Truemors
is reporting from
Member
NP Rank:
NP Rank:
This is America? This is 2007? Racial conflict in Jena
Share:
by scotty_ng1 | August 1, 2007 at 04:32 pm
3188 views | 97 Recommendations | 13 comments
Videos
Photos
All Things Considered, July 30, 2007 · As at hundreds of other high schools across America, black and white students at Jena High School in Jena, La., rarely sit together. The white students gather under a big shade tree in the courtyard, while black students congregate near the auditorium. But last year, a few days into the first semester, a new student, a freshman African American, asked the principal at an assembly, if he, too, could sit under the tree. He was told he could sit anywhere he liked.
Three white boys on the rodeo team apparently disagreed. The next morning, there were three nooses hanging from the shade tree in the courtyard. Anthony Jackson is one of two black teachers at Jena High School. He laughs ruefully, as he recalls watching the nooses swaying in the tree. "I jokingly said to another teacher, 'One's for you, one's for me. Who's the other one for?'"
Many in Jena's black community wanted the three white students expelled. But when the white superintendent and other school administrators investigated, they decided the nooses were a prank. Instead of expulsion or arrest, the three received in-school suspension. Blacks called the punishment a double standard. "White students can do things and receive a slap on the hand," Jackson says. But authorities "want to throw the book at blacks," he adds.
An Incident Escalates
A few of the black athletes, the stars of the football team, took the lead in resisting. The day after the nooses were hung, they reportedly organized a silent protest under the tree. The school called an assembly and summoned the police and the district attorney. Black students sat on one side, whites on the other. District Attorney Reed Walters warned the students he could be their friend or their worst enemy. He lifted his fountain pen and said, "With one stroke of my pen, I can make your life disappear."
That evening, black students told their parents that the DA was looking right at them. Walters denies that. Billy Fowler, a member of the school board, doesn't believe it, either. "He said some pretty strong things," says Fowler, "but I don't think he was directing it to anyone in particular. I think he just wanted people to calm it down."
But things didn't calm down. Some whites felt triumphant; some blacks were resentful. Fights began to break out at the high school. But that year, the football team was having an unusually good season and the black athletes were a major reason why. So while there were fights throughout the fall, nobody wanted to take any action that would hurt the team. When the season was over, so was the truce. On Nov. 30, somebody burned down Jena High. Whites thought blacks were responsible, blacks thought the opposite.
Charges and Public Outrage
The next night, 16-year-old Robert Bailey and a few black friends tried to enter a party attended mostly by whites. When Bailey got inside, he was attacked and beaten. The next day, tensions escalated at a local convenience store. Bailey exchanged words with a white student who had been at the party. The white boy ran back to his truck and pulled out a pistol grip shotgun. Bailey ran after him and wrestled him for the gun. After some scuffling, Bailey and his friends took the gun away and brought it home. Bailey was eventually charged with theft of a firearm, second-degree robbery and disturbing the peace. The white student who pulled the weapon was not charged at all.
The following Monday, Dec.4, a white student named Justin Barker was loudly bragging to friends in the school hallway that Robert Bailey had been whipped by a white man on Friday night. When Barker walked into the courtyard, he was attacked by a group of black students. The first punch knocked Barker out and he was kicked several times in the head. But the injuries turned out to be superficial. Barker was examined by doctors and released; he went out to a social function later that evening. Six black students were arrested and charged with aggravated assault. But District Attorney Reed Walters increased the charges to attempted second-degree murder. That provoked a storm of black outrage. "Jena has always been a racist town," says Bailey's mother, Caseptla Bailey. "We've understood that….It has been that way since I've lived here."
But school board member Billy Fowler disagrees. As far as racial problems, our community is no different than any other community," Fowler says.
Fowler is one of the few leaders with the school administration or local law enforcement willing to talk to the media. The principal, the school superintendent and the district attorney all declined repeated calls for comment. Fowler says he is appalled at reports by outside media outlets that he claims portray Jena as a racist community. But he and many other white leaders agree that the charges are unfair. "I think it's safe to say some punishment has not been passed out fairly and evenly," Fowler says. "I think probably blacks may have gotten a little tougher discipline through the years.
"Our town is not a bunch of bigots. They're Christian, law-abiding citizens that wouldn't mistreat anybody."
But the black students and their families feel mistreated. The first to go to court was Mychal Bell, the team's star running and defensive back. Bell's court-appointed lawyer refused to mount any defense at all, instead resting his case immediately after two days of government presentation. An all-white jury found Bell guilty. A talented athlete, Bell had a real shot at a Division I football scholarship. He now faces up to 22 years in prison. The other five black students await trial on attempted murder charges. Over the weekend, Jena High School had the big shade tree in the courtyard chopped into firewood.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=12353776
------------
Also the Democracy Now reporting on the story:
Wednesday, August 1st, 2007
Hundreds March in Jena, Louisiana in Support of the Jena Six
AMY GOODMAN: And in Jena, Louisiana, the movement backing the six African American high school students known as the Jena Six is growing. For more, we go down to independent reporter Jordan Flaherty. He was in Jena yesterday, joins us on the line. Welcome, Jordan.
JORDAN FLAHERTY: Thank you, Amy. Thank you for having me.
AMY GOODMAN: Can you explain who the Jena Six are and what happened yesterday in Jena?
JORDAN FLAHERTY: Yes. Yesterday nearly 300 people rallied and marched in small town Jena, Louisiana, calling for freedom for the Jena Six.
The Jena Six are six high school students who are facing a lifetime in prison for a schoolyard fight. The case began with nooses hung from a tree at Jena High School nearly a year ago. Racial tension escalated in the town, which is 85% white, after the nooses were hung. The black students led a protest after noose incident. Nearly every black student at Jena High School stood under the tree. The town district attorney, Reed Walters, came to the school and told black students, “Stop making trouble. I can make your lives disappear with the stroke of a pen.”
One weekend last December, two black students were beaten by a group of white students. Later, a group of black students were threatened with a shotgun by a white former student. Whites were not punished for the noose incident or these other incidents, but the following Monday when a white student was beaten up by black students in a schoolyard fight, six black students, the Jena Six, were arrested and charged with attempted murder.
Protesters yesterday came from as far away as New York, California, Florida and Chicago, with large delegations from Houston, Lake Charles, Monroe, Lafayette and New Orleans. 43,000 signatures on a petition written calling for District Attorney Reed Walters to drop all charges were delivered, and protesters rallied outside the courthouse and marched through downtown Jena.
Jena town officials has no comment, but this week the school board had the notorious tree chopped down.
AMY GOODMAN: Who chopped it down?
JORDAN FLAHERTY: It was chopped down by the school board. They gave a comment saying that we don't want black students coming to school and seeing that tree and causing more trouble.
AMY GOODMAN: And this all began with one black student asking the school authorities last September if he could sit under the tree like the other white students.
JORDAN FLAHERTY: That's right. And he was told by a school official he could sit under the tree. And the next day the three nooses were hung from the tree. And in a spontaneous act of daring and brave resistance, nearly every student in the school went and stood under the tree. And it's been widely said that the folks that organized that protest to sit under the tree are the so-called Jena Six, the six students that are now facing life in prison for a schoolyard fight.
AMY GOODMAN: Five of them facing up to a hundred years in prison. Mychal Bell, the sixth, already tried, found guilty of -- what? -- aggravated battery, was supposed to be sentenced yesterday. That's why the date was set for the march. But that's been put off ’til September?
JORDAN FLAHERTY: That's right. September 20th is the current date for the hearing for Mychal Bell. He was represented by a public defender who called no witnesses in the case. The case was heard by an all-white jury, white district attorney, white judge. And he had no defense at all and was convicted on all charges very quickly by the all-white jury, now faces twenty-two years in prison for the aggravated assault charges.
AMY GOODMAN: Different attorneys now and the fact that the NAACP national has gotten so involved? It's their homepage? Has this made a difference -- the level of national support, the petitions that have been signed? You said something like 43,000 names have appeared?
JORDAN FLAHERTY: 43,000 names. The family members have gotten petitions -- have gotten contributions from people all around the country, many of whom saw the report first time on Democracy Now!, who really helped to bring this story to a wider audience. The family members have been so touched by the support they've received from people all around the country.
If people want to send donations to the family and also sign the petition, there's links to that at leftturn.org. They can also -- I’m sure you all will have the information on your website, as well. The family members have been so touched by the support. There have been people organizing in the grassroots in small towns in Louisiana and Texas that have come out, organizations like Friends of Justice based in Tulia, Texas. The Millions More Movement has been out there. Family and Friends of Louisiana's Incarcerated Children brought nearly fifty people from Lake Charles, Louisiana. People from the grassroots have really been upset and have been leading -- have been joining the struggle that's been led by the family members of these youths.
AMY GOODMAN: Jordan Flaherty, I want to thank you for joining us, in Jena yesterday for the march of hundreds in support of the Jena Six, calling for the charges against them to be dropped. And we will link at our website, democracynow.org, to our hour of coverage with the family members of those who have been arrested.
What is NowPublic?
NowPublic lets people work together to cover news events around the world.
Crowd Power
outragelondon
Belgravia,
Most Recommended Stories in World
Recommendations (97)
Anonymous user
Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (13)
at 20:54 on August 1st, 2007
If you feel inclined to write the Jena major or DA concerning this case:
Murphy McMillan, Mayor
P.O. Box 26
Jena, La. 71342
Phone (318) 992-2148
To contact District Attorney Reed Walters directly:
Parish of LaSalle: District Attorney's Office
1050 Courthouse Sq
Jena, LA 71342
(318) 992-8282
at 04:39 on August 2nd, 2007
scotty_ng1, I like this story. It's good stuff.
When things like this happen in this day and age it ticks my off. I have notice "some times" the best way to get others attention is by going above them! We all have people above us and making this a national issue was a great and also a way for people of any race, creed or color to be fairly treated by the laws and not by judgment of a bias nature of racism that seems to be a continued fight that we have not over come yet in this nation!
This may be another way by going above local level. Anyone have info on national levels?
Governor Kathleen Babineaux Blanco E-mail address:
http://www.managekeelson.com/websites/la.gov/index.cfm?md=form&tmp=home&cfmid=282
Call
866-366-1121
225-342-0991
225-342-7015
Facsimile: 225-342-7099
*
This is the Attorney General office for Louisiana.
Investigation Division
Leslie Bonano, Director
225-326-6100
1-800-488-2770
225-326-6197 FAX
1885 North 3rd St.
Baton Rouge, LA 70802
P.O. Box 94005
Baton Rouge, LA 70804
InvestigationInfo@ag.state.la.us
at 07:09 on August 2nd, 2007
As a nation the USA has a lot of housekeeping to do. I wonder how many incidents like this go unreported.
(I'm a dual US/Canadian citizen)
at 08:51 on August 2nd, 2007
Jordan, this is an everyday thing for people of colour. Why this is so astounding to the settler population is no mystery. The Germans denied what was happening under their noses as well. Trust me when I say that I am not picking on you, I am simply fed up with the notion of surprise that these things still occur. Africans and North American Aboriginals complain incessantly. White society just refuses to listen.
Why? For one thing to admit racism and Europocentric bias exists to to directly contradict the stated charter of the United States. And who among the "responsible" wants to deal with that paradox? - The Angryindian
at 08:10 on August 2nd, 2007
Thank you for posting this, Scotty_ng1!
at 08:39 on August 2nd, 2007
Thank you all for the feedback and your shared outrage with me.
Some comments from my home chat group:
this for one is the most appalling stories of racism in US today.
i think that ppl should continue to contact the officials of Jena let them know that the world is watching and the things have to change.
-----------
I'll make sure to save this to forward to anyone who tries to tell me
that we should get rid of affirmative action or whatever because
racism doesn't exist anymore...
----------
And cruelty/prejudice come so easy to teenagers - how can the school and community leaders tolerate this stuff fermenting in their young people? Well, I'm sure the kids learned to hate somewhere, and the older generation is part of the problem. I know blacks can be racist against whites and others too, but historically in the US south we know who the primary perpetrators and the primary victims are.
When a gang of white kids put nooses on the shade tree in plain view of everyone, I think that goes beyond the "innocent prank" level. It's just like talk radio excusing the Abu Ghraib torturers as harmless kids pulling fraternity antics. But Michael Vick is accused of dogfighting - mild mannered white people wants blood. How did those kids avoid expulsion, or at least community service? I don't know what an "in school suspension" is, but it sounds suspiciously similar to a Paris Hilton jail sentence. Heck a kid in CA got expelled for wearing a "Bong hits for Jesus" shirt, and even lost his 1st Amendment appeal in the Supreme Court!
------------
It's just criminal that this story hasn't really been reported nationally until now, when events took place in 2006! Only some local newscasts as far as I can tell until Democracy Now and NPR today. I hope the NAACP and some celebrities/politicians get involved to put some pressure on those hicks. Come on Barack, show us what you're made of! Louisiana is over 33% black (not sure if that includes all the displaced Katrina victims still 2 years later!), though Jena is 85% white. Real convenient that an all-white jury took all of 2 days to deliver the verdict on the first defendant M Bell: 20+ yrs for aggravated assault and conspiracy.
Yeah the yokels down there loooove the black kids when they make the football team win, but if they want to sit under a shade tree and want to go to school without HATE CRIMES committed against them, too uppity!
After the white "noose prank" students got off with a slap on the wrist, as a show of solidarity the black students all congregated under the cursed tree. So the school called the police on them and the DA threatened them into submission! I guess the right of free assembly also doesn't apply down in Jena.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kSUAl_CImBU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d_rntP6iw4U
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2h0pIpn4SA
---------
My favorite part is when the guy says that he agrees blacks have probably gotten tougher punishment over the years, and then in the same breath says that their town members are Christians who wouldn’t mistreat anyone. That seems like an obvious contradiction. Either people get doled out punishment fairly or you are mistreating them. It goes back to that study that people will say that most people are racist, but will almost always say they themselves are not racist. Everyone thinks better of themselves even in the light of obvious evidence to the contrary.
-----------
It irks me how that local librarian who was interviewed in the D Now video played so dumb about it, like Gonzo in front of Congress. "It's not a race problem, it's crime. The nooses.... I don't even know why they were there. I don't know what they were supposed to mean. There are pranks going on all the time... it just didn't seem to be racist to me." If that librarian goest to work tomorrow and sees an inflatable love doll sitting at her desk with her name written on it in lipstick - will she think that it's just a simple prank from coworkers and not sexual harassment?
So irresponsible of the 4th Estate: The incidents happened in Fall 2006. Only small-market local news affiliates have been covering. Foreign BBC was the first big source to report on this story, in May 2007. NOTHING on CNN or NYT. And you can bet your ass the leader of the free world hasn't heard about it. Foxnews.com, Wash Post, and msnbc.com had short articles on July 25-28.
at 08:54 on August 2nd, 2007
Keep up the presure scotty_ng1.
at 10:22 on August 2nd, 2007
Thanks angryindian. I called the Mayor and the local DA, but they just wrote down my complaint and left it at that. I emailed the LA governor and attorney general, but they might not respond since I'm not one of their constituents (I do have family in LA though, and they're still waiting on their Katrina aid!). I think the cat is out of the bag though, and it's only a matter of time until the national spotlight shines down there and they really get the heat turned up to do what is right.
Oh, apparently Sharpton is heading down there to make a statement. Where was he, Jackson, Oprah, and others before? Come on KanYe, say something! It's been half a year! Oh wait - maybe they were too busy chasing red herrings like Don Imus. Look at the difference in media coverage, ridiculous. "Nappy headed hos" vs. nooses and fights, hmmm which one is more serious? We all know what Imus did was unacceptable, but this is what I was saying about crying wolf too many times. When the more prescient battle emerges, America is too tired/numb to race issues, so we lack the motivation to seek justice. Imus will die a comfortable, rich man no matter what. The Rutgers girls will move on and probably have great lives despite the mean comments against them. The Jena Six will probably lose any chance of playing college football, and may go on lockdown for years, thereby destroying their futures. Isn't that a bigger deal worth fighting for?
At least Imus lost his job, the least they could do is expel the students who hung nooses and pulled a shotgun on an unarmed classmate. If they're giving the Jena Six decades in prison each for "assault", how can the authorities get away with going so easy on the whites? I know that violence can't be tolerated and we have to punish offenders, regardless of race. But what about the students who hung nooses in the schoolyard? Isn't that a HATE CRIME according to the FBI and US laws? How can those students receive such minimal punishment? The country wants to see that justice is truly blind and America is a place where people do what is right. I hope someone will intervene.
at 10:41 on August 2nd, 2007
So hanging nooses in a public school as a deterrent is at least a race-motivated threat of violence (not just hate speech protected by the 1st Amendment), and obviously the white students had no legal claim to exclusive use of the shade tree. Also a gang of whites beating on a defenseless black person is also a hate crime, yes? I wonder if the FBI will do anything. Despite ignorant hatred for Muslims after 9/11, anti-Semitism, anger over illegal Latino immigrants, and China resentment, the majority of US hate crimes have always been against blacks.
http://www.fbi.gov/hq/cid/civilrights/hate.htm
Hate crime definition from FBI.gov:
A hate crime is a traditional offense like murder, arson, or vandalism with an added element of bias. For the purposes of collecting statistics, Congress has defined a hate crime as a "criminal offense against a person or property motivated in whole or in part by an offender's bias against a race, religion, disability, ethnic origin or sexual orientation." Hate itself is not a crime—and the FBI is mindful of protecting freedom of speech and other civil liberties.
FBI Jurisdiction
A hate crime is not a distinct federal offense. However, the federal government can and does investigate and prosecute crimes of bias as civil rights violations, which do fall under its jurisdiction. These efforts serve as a backstop for state and local authorities, which handle the vast majority of hate crime cases. A 1994 federal law also increased penalties for offenses proven to be hate crimes.
Limitations in federal statutes prevent the FBI from investigating crimes of bias motivated solely by gender, disability, or sexual orientation. Disability issues may be investigated in housing cases that fall under Title 42, U.S.C., Section 3631.
The FBI’s Role
As part of its responsibility to uphold the civil rights of the American people, the FBI takes a number of steps to combat the problem of hate crimes:
at 10:43 on August 2nd, 2007
scotty_ng1, you eloquently and thoroughly tell this terrible tale. Good Stuff.
at 11:01 on August 2nd, 2007
I appreciate the kind feedback Ryan. I pray that justice will be served down there. Outrage first, then reconciliation. We have to fairly enforce the law, and the perpetrators on both sides have to be honest about their actions and accept just punishment. Hopefully in the manner of the Truth and Reconciliation investigations in South Africa. Whites and blacks HAVE to get along with each other in America (or anywhere) because they can't dislike and avoid each other forever (in fact they need each other). Jim Crow is history, but "legal segregation" is unacceptable. It starts with the young. Melting-pot New York City is the most segregated school district in America.
I mean, we can't force people to coexist side-by-side as loving neighbors, but at least different races can share their high school - should share their public high school. The onus is on the ADULTS to act like adults, like good Americans and moral people, to set a good example that impressionable young people can follow.
at 11:35 on August 3rd, 2007
More comments from my chat group if you're interested:
Well, the motivating factor of race in a crime is hard to ascertain I suppose, and under the domain of the attorneys to persuade the jury either way. Say some kids harass a Muslim woman in a burkha. Are they doing it because of her religion, her ethnicity, her gender, or just because she's there?
As M said, what if a white gang hung nooses to intimidate another white person? It's a threat to his safety, but he wouldn't be a target because of his race (unless the white gang is really messed up in the head). I don't know, but "intimidation" qualifies as a hate crime according to the FBI. "Hate crime" is not a stand-alone category. A pre-existing crime gets classified as a hate crime if prejudice was the motivation, then I guess the perp gets harsher punishment because of the hate crime add-on.
Did the LA cops beat harder on Rodney King because he was black? Or would they have given a white perp the same treatment? But with a noose, the historical significance is hard to deny, so it's pretty damn clearly a hate crime to me. I mean, just imagine if the white kids flew a big swastika flag on the shade tree to keep Jewish students away. The Anti-Defamation League and every news outlet from here to Timbuktu would have descended on Jena. If Jewish students protested and staged a sit-in at the tree, no cops, DA, or school officials would get away with dispersing them. But in this case, it's just black people, and it's just some kids playing pranks with nooses, so how 'bout we cut down the tree and call it even?
---------
I personally have a hard time distinguishing between someone hating you because you are “fill in the blank” or simply hating you and using whatever weapons they have available to hurt you. If I am arguing with a guy somewhere, and he is fat, I’ll start ripping on him for that. If he is balding, that will come up, it is the salient features that are so easy to pick off and use as weapons in a personal attack. Now in Jena, and I conceded this, it is hard to imagine that the nooses were anything but race. But lets say you were beat up by a black dude, for whatever non racist reason you can think of. Does that mean that in hating him back, you are not allowed to bring up his race in your rants about him? I just believe people use the weapons that are most effective, if that guy kicked your ass, fighting is out of the question most likely. So you get him where it hurts, and I think race is a very easy weapon for people to grab. I don’t necessarily believe that makes it a hate crime. Sometimes I think hate of the person comes first, and race just gets used as a method to hurt the person. Is that a hate crime?
------
To reiterate what has been said, yes it is possible that a person can hate another person and the easiest way is to use the most glaring aspect of that person. However, a noose has a clear historical link to racism against blacks especially in the south. Further, this is the town that is known for its racial discord and disputes. These are kids born and raised with such happenings and contempt for each other. It's very very very hard to believe that the kid who hung the noose simply hated the person and did this to hurt just one by picking on his most distinguishing character while trying not to disrespect the entire black community. Judging from the record, such fine line distinctions are not made in this town, meaning people have been judged not as individuals but rather as a member of one race or another for a long time.
I dont that this is a oneway problem. I think that there is a mutual hate between the two races in this town and that blacks hate whites just as much because they are white. But what becomes shameful is that one has the power to subjugate the other and is not afraid to use it, openly. This particular story really makes me angry. Perhaps it's the way the town officials and judicial system in jena so openly and almost proudly (?) dealt out racism and stood defiant and without remorse to the rest of the world. I know that racism is still a problem in America and will continue to be this way for a long time if not forever. However most are educated enough to know that it is look down upon and don't have the audacity to flaunt in this manner. After reading the article I suggested to tim we should just write letters good old fashion grandmothers' way and sent it to jena. And get as many ppl as we can invovled. I had this vision of the officials in jena sitting amidst letters and cameras pointed at them finally realizing that the secret is out and with the world watching jena is not so little anymore and things would have to change. Well, and then I wake up….
---------
Unfortunately, 'then I wake up' is the true reality of this situation. It is just a dream, albeit a wonderful one, that we could actually change these people's minds. The very fact that they stand defiantly behind thier racism is the problem. Don't you think that defiance and sense of righteousness in their narrowmindedness is supported by the media with their promotion of stories like the don imus thing? It's now that the black kids are too sensitive. First they have to be hardened to words, now they have to be enured to images/actual articles(i.e a noose) that represent death to many of them. And, you are absolutely right about the power issue. It is about the less powerful being blamed.
-------
It was a major change in the Civil Rights Movement when "northern whites" and DC politicians started to campaign and support the black people in the movement. Then it clearly showed it was a moral issue and not just a racial one. Some of conservative, southern people might think that black people are lazy and undeserving. They want special treatment as the "victim" and threaten their complacent, white-dominated society down there. But look at the economic and power disparity between the races. Whites have nothing to feel threatened about, yet they are! As Lis said, the victim suddenly becomes the culprit? So whites moved from the cities to the suburbs to get away from the coloreds, and try to reinstate segregation at times (shopping malls, schools, clubs, and shade trees). Jena is 85% white. We know who is in charge. But the blacks there are not Cripps drug dealers. They are probably mind-mannered decent folk who just want to make a living. Their kids are stars on the football team. So it's not like Bosnia or something where racial hatreds and rivalries were brewing for years. I bet plenty of blacks are racist against whites, but they don't have the social status and power to discriminate much. In 2005, the FBI reported over 2,600 hate crimes against blacks, and only 800 on whites, even though America is over 70% white and only 12% black - so the difference of hate crimes per capita is huge. The whites can try to get away with overt racism, while any black who tried would get squashed.
The thing is, why would the whites who "owned" the school shade tree feel a hatred towards this one black frosh who wanted to sit there? They probably didn't know his name! So when you choose to hate a stranger, you do so because you think he or she fits a negative stereotype in your mind. It's like the Nazis - they had very little knowledge or relations with actual Jews. They just decided to hate the unknown to follow their racist ideology. On the other hand, Shia and Sunni lived side-by-side in Arabia for centuries. Sometimes they coexisted peacefully, and sometimes they butchered each other. It is more like fratricide than racism (the latter is ignorant, the former is intimate). So for the whites to totally over-react and hang nooses just because a humble black frosh dared to disrupt their homogeneity, that IS A HATE CRIME. The kid did nothing to provoke an angry response, except that he was there and he was different. Pretty cut and dried to me.
Of course R, for a hate crime to occur necessarily means that hate crime laws must be in place. Humans were "sodomizing" each other without a second thought since caveman times, but only when sodomy laws were in place did we actually realize it. But hate crime laws are a good idea, because enforcing them improves social justice. Whereas sodomy laws made little sense outside the deep south.
To address M's email, yes I understand your point. I just don't think it was inappropriate to use me as a personal example. I think Rishi's comments were pretty preposterous though. We're having a discussion about a racial crime, so probably it's not the best occasion to bust out the epithets that are totally irrelevant. And it's NEVER appropriate to use racial epithets, unless you're a dirty comic like Richard Pryor and use the profits from your shows to feed the needy. Look, I'm not so naive. We speed on the roads even though it's illegal. We get drinks for underage friends even though it's illegal. And we use mean racial words even though somewhere in our conscience we know it's wrong (I hope). We tolerate some evils in the world. But would our relationships and our comedy suffer so much if we just abolished all use of those words? I am not a censorship advocate, but if everyone made an active choice to refrain, would that hurt so much? It's like boycotting a store when you find out they use child labor. Just making a concerned choice I guess. I'll stop if you guys do, because really it's not worth it and I hope that all of us would want to be as far as possible from resembling Jena. First it's a casual joke, then it's a dirty look to someone on the street, and maybe a few iterations later it's Don Imus or Rodney King. I believe we have more sense than that, but why risk it? If racial joking is the "gateway drug" to harder things, why start? I hold myself guilty as well.
In our home group of friends, most races are represented. Why are 90% of the race jokes about me then? I know I tolerate it and I might even encourage it due to my color commentary and comebacks, but a girl who wears a miniskirt is not to blame for getting raped. I might laugh and not give it a second though, but somewhere deep down it hurts a little. I think if you guys are honest you would agree if anyone ever used names on you. So do you guys diss my race because you know it "hurts the most"? I guess I don't have BO, I'm not dumb, and I'm not a total nerd, so it's convenient to invoke race as ammunition instead? But going on what M said - if you already hate a person for a specific reason or grievance, using race/appearance/etc. against him or her is not necessarily racism. The hate was already there, and you don't hate him or her just because of their race. You just use race as another way to attack them. But that case totally doesn't apply to the Jena situation. I guess which came first - hate for the individual or hate for their race/affiliation/etc? But it could be chicken and egg territory. Though discrimination could be defined as prejudging someone based on those divisive characteristics before actually weighing them on their merits. It's 100% constitutional to hate someone. But if you discriminate, and thereby deprive the victim of equality or fair treatment simply due to their race or whatever, that is illegal. I think Jena was more along those lines.
Lastly, I agree with L that it's appalling to see how defiant some of the Jena whites are. They really don't think anything is wrong. As La said, writing them and protesting might help. They might not agree with us but want to mitigate the damage and negative press. I'm sure they feel like the victims now, just like Don Imus. Some people will never wake up. People will always hate each other for irrational reasons in any society. I guess we hope to enforce laws, encourage good behavior, and nip problems in the bud so as to minimize the negative effects of the hate. The south has a long way to go in that regard - California, New York, and other places too.
at 13:52 on August 6th, 2007
this is a nice lively discussion.
t's concern, a valid one at that, is about why it took a year to
get this stuff in the news. i think this type of intimidation
happens a lot more than people think. it only got into the news
because the situation became too ridiculous to ignore. the truth is
you could stay in any area with large black population in america,
not necessarily the south, and fill the whole newspaper full of
awful intimidation tactics against blacks. everyday things just
slightly less messed up than the jena case go right under the
radar. i'd like to blame the media, but honestly they're doing a
better job than anyone else. the federal government doesn't touch
this stuff with a ten foot pole.
the most frustrating thing to me is that people yell and scream
everytime something like this case shows up, but in reality they
are willing to do very little change things. i've now lived two of
the most liberal places in america, berkeley and manhattan, and the
schools in both places treat black students worse than the average
non-southern city. professors may often have left leaning politics,
but when it comes to their own kids, they will do whatever it takes
to their kids ahead. berkeley high sends more students to the ivies
than any other public school in the bay, but the school is so
heavily tracked it's like 3 or 4 schools in one. the lower "tiers"
do not have the appropriate classes to go to a UC (even if they
have straight As, which happens more often than you think) and are
generally ill-prepared for further study. manhattan is even worse,
with a system of magnet schools that leaves the average public
school (with a huge number of black people) way underfunded and
without appropriate courses. furthermore, manhattan is
extraordinarily segregated (one of the most segregated cities in
america actually), where the average black man in harlem has a life
expectancy on par with a male in BANGLADESH!! (see democracy as
development, amartya sen).
i give these examples to show that intimidation and segregation is a
not a phenomenon restricted to the south. even liberals can't be
trusted with integration. the truth is much less of this garbage
would occur if things like education and healthcare were
nationalized, that is if "areas of integration" where everyone
should have equal access were left to the national government. as
it stands now, those in power locally have a vested interest in
screwing over disadvantaged black people. i guarantee that if the
department of education actually had some power, every single of
those dumbasses running schools in jena would be unemployed right
now.
the connection between local governance and racism has been known
for a long time. in fact, southern legislators have, for decades,
blocked a large number of national programs even though the south
should theoretically benefit the most. the reason is that keeping
"welfare programs" controlled locally allows the southerners to
keep blacks down and the whites in power. the most famous example
of this is when FDR proposed social security the only way the
southerners (who really, really needed it) would vote for it was if
domestic workers and farmers were ineligible (and that's how it was
passed). AT THE TIME, OVER 50% OF BLACKS IN THE SOUTH FELL INTO
THOSE TWO CATEGORIES. thankfully, social security was later
extended. when viewing things this way, it becomes clear why we
haven't been able to nationalize healthcare and education, like
every other modern wealthy democracy.
as l and l wrote, these sorts of incidents are not going
away anytime soon. however, i believe we could curb a lot of the
local intimidation with stronger nationalization and
institutionalization. i absolutely believe that affirmative action
needs to extended in anything the government can touch, and that we
need to give national bureaus like the department of education real
power. this is why i am hoping for an old-school fifties, sixties
style northern democratic nominee for president when the democrats
actually believed in an effective national government (OBAMA!!!!).
-------------
Thanks for writing and very compelling arguments. It makes me want to vomit because the situation seems so intractable. If Bush-type politicians are taking the teeth out of (or appointing partisan cronies to ruin) the EPA and FDA, no way they would give a crap about Education and Health & Human Services. Less impact on the economy, and by economy - I mean corporate affairs. Sometimes I worry that America is too large and too diverse to have centralized, nationalized programs (even if it's for everyone's benefit) - because as you said 2 senators from each state (even podunk states, pardon my elitism) can mess up any bill. And then of course the "anti-big-government" complainers will flood talk radio and Rupert Murdoch broadcasting with hate speech to vote any initiative down. Of course I'm being overly pessimistic, but can you blame me?
As you said, we can't just blame the south for being F-ed up. The south is like our miscreant little brother. Yeah we're ashamed of him sometimes, but we are still family, and we are cut from the same cloth. If educated, wealthy liberals don't even get it, how can we expect anyone else to? As you said, when push comes to shove, rich white liberals don't want their kids going to integrated schools or living in integrated neighborhoods (unless the minorities there are also rich and white-resembling, like Cupertino or Orange County). I don't know what can be done. Even if President Obama wins and isn't assassinated (and you all know someone will try - heck Biden even called for more security detail for Barack while he's out on the campaign trail!), he has put social justice and race issues so low on his political agenda (probably due to his race, which is unfortunate), so as to not resemble Sharpton/Jackson. He wants to show he's a heavyweight who can hang with Hillary on health care and terrorism, so he insults Pakistan and says we'd bomb them without permission.
JFK stalled a lot of civil rights reforms because he didn't have the sack to stir the shitstorm and stand up to the South (where he was already unpopular). He wasn't as pro-black and pro-poor as benevolent history remembers him anyway. Some of his ideas eventually came to fruition under Johnson's Great Society (LBJ deserves credit for the majority of reforms), but only a hardcore Texan and former House Speaker could have pushed it through Congress. And of course RFK would have done much more but never had the chance. Barack is no JFK, RFK, nor LBJ. Hillary actually has more black support and Edwards is leading in Iowa.
As you said, the sad part is that for every one Jena or Rodney King that makes the national headlines, 100 more slightly less outrageous events go unnoticed and unpunished. As M Bell's father said, this is what it means to be black. So yeah, those idiotic and corrupt local government will still rule over their fiefdoms, and DC might not care. And of course the criminal justice system may be our most racist institution today, though the problems facing blacks in that regard are of course related to insufficient access to fair education, health care, employment, etc. Wow, I didn't know Berkeley High was like that. Mario Savio and John Lennon are rolling in their grave.
Imagine all the people... gave a shit about their fellow man.
---------
Obviously the nooses were a hate crime. I brought up my point because I am curious as to how many hate crimes that are litigated are based on what I mentioned or on Jena style actions. Just a curiosity. As for calling Tim a Vietcong, for me that is like blacks shootin the N word at each other. I believe there is something representative about hitting sensitive subjects with those close to you. When your with friends it’s a level of comfort that is not always attainable. As for girls wearing skirts, and some comments we make at the peak of degeneracy, well I feel what tim is saying. And while sharpton and many black leaders have put to the grave the N word, and encourage blacks to stop using it casually, I can understand the reason people do it. I still don’t know why you took offense for a personal reference, but my bad if you did. I thought it was quite apt and easily relatable, which is why I included it.
This got me talking with a black coworker of mine about this whole deal. And what it came down to is that he doesn’t know why, but he knows what. Whites are afraid of blacks. Rich white folk don’t live near poor folk, black folk, brown folk, etc. I’m near manhattan beach and this area is the epitome of class and race segregation. Old money lives on the beach, poor folk go east, to Compton, hawthorne, Crenshaw, etc. And people like me, roughly middle class who want good schools and safety, if your in that position and white, looking around people still flock to their own. Middle class white folk would rather live in san Fernando valley, an hour commute, or in orange county, than live 15 minutes from work in a non white city. As for black/brown/other, they seem to have no problem, as long as the neighborhood is nice. I believe most people I’m talking to in this email are of this mind. No one wants to live in the ghetto, no one wants to put our loved ones in danger, but we don’t equate color with danger. And this is a connection that I believe many white people have, my coworkers included.
I think the tough question is the WHY. Why do people feel this way and what can you do to change it?
I have no good answer. I find those entrenched in their stereotypes, when faced with something/someone who debunks them, calls that something/someone the exception. And there can be an infinite number of exceptions without changing their belief in the stereotype. How do you defeat that kind of thinking? And for places like Jena, all hope seems lost. Because not only is the thinking there and unchallenged, it is rewarded. I’ll bet you that the person/people who hung the nooses thought it would be a great idea. And I get the feeling most people they knew thought so too.
----------
on the hate crimes point, i think from a legal standpoint you have
to establish the motives of the assailant. this is no different
than establishing 1st degree murder (premeditated) versus 2nd
degree (spontaneous). the question is whether hate-motivated crime
should carry a stiffer penalty. i believe it should because it is
intended to intimidated a whole group (and so we should have a
stronger deterrant to stop it). as with any other type of
litigation, the decision to go for a hate crimes conviction will
rest upon whether the prosecutor reasonably believes he/she can
convict the defendant of that crime.
maybe i'm an optimist, but i don't believe the situation is a
hopeless as some of you have argued here. mark stated exactly my
point. left to their own vices, people use prejudices to make
decision. for instance, it is true that oaktown, harlem, or compton
are X% (say, 25%) more dangerous for white people, so in a fair
world we should expect an appropriate decrease in the number of
white people (80% of normal) going to these areas to even things
out. however, paranoia makes sure that there is much less white
foot traffic in these areas. the point is...RACISM IS RATIONAL, BUT
IT LEADS TO IRRATIONAL OUTCOMES. the solution, then, is to implement
laws that strive for egalitarianism. in many divided societies, like
belgium and switzerland, this is precisely the idea used for laws.
quotas are set for appropriate minority groups (e.g. flemish and
walloon in belgium) to make sure political participation is fair.
in india, a hyper-divided society, there are quotas for women,
muslims, and lower castes to try to ensure fairness. this has been
the key to the sustainability of indian democracy. the old school
democrats have always understood the effect of institutional power
on restricting discrimination. the key here is to get a democrat
from this school of thought back into power (pelosi is clearly in
this camp). i believe (hope) that obama and hillary, despite the
way that they campaign, are old school democrats who will increase
the power of central government over relevant issues. if the
democrats can control the presidency and congress for the next 8 to
12 years, i believe we will see substantial increases in the level
of civil rights. it's a tall order, but it's not impossible.
GET INVOLVED!!!
------------
Again great follow up points. Going on what M and S said - yeah it's not like educated, middle/upper class people refuse to live with blacks per se, but don't want to live where it's poor, ugly, and unsafe (which is totally reasonable). Unfortunately those places tend to be mostly minority populated as you stated. And we all know it's harder for minorities to get loans approved and buy houses in better neighborhoods (and if they do, they have to pay higher rates), so many can't get out.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/09/08/business/main1988883.shtml
To be the party pooper:
J brought up a good remedy for change, and certainly we must have more laws and protections in place to deter prejudice and encourage fairness. Except in doing so, you used the Q word. What about America makes you think our society is compatible with quotas? That is as much of a call to arms for conservatives as abortion. We are not a big government, "socialistic" state like Belgium, and probably we'll never be. As you said, look how hard it was for dynamic, consensus-striving leaders like FDR and LBJ to pass through no-brainer social safety nets like S Security and Welfare. No way a "centrist" Democrat like Hilly or Edwards would be able to pull it off, especially Hilly who is so divisive and targeted by the Right.
http://www.npr.org/news/specials/michigan/index.html
http://www.umich.edu/news/Releases/2003/Jun03/supremecourt.html
Remember how Bush tried to strike down the U Mich affirmative action policy in his first term? The High Court narrowly countered him 6-3 in 2005 (race is ok for the law school, not ok for undergrad admissions), before O'Connor retired and was replaced by that hack Alito. FYI, Roberts and Alito are more or less a monolith, sharing the same opinion even more often than Thomas-Scalia. This term, a third of all their cases (some fairly controversial) went 5-4 (it's like almost money in the bank that narrow rulings will go Roberts-Alito-Thomas-Scalia-Kennedy vs. Breyer-Souter-Ginsburg-Stevens, so why even waste money and time trying the case?). The use of race in student placement at the Seattle-Louiville school districts was struck down (who needs diversity?). While the Court upheld a few "liberal" viewpoints on issues like the EPA and Gitmo detainees, for many civil rights and social issues they went conservative (sometimes in blatant disregard for stare decisis).
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/linkset/2005/03/24/LI2005032400136.html
http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/decisions.php?when=thisterm
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/06slipopinion.html
BTW, the Supreme Court has one of the most primitive websites I've ever seen. A 12-year old could have designed a better one back in 2002. Maybe that signifies how hip with the times they are.
Then onto the next branch of government - Congress. In Pelosi's "first 100 hours" crusade, how many of those bills would directly help marginalized groups like US blacks? Maybe at best the minimum wage bill, but that only applies to 1M Americans. They are more interested in political circuses and sleepover sessions to protest Iraq (which won't make a damn difference anyway). Maybe they don't bother with civil rights legislation because they know they don't have the numbers to overturn a Bush veto anyway, so I hope they're just waiting till 2008? But really - where is the political will to enact those boring, arduous, controversial, yet critical reforms? No special interests and lobbyists are dumping money and browbeating Congressmen over civil rights. Maybe Dems don't feel the need to seriously address those issues, because they know they already have the poor and minority vote locked in for their districts so they take it for granted.
So if the S Court went conservative, and Congress is fairly gutless or distracted with other topics, how can even the most egalitarian, conscientious, popular president push through new civil rights reforms? President 44 will have a lot to deal with, like trade wars with China, the war on terror, cleaning up Bush's mess in Iraq/Afghan, energy/climate, inflation, and health care (which may have a race element, though we know universal coverage or single-payer is unlikely to materialize any time soon). Plus, it's no guarantee that the Dems will keep Congress in 2008, since public opinion for Congress is so damn low (deservingly), so you blame the majority party (as voters did to the GOP in 2006). And it's not really clear if Dems are so much better on civil rights issues anyway. They are not the party of the working class and of the under-represented anymore. Most prominent Dems are as intimate with Wall Street as anyone, and now more than ever they have to prove their bona fide Christian merits too. I know that it's Christian values to fight injustice and help the needy, but that's not the brand of Christianity that exists in politics today.
Since the Civil War, only 3 presidents have grown up not rich: Abe, Nixon, and B Clinton. Edwards could be the 4th, but unlikely. Issues of poverty and social justice are not a high priority for the people in power now, and I doubt we'd have a Renaissance on those issues any time soon. Remember KATRINA!?! That was supposed to be a wake-up call for America to clean itself up. 2 years later the place is still struggling (in some cases REALLY struggling), poor minorities are no better off, and mainstream America doesn't give a shit. So if Katrina couldn't jolt our sensibilities and kick our asses into action, what will? Definitely not Jena.
----------
I just wanted to say to something T wrote, about white people not wanting
to live where it is dangerous, which is as he writes quite understandable.
The racist elements comes in when you find out what about a neighborhood
makes a white person think it is dangerous. When you live somewhere, there
generally are sections of that city that are better than others. There may
be nowhere in Compton that you find safe enough for your family, but there
may be many a place in some places (to use my area as a reference) Carson,
Hawthorne, Gardena, all the places between Redondo Beach and Compton. But
if you look at my workplace, the white people all live in the same 2 or 3
areas, almost exclusively. Why is it that educated, liberal, upper middle
class WHITES have a different sense of what and where is safe than upper
middle class NON WHITES? This is where I sort of disagree with Tim. I
think that white people DO refuse to live with blacks, but in their own mind
I believe that is not what they think the reason is. They refer to a
dangerous city as the cause, but in that dangerous city are many nice
neighborhoods with their peers living happily and safely. And I am hard
pressed to find a non racist explanation for that one.
------------
Yeah I see your point and am in agreement. It's like when a girl breaks up with you - she says that "it's not you; it's me" and you deserve "someone better", but really she means you're a creep or you're deficient in some other way. So maybe some people cite crime, schools, etc. for the reason for residential segregation, but really those are just symptoms of the underlying racism? But I think same goes for blacks or other minorities. Some don't want to live in predominantly white neighborhoods. Probably not out of safety reasons, but comfort and familiarity (plus it sucks to stick out). So as you said, some surveys suggest people realize there is racism in the world, but are less likely to admit that they are part of the problem (nonblack people "say" they would vote for a black candidate, but come election day they do differently).
So maybe whites do dislike living with nonwhites and especially blacks. It's possible. But with America being over 75% white, with all the choices for suburban middle class whites to live, it's kind of inconceivable for them to pick a minority neighborhood. So it could be just pragmatism/chance instead of racism, though clearly some housing choices are racially motivated. And as you said, I don't have the data but I seem to sense that minorities are more comfortable living with each other (Latinos, blacks, Asians, Middle Easterners) than whites are, except cases like NYC where blacks, Puerto Ricans, Italians, and Jews may dislike each other and keep to their own hoods.
-----------
I think you brought up a good point also, this goes both ways. I know more than a few people who wouldn’t live in the rich white areas because they would stick out or be judged by their neighbors. But I think the difference is in the position each side takes. The non whites I talked to about this think they are being looked down on when they go to white neighborhoods. The whites cite crime and danger. I think the racism involved in each case is on different levels. But the door definitely swings both ways.