incarceration can exist in communities of color. Prof. Alexander equates the lying and avoidance people undertake to “passing” during Jim Crow and notes that it represses public thought and denial of people’s lived experiences.
Despite the shame of incarceration, there are ways in which young black men embrace the stigma society places on them as a group. This is a normal response to being part of stigmatized group; embracing the identity placed on a person through social stigma is an act of resistance and defiance. Prof. Alexander notes that embracing the identity of “criminal” is more problematic than “gay pride” or “black is beautiful,” but does not really offer a solution. Instead, she turns to a discussion of “gangsta culture” in which she draws parallels with the minstrel shows of the Jim Crow era – a for-profit display of the worst of the day’s racial stereotypes. At the same time, she suggests that gangsta rap artists are simply telling their truth, their lived experience. She hopes that an understanding of the social context created by mass incarceration can help us see gangsta rap artists as we now view the minstrel – with “pity more than contempt.”
Prof. Alexander ends Chapter 4 with the assertion that she does not wish to deny the personal agency of black men but asks that we recognize that circumstances impact everyone’s agency. We all fail at challenges, many of us under circumstances far more comfortable than those experienced by many black men. Mass incarceration and lifelong stigma says more about us as a society than it does about the black men who are trying to survive in the ghetto.
Do you believe Professor Alexander when she says she does not deny the role of personal agency in the decision-making of black men in poor neighborhoods? Either way, what do you think about personal agency versus the impact of our economic, social, and criminal justice systems on the decision-making of these men?
Are you satisfied with Prof. Alexander’s engagement with “gangsta culture”? What does she want the reader to see in the comparison to minstrel shows and do you think the comparison works?