Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

The Drug War: Still Racist After All These Years

Posted by Bean , Lawyers, Guns and Money at 7:54 PM on May 9, 2008.


The drug war is still being waged only on some people and on some drugs. In other words, it's still a racist crock.
drugs2
drugs

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get Reproductive Justice and Gender in your
mailbox!

 

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

The New York Times reported today on two new reports (one from the Sentencing Project and one from Human Rights Watch) that confirm what any study of prison demographics could tell you: the war on drugs is still being waged only on some people and on some drugs. In other words, it's still a racist crock.

Drug related arrests are up and more than 4 of 5 drug arrests are for possession (as opposed to sale or manufacture). And Black men are 12 times as likely to be incarcerated for a drug crime than are white men. Also, 1/3 of drug arrestees were black, despite the fact that only 12.8% of the population is Black.

The statistics would be bad enough. But the absolute worst part of the Times article is that the author cites a Manhattan Institute staffer as an "expert" on incarceration issues. What does she blame drug war disparities on? The "fact" that Black and Latino men are more likely to be involved in the distribution of heroin and cocaine.

Ms. MacDonald [of the Manhattan Institute] said it made sense for the police to focus more on fighting visible drug dealing in the inner city, largely involving minorities, than on hidden use in suburban homes, more often by whites, because the urban street trade is more associated with violence and other crimes and impairs the quality of life.
“The disparities reflect policing decisions to use drug laws to try and reduce violence and to respond to the demand by law-abiding residents in poor neighborhoods to clean up the drug trade,” she said.


Riiiiiight. The policy makes Ooooooh so much sense. When racism and "personal responsibility" are your starting points.

Not surprisingly, the Human Rights Watch study's author gets it right:
“The race question is so entangled in the way the drug war was conceived,” said Jamie Fellner, a senior counsel at Human Rights Watch and the author of the group’s report.
“If the drug issue is still seen as primarily a problem of the black inner city, then we’ll continue to see this enormously disparate impact,” she said.

Digg!

Tagged as: race, war on drugs

Bean is a third-year law student in New York City. Her blogging focuses on the intersections of criminal justice, reproductive rights, gender equality, and drug policy.


So the Stupak Amendment Sucks: Here's What You Can Do About It
Find out how your representative voted on and call their office, to thank them or to tell them that you'll be supporting a pro-choice democrat in the next primary.
Post by Jill Filipovic. November 10, 2009.
Focus on the Family's Insurance Plan Covers Abortion (And Other Ironies of The Latest Assault on Choice)
If anti-choice pols want to assure taxpayers they won't subsidize abortion, why haven't they tried to abolish tax breaks for employer-sponsored health insurance?
Post by Eyal Press. November 9, 2009.
Will the Stupak Amendment Force Women Who've Miscarried to Lose Insurance Coverage?
I think so.
Post by Robin Marty. November 9, 2009.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
de facto or de jure?
Posted by: whealeydj on May 12, 2008 4:38 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I would say the Moynihan-Reagan drug laws were de jure and the application is de facto.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The two Rs of drug laws
Posted by: Jim Swanson on May 12, 2008 6:44 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
While Racism is the leading reason we have repressive and largely Racist drug laws, there is another R which is seldom discussed: Religiosity.
Most popular religions equate illicit drug use with evil. The Catechism of the Catholic Church #2291 says:"The use of drugs...constitute direct co-operation in evil...."
Evil, which has no basis in reality and is just another religious myth, drives the War on Drugs for as many people as Racism does. But it does it even more insidiously by using the victims of the Drug Wars, people of color, to help wage the battle. Churches use this reified "evil" to bring the forces of law enforcement down on their own communities. I have sat in "drug rehab" programs for people of color where the Salvation Army, and other religious "coaches", tell the participants it is better "to kill your children than to allow them to become addicts". This is fueled by the Manichean beliefs in a battle for the "souls of mankind" between "good and evil". The "one with the most souls wins all souls".
Souls are also just religious constructs with no neurological basis. We only believe in them because we are told they exist--similar to gods.
Until we address the other R we will never be able to stop destroying our brothers and sisters. An intelligent Black female reporter recently wrote that "Obama was lucky he didn't become a cocaine addict like other Black Men". Duh, most users of cocaine were and are White and less than 10% ever became what are commonly called "addicts". So-called addiction is a symptom of other problems and not a result of illicit drug use. People of Color face many needs in our Racist society and drug laws allow the rest of society to ignore those needs.
We need the whole story, with universal health care including extensive pre, natal and post care for all women.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Police take the easiest line of attack
Posted by: billwald on May 12, 2008 9:17 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The people standing on street corners looking and acting like dope sellers are not generally white females.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There's money
Posted by: willymack on May 12, 2008 11:59 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In the phony war on drugs. It wouldn't have lasted so long, otherwise, considering its obvious and abject failure. The profiteers are killing two birds with one stone by imprisoning, and thus controlling those who have no real wealth, and, therefore, no political power.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

WHAT DRUG WAR
Posted by: mindtrvlr on May 13, 2008 12:03 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The war on drugs is about as effective as the war in Iraq. Its Time to quit Throwing people in prison for what they individually choose to do to themselves. All the drug laws do is make the problem worse, and cause more people to commit more terrible crimes to support their habits. At least if drugs were legal, the prices would go way down due to legal competion of the market. Also, addicts would be more willing to come out and seek treatment, if they wouldn't be labled criminals.
it's obvious that the government either can't or won't stop the flow of drugs into our country, probably because they are making to much money behind the scenes.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

two Johnson's, equals, no constitution
Posted by: chiefwanadubie on May 14, 2008 4:37 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Addiction, is a human frailty, NOT A CRIMINAL ACT!!! It was the 13th amendment, that supposedly ended slavery, by changing, it's condition, from the color of ones skin, over to, punishment for crime!!! At the time that the 13th was written, crime, was murder, robbery, and treason!!! Today's, so called crimes, was all acceptable behaviors, at the time of the 13th!!! DEPARTMENT 13 is the result of the 13th amendment!!! There is nothing equal, about there EQUAL OPPORTUNITY SLAVERY!!! DEAD presidents, are the only representation, that Americans have today!!! If you have no CASH, then, your ASS is GRASS!!! The war against DRUGS, is only a racial issue, if the only two RACES, are those with MONEY, PREYING, on those without MONEY!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The "Drug War" is Not
Posted by: NDK on May 14, 2008 7:21 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Drug War is a misnomer, it's not a war at all. That's a misleading attention-getting 'headliner', but most of all it's a euphemism for an economic system that will never go away so long as there is profit and jobs to be made from it.

Consider, if you will, the huge investment made in the drug economy infrastructure. The sheer number of law enforcement jobs it keeps in place. The courts it keeps fueled, the confiscated goods seized under RICO for auction it supplies and which nets profit for those who are alert to these sales.

Consider as well, the training, men, machines and money invested in this drug war from expensive aircraft to boats, electronic surveillance, etc.

Why would anybody in this industry want to end their job by eradicating drug use? What would they do afterwards?

The Drug War is another facet of the Wars Without End that the Academic-Military-Industrial-Mediaplex maintains as a mythical way of ensuring continued profits from misery and destruction.

It's another part of the American (and Global) Mythology that needs to end, if we are to have an honest world.

But calling it a War is dishonest, it's not a war, it's an economy. A Drug Economy.

For everybody in this economy there is nothing to be gained from ending it. Rather, their job is to make sure it persists.

"Drug War" Pfft!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The "Drug War" is Not Posted by: mindtrvlr
THE REAL SHORTAGE IS OF HONEST MEN. WHEN A MAJORITY OF MEN GET HONEST
Posted by: Raymond Emerson on May 15, 2008 10:34 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
we will have a change in our drug laws. We didn't legalize alcohol because we approve of drunkeness. We did it because it was the only way to sensibly manage it. Some people actually do use alcohol sensibly. Yes, and some people use recreational drugs sensibly.

Right now the right wing churchy folks and the drug lords and dealers seem to be running things. When enough of us have had enough of this, it can be fixed. If you are impatient, so am I.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

crimewriter
Posted by: voyagernx1 on Jun 3, 2008 11:10 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Has the nation's so-called War on Drugs been a disaster? Ask anyone who lives in a major urban area or in a poor Black neighborhood.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]