Dear White Friends:

This letter was written in reaction to a Meeting for Worship With Attention to Business  at Upper Dublin Monthly Meeting as they considered a "sabbatical" in Business Meetings to avoid considering difficult relationships in the Meeting and conflict with  Quaker Friend of color, Avis McClinton

------
Dear White Friends,

Grace to you and peace from they great Spirit which unites us all in Love, connecting our hearts and weaving us together in one fabric as a human family.

I write to you with a great of tenderness of heart, having prayed with you and for you during your last Meeting for Worship with attention to business, last First Day - 20th day, 9th Month 2015. You labored with a minute for a sabbatical, suspending your business meetings until January 2017.

The reason for your fourteen month break is a conflict with your only African American member, Avis Wanda McClinton. You have expressed exhaustion in struggling with Friend Avis arising from your differences which you describe as "irreconcilable."

In your "Minute to Request a Sabbatical" you say the following:

"We the undersigned members of the Upper Dublin Monthly Meeting of Friends after more than three years of listening, struggling, and praying for the conflict with Avis Wanda McClinton and her support group to be resolved, request that Upper Dublin Friends Meeting undertake a sabbatical from Monthly Meeting for Business for a fourteen month period. This sabbatical would begin November 2015 and Monthly Meeting for Business would resume again in January 2017."

 "We believe, despite long term pastoral oversight from Jada Jackson, Presiding Clerk of Philadelphia Yearly Meeting and Amelia Diamond, Clerk of Abington Quarterly Meeting, that our differences with Avis remain irreconcilable."

We have met in retreat, we have labored for many extended hours in Meeting for business and we have made many changes to our practices as requested by Avis and members of her support committee. None of these efforts have brought peace or reconciliation to use faith community. Instead we find ourselves going over the same ground and same issues over and over again."

"Our Business Meetings have become a forum for demand for action, dictation of the meaning and accuracy of minutes, request for funds, direct accusations, and venting hostility. This contempt for us and hostility toward us has taken a huge toll on our members. We are a very small Meeting. We have suffered though aggressive outbursts, name calling, lying, hijacking of our a meeting for Worship for Business. A faith community is supposed to be a place for spiritual growth and nurture. We feel that we are on the precipice of losing that. Several members have grown so weary and frustrated  that they have stopped attending or are contemplating such."

"We see this sabbatical as a time away from business of the Meeting. We envision it to be a time of healing, reflection, study, spiritual growth and nurture. We are heart sick and weary from the prolonged conflict with Avis Wanda McClinton and her support group. "

"We know in our hearts that there is structural racism with the Religious Society of Friends. It is, after all, a predominantly white religious organization. But we also know deep in our hearts that "racial hatred" is not present among us. We are and want to continue to be an open and caring religious community. We feel the need this time to think, reflect, pray, love, and support one another."

"We also want to be able to get the spiritual support and guidance we need, as individuals, to continue to participate in the important work in our communities, and with each other."

During consideration of this minute there were several comments which expressed exhaustion with dealing with the conflict with Friend Avis.

Friend Avis has experienced this conflict in terms of racial exclusion. (http://www.friendsjournal.org/experience-african-american-quaker/ ) When asked what she thought of this minute, Friend Avis replied "it is a gag order."

One older gentleman who came to the Meeting late interjected during the consideration that the Meeting could just vote her out of membership. Other members interceded and said that was not the issue before us. As the Meeting for Business entered the third hour, this same gentlemen joked with another White Male about needing to end the Meeting so they could make it to watch the Eagles football game.

Members said they were tired of "wasting time" on these issues raised by Friend Avis, and we're bogged down in "minutiae of details" over and over.

One member said that if we were in the "business world," Friend Avis could just "walk away." This friend asked "why do you keep coming?" Shouldn't you go somewhere you "feel more comfortable?" Basically suggesting Friend Avis should vote with her feet and leave.

I watched Friend Avis tremble as members expressed their open hostility personally to her face, as they spoke from the Silence. It was a chilling Meeting for worship with Attention to Business.

There was some consideration of the possibility of a reconciliation committee to continue this work during the sabbatical, but it was expressed as a possibility that no one seemed interested in undertaking.

As I sat among you, my heart became very tender for all of you - these suffering White Friends and this solitary, fearful and defiant Friend of Color.

The first Bible Verse that came to me was "Jesus Wept." (John 11:35)  It was so sad. Jesus wept with a group of mourners. Then Jesus raised the dead Lazarus. This verse reminds me that the Divine is with us as we suffer, and just before we can expect a miracle.

Then I thought of the letter to the Ephesians dealing with the division within their community between Jewish and Gentile Christians. "I therefore, the prisoner in the Lord, beg you to lead a life worthy of the calling to which you have been called,with all humility and gentleness, with patience bearing with one another in love, making every effort to maintain unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to the one hope of your calling." (Ephesians 4:1-5)

This minute you accepted, and the lengthy comments of many frustrated, angry white members in your business meeting fell short of this guidance on how we should bear with one another in love. They perspective of the minute and the language of white members of the Meeting does not include Friend Avis as a part of your "body." The all white members who drafted and signed this Minute did not make any effort to include Friend Avis and her perspective. in fact, members did not give Friend Avis a copy of the minute until it was time to consider it. You spring this minute of Friend Avis at the last possible minute. Is that acting as one body with love, in the Spirit of Unity, in peace?

Friend Isaac Pennington echoed the sentiment of Ephesians 4 in a letter to Amersham Friends in1 667: 

"Our life is love, and peace, and tenderness; and bearing one with another, and forgiving one another, and not laying accusations one against another; but praying one for another, and helping one another up with a tender hand, if there has been any slip or fall; and waiting till the Lord gives sense and repentance, if sense and repentance in any be wanting. Oh! wait to feel this spirit, and to be guided to walk in this spirit, that ye may enjoy the Lord in sweetness, and walk sweetly, meekly, tenderly, peaceably, and lovingly one with another. "

I witnessed no effort at love, no expressions of kindness or care or concern during this 3 hour meeting.

When I read in the minute that the conflict was "irreconcilable" it made me think this was more of a legal document asking for a separation in marriage than a minute from a religious society committed to living in the present Kingdom of God in the present moment.  No conflict is "irreconcilable" when we are one in the Spirit. Conflicts become irreconcilable when we are living from a place of our own wounded egos. We are called to live by virtue of that life and power that makes every conflict an opportunity for loving forgiveness.  

When I hear your frustration with "going over the same ground and the same issues over and over again," I am led to think of the time Jesus asked how many times do we forgive?  "I do not say to you seven times, but seventy times seven." (Matthew 18:22) When we are in religious community together there is no end to our willingness and effort to find forgiveness.

I sensed a strong sense of feeling persecuted among both Friend Avis and the White Friends. The minute expressed a feeling of being a victim of hostility and contempt, suffering from outbursts, lying, and hijacking. We know from our history of early Friends that the suffering you express in your minute pales in comparison with the loss of liberty and property early Friends experienced. It also in no way approaches the risks of your fore bearers who risked their safety and privilege by assisting escaping slaves seeking freedom. It is also noteworthy that your minute only describes the suffering of the White members, and neglects to include the suffering of Friend Avis.

Your suffering has made my heart feel so tender to you. I sense you are all a kind and loving group of Friends. You have been handed a difficult piece of spiritual work that is important to Friends within your Meeting and outside. You have become a focal point. You've been called to wrestle with trauma that goes back for centuries. I am inspired by your courage, your effort. And, I have no judgment about your exhaustion. I don't know how I would feel if I were in the shoes of white members, Friend Avis, or her support group. You are intertwined in a grand spiritual mess. I write to you just to remind you of our highest values and encourage you along that way.

I hope it encourages you that Jesus said, "blessed are you when you feel persecuted." (Matthew 5:11) The path of Christian love is marked by wounds and persecutions.

I wonder what you mean by "a faith community is supposed to be a place for spiritual growth and nurture." Are you trying to retreat from the world? Is the gathering of Friends for their own benefit? Certainly spiritual growth and nurture is what happens when we are Spirit led in community. But, what you are experiencing and teaching us is that growth and nurture is often difficult, painful, and messy when it is authenticated deals directly with the Truths of our failures. Jesus said he did not come to bring peace, but "division" (Luke 12:52) 

 

Spiritual Peace is not the artificial or enforced absence of conflict. Spirit draws us into conflicts that seem deep and impossible and shows us how to let the Spirit transform us. There is no Easter and reconciliation without crucifixion. An authentic faith community is not a vacation, its a place where we are working out our sad feeble selves in a Spirit of love transformed by grace.  It was a poor analogy to compare Meeting to  a "business" where people can vote with their feet. First because our community is "one body" in Christ, (Ephesians 4) and we amputation harms the whole body. Second, the Kingdom of God does not follow the rules of the competitive material world, ("My Kingdom is not of this world." John 18:36)

Your minute shares your understanding of structural racism, and says you do not have "racial hatred" in your hearts. I believe that you do not have racial hatred. I have been working on issues of race in the South all my life and I know racial hatred. I sensed no racial hatred. However, your minute shows that you do not understand structural racism, white supremacy, or white privilege.

Who is "We?"

One example, you refer to "we" more than fifteen times. And you make it clear that "we" does not include your only member of color, Friend Avis. One member spoke and said, "we are a white meeting." But you are not. You have Avis. When you describe how "we have suffered," you really mean the majority of our white members have suffered. You did not include Friend Avis, her suffering, or her perspective in your a minute. When you say you want a sabbatical from "business meeting" you mean the white members want a break from dealing with the issues raised by your only African-American member. The ubiquitous white "we" is a symptom of white supremacy- failing to make an effort to include the perspective of your only member of color.

"We" need a break

Second, one of the privileges of white supremacy is to only deal with the trauma of our racial history when white people want to deal with it. White people can be willfully blind to the continual and persistent trauma of racial disparities whenever they choose. The a white males joking about getting to the Eagles game are exercising this privilege. While they drive home to make popcorn, Friend Avis drives home alone and risks being stopped and searched because of the color of her skin. For a person of color, There is no sabbatical from being black in a society still suffering the racial disparities of our history. The impulse to run away and not deal with it is typical of structural racism. How many of you called, emailed or texted Friend Avis to make sure she was okay?

If "we" make you uncomfortable, just leave.

Third, the sentiment that Friend Avis should stop coming if she does not "feel comfortable" gives priority to the culture of the "all white meeting" and signals that the power of that white community refuses to try to change to accommodate this voice of color. The message sounds like "if you don't like our white meeting, and don't feel comfortable, it's not our job to change or become a  more inclusive community, and make you feel comfortable. You can just leave."  The unyielding primacy of the white majority, and the refusal to consider how the white culture must change to make people of color comfortable is a hallmark of structural white supremacy.

I don't know how the Spirit will work among you, and what you are planning in terms of study and reflection. I recommend some in depth racial equity training. I also recommend that each of you make some time to have coffee, share a meal, I r show some love to a Friend Avis. Having decided to set particular issues aside, do not set Friend Avis aside. Have coffee. Find out what she is struggling with in your life. Share your struggles, one on one. In short, bear with each other in love.

In Peace, With Love

Scott Holmes

  

Three Prayer Poems

A Living Prayer

 

I do not kneel

or talk out loud

lifting my words, upward

my sanctimonious monologue

is a laughing loneliness

No, it's more like

reaching for a Gift

with my heart

A Wordless bending

of my full self

Like a dancer's stretch

toward a warm current of divine energy

trying to reconnect with

the Source

recharging

Sometimes it is movement, a dance

a word, a song

a visit to jail or the garden

I feel it,

like the Old Monk,

cleaning dishes, washing toilets

watch closely

the saints, the monks, the small children

and see how

to make life, itself, our prayer

  

The Rhythm of Prayer

 

beyond the wireless Babel

the assembly line of frenetic

double minded multi-tasking

the icloud storage, almost full

the race of time

accelerated by Empire

anxious and ambitious accumulation

what priceless our minutes make

our rush renders worthless

Prayer is dying to Time

living in Eternity

the glacial pace of monastic solitude

Hours stretch into a lifetime

of slow reading, and re-reading

the smell of books waiting like old friends

room enough to stretch and breathe

and leap wildly into the

rejoicing air

Where there is no Time

there is the Rhythm of Prayer

 

Freedom's Prayer

 

As I stand in Court

next to this suffering soul

awaiting judgment, I pray:

Let me feel his fear,

Let me own his suffering as mine own,

Let me hold his anxious hand,

like a my own child,

Let me take his place,

and feel the full weight

of his punishment

Let him go free, and walk

in Sunlight and Mercy

As I take his chains

upon my wrists and around my ankles

For this is my only path

to Freedom.

Scott Holmes, 2015

End the War on Drugs, Imagine the Exit Strategy - A Speech before the Durham Human Relations Commission

Speech before the Durham Human Relations Commission

February 27, 2015

Introduction by Commissioner Foster

Scott Holmes is presently professor of law at North Carolina Central University where he teaches appellate advocacy, trial advocacy, criminal procedure and supervises the Civil Litigation Clinic. The North Carolina Civil Litigation Clinic handles a variety of cases including housing, unemployment benefits, and police misconduct cases. He is also an adjunct professor of Restorative Justice at Guilford College in Greensboro, where he teaches a class on diverting people from the prison pipeline with restorative justice. He is concerned with the way our justice system harms poor and vulnerable members of our community including children, immigrants, and the mentally ill. He also works to challenge racial disparities in housing practices and in the justice system. Having represented protesters, preachers, and panhandlers, Scott works to empower and amplify marginalized voices in our community. He lives in Durham with his wife, Kerry, his four kids, and three dogs.

 

Introduction

Commissioner Foster, Councilman Moffit, esteemed Commissioners and members of the Durham Human Relations Commission, honored friends and fellow guests,

I am thankful for this invitation to share some thoughts on human relations in Durham on this auspicious occasion awarding some of Durham finest leaders in the area of human relations. When they asked me to speak, I asked them multiple times if they were sure because you never know what you are going to get. Also, at this time when law professors at public law schools are being targeted for their speech, I have to say that I am not speaking on behalf of NCCU law school, or any other group. Tonight I speak for myself. I am so honored to come before you and share some thoughts on human relations in this important historical venue, the Hayti Heritage Center.

Tonight we will have the opportunity to honor Wanda Boone, founder of Durham Together for Resilient Youth, for her work helping steer our children away from drugs, alcohol, and other challenges which sabotage young lives. We honor the Genesis Home, for his work helping families out of homelessness with technical assistance, individualized case management, and circles of support.  We also honor, Brenda Howerton, Vice Chairman of the Durham County Commission, who will receive the human rights award for her tireless service in a variety of human rights areas. We will also honor our young leaders, Sary Martinez for her amazing individual journey and her work welcoming immigrant youth, and Vernodo Garcia-Carrol for his community work promoting civil engagement.

          In addition to these specific awards, our own Durham Human Relations Commission deserves an award for their remarkable work in the last year conducting hearings on racial profiling in our police department and issuing their thoughtful report.  Even a cursory glance at human relations in Durham reveals a wealth of rich leadership, movements, personalities, and people dedicated to improving human lives. There are so many people in Durham working hard for human relations that you can hardly throw a stone in public without hitting one of them.

The Story of Written Consent and the FADE Coalition

This richness is illustrated by the role our Human Relations Commission played in the City Council’s consideration of racial disparities in policing. A coalition of Durham organizations came together around the issue of racial profiling in Durham. These organizations included, but were not limited to, SpiritHouse, Southern Coalition for Social Justice, the Durham NAACP, Neighborhood Allies of Durham, Durham Congregations in Action, Durham CAN, Durham Committee on the Affairs of Black People, Durham People’s Alliance, George H. White Bar Association, Southerners on New Ground (SONG), Action NC, North Carolina Public Defender’s Committee on Racial Equity, and the Rutba House. Friends and colleagues such as Commissioner Diane Standaert, Daryl Atkinson, Ian Mance, Jonathan Wilson-Hartgrove, Nia Wilson, Tia Hall, Dave Hall, Rafiq Zaidi, Candace Rashad,  Omar Beasley, and others who came together to develop a strategy for changing police practice in Durham. They gathered under the umbrella of a coalition called FADE, Fostering Alternatives to Drug Enforcement. FADE issued recommendations. Five of their most important recommendations included: mandated written consent forms for all vehicle consent searches; de-prioritization of misdemeanor marijuana enforcement; periodic review of racial disparities in officer stop data; reformation and strengthening of the Durham Civilian Police Review board; and formal racial equity training.

          The local FADE coalition collected statistical analysis clearly demonstrating racial disparities in consent searches at traffic stops. We learned that police have requested people of color for consent to search at traffic stops at rates far higher than traffic stops involving white people. The statistics also showed a very lot hit rate for drugs or contraband. This means that many innocent people of color were targeted for searches with no results. We represented victims of police misconduct in court, collected evidence of misconduct, and told individual stories of people who are victims of racial profiling and excessive force. Ministers, organizers, statistical and policy analysts, and lawyers brought their skills together to make racial profiling visible and offer concrete solutions. In our public discussion we heard from our Chief of Police, from our City Manager, and from our concerned citizens. We engaged in contested and difficult conversations about race, police practice, and our values in Durham which resulted in the adoption of a police policy requiring written consent to search. We are now receiving regular reports from our Police Department on the racial disparities in our police practices. I am proud to be a part of this courageous community facing directly the issue of race in our justice system, engaging in difficult conversations which are resulting in concrete, innovative policies. Our work here is an example for other communities facing the same problems.  The way our community brought the issue of racial profiling to the leaders on the City Council, and the way the Human Relations framed the difficult discussion, leading to specific and concrete advancements, serves a model to the rest of North Carolina and the rest of the Country as we all struggle with these racial disparities.

Where do we go from here? End the War on Drugs

          So where do we go from here? I say, we should call an immediate end to the “War on Drugs” in Durham. We have lost this self-defeating War on Drugs and we must begin imagining an exit strategy. This War has not made us safer. This War has not reduced the amount of drugs on our streets. And yet, it has inflicted numerous casualties against our own citizens. This War was ill conceived and misguided from the start. For, there is really no such thing as a “War on Drugs.” There is only War against people. Drugs are things, inanimate objects. This War is against human beings. War involves the destruction of human lives. And that is what we have witnessed in the War on Drugs - the destruction of human lives.

          Our first mistake in the war on drugs was concentrating the War in poor communities of color. While studies showed that two thirds of all crack users were white, not one white person had been prosecuted for crack in Los Angeles as of 1995. The War on Drugs was really a War on poor communities of color. Declared as we were exiting from the segregation battles of Jim Crow, the War on Drugs became the new form of racialized coercion and social control – a New Jim Crow. (Many of us are reading that excellent book by Michelle Alexander in Durham this month) The media campaign against drugs portrayed the stereotypical drug user as a black crack addict when studies showed the demand for drugs came primarily from the white majority. Our police have therefore targeted people of color more often for drug investigations. For example, our police set up undercover drug transactions in more often in poor communities of color, and not on Duke’s campus or other more affluent parts of our community. Our City police have recently reported that 86% of their marijuana arrests were for people of color.

Not only are people of color targeted at a higher rate for drug investigations, their sentences are disproportionately longer than white offenders. Because crack appeared to be prevalent in communities of color we passed harsh mandatory sentencing laws which punished crack at a rate of 100 times when compared with powder cocaine.  Powder cocaine was viewed as the drug of choice for affluent whites, and crack was viewed as the drug of choice for poor people of color. This means that a black teenager with crack weighing about as much as a candy bar would face a ten year mandatory minimum sentence.  To get the same sentence, a white person would have to possess about 12 pounds of powder cocaine.  Scientifically there was no difference in the addictiveness or harmfulness of the two, the only difference was baking powder. Our federal law allows for mandatory life sentences for some non-violent drug offenses depending on the amount of drugs. As a result more people of color were not only unfairly targeted for prosecution at higher rates, and they also faced disproportionately longer sentences. More black people go to jail for drugs, and black people face longer jail sentences than similarly situated white people. Our racial history permeated the investigation, prosecution, and sentencing of black people, tilting the scales of justice irrevocably against people of color.

Our second mistake in the War on Drugs was the militarization of this war. In one generation the image of the ideal law enforcement officer shifted from the Andy Griffith who used personal relationships to work out community problems, to the SWAT team. Armored vests, armored vehicles, flash grenades, bullet proof vests, assault rifles became a normal part of communities that felt more like occupied territories than local neighborhoods.  For every high capacity magazine on the street, the police needed greater capacity. For every armor piercing bullet, the police needed better armor. We have watched our inability to regulate guns lead to an arms race on the streets.

As an aside, how is it that we can regulate motor vehicles requiring a driver’s test, a license, accident insurance, and an entire regulatory scheme of motor vehicle laws to insure safe operation, but we cannot do the same for guns? It makes no sense that I can get a gun without a license, insurance, test, or strict regulations for its use? And yet, we are asking our police to face these risks on the street. 

Our third mistake was to turn the War on Drugs was turning it into a profit making endeavor - War profiteering on the War on Drugs. We took advantage of federal grants to arm our officers in the war on drugs, and needed to generate drug arrests to justify the grant money. We reported drug arrests in order to justify more federal money to get more drug arrests. We applied forfeiture laws to seize cars, houses, cash from poor folks arrested in tough neighborhoods as part of the spoils of War. As a result the Prisoners of the War on Drugs feed a billion dollar Prison Industrial Complex which regards these poor people of color as a “Revenue stream.” This Billion dollar prison industry employs lobbyists to lower the age of adulthood and lengthen criminal sentences in order to increase their profits and pad their bottom line by increasing the number of prisoners around the country. It is a fact, made more painful by our history of slavery, that the War on Drugs has become yet another way for rich people to profit on black flesh in chains.  The War on drugs is a three headed monster, yet another manifestation of the intertwined horrors of racism, materialism, and militarism in our midst.

The Battle of Cheek Road

I encountered this three headed monster in all its ferocity on February15, 2002 when I was a new public defender here in Durham. I was watching the nightly news when I saw reporters live at the scene of a drug raid at Cheek Road apartments. Mayor Bell was there at the scene, talking about the need to rid our community of drugs. The Police Chief was there. Officer Green made arrangements for the local ABC affiliate to stand alongside of police as the busted into homes, entering the homes of residents as police raided apartments.  There were 111 apartments at Cheek Road. The police showed up with hundreds of officers from Durham City Police, Durham County Police, and the State Bureau of Investigation.  There were two National Guard helicopters spot lighting people on the ground. There were also media helicopters in the air. At eight o’clock the police sealed all the entrances to the apartment complex, conducting traffic stops of everyone who tried to leave. No one was free to go. The City Government called it “ TAPS” – “The Aggressive Police Strategy.” They battered down doors, threw “flash bangs” into apartments where they knew small children were living. They only executed 3 search warrants, entering many other homes without warrants. The chased a thirteen year old boy into this apartment where they searched him at gun point in front of his mother.  It was a military operation, an invasion of a poor community of color.

I was horrified the next night, February 16, 2002, when they returned to the same complex and did it again. They invaded 4 more apartments with search warrants using the selective enforcement team (SET team), riding in an unmarked black van, wearing unmarked black body armor, helmets, masks, and pointing semi-automatic weapons and shot guns.  Once again they chased the same thirteen year old child back into his apartment and held him at gunpoint. This time he was hospitalized for shock. By the end of the two night invasion, the police had entered each one of the 111 apartments even though they only had 7 search warrants. They claimed that all the residents gave “consent” to search their homes.  A Judge later held that any consent was “coerced” and that the entire invasion was unconstitutional. The minor drug charges arising from this invasion were dismissed. The invasion of Cheek road embodied everything that was wrong with our militarized war on drugs.

The Consequence of the War on Drugs

The consequence of this misguided War on Drugs is that certain parts of our community live in fear of the police. The children of Cheek road are ten years older. What do they think of our police? Because of the War on Drugs, the number of people in prison nationally has escalated from five hundred thousand to 2.3 million. The Prisoners of the War on drugs outnumber the entire population of some small countries. As a country that represents five percent of the world’s population, we house twenty five percent of the world’s prisoners.  More than sixty percent of Prisoners of the War Drugs are from poor communities of color.  The Prisoners of the War on Drugs are never completely free because their felony convictions follow them the rest of their lives, restricting their vote and keeping them unemployed.  The Prisoners of the War on Drugs are forever marginalized in our society. We have more black people under Government supervision today than there were slaves at the height of slavery, and more black men who cannot vote now than at the height of Jim Crow.  Our poor communities of color have been decimated by taking young black men out of our communities and making them criminals. Parents are divided from children, which only perpetuates the cycle of poverty. We have suffered immeasurable social and economic cost for making people convicted felons: the social marginalization, the loss of economic opportunity and labor productivity, the harm to the social fabric of families and communities.  Our police departments are built to aggressively search for drugs and are less well equipped to solve murders, property crimes - the historical and traditional role of law enforcement.

It’s not the fault of the police. How can we turn our police into drug soldiers and then complain that they use too much force? How can we order our drug soldiers into communities of color and then complain there are racial disparities in their arrests? It is our fault for allowing this self-defeating War on Drugs to continue for so long. We must find another way, or we are sentencing our community to more shame and destruction.

The Giant Triplets: Racism, Militarism, Materialism

In his speech at Riverside Church in New York City in 1967, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., identified the “giant triplets of racism, materialism, and militarism” as the greatest threats to justice in our society. Dr. King most famously grappled with racism in his movement for equality for people of color and the dismantling of American Apartheid. He spoke often of the way racism dehumanizes people of color.  Racism excludes some residents from the basic hallmarks of human dignity, while allowing other residents to enjoy the unearned advantages of these patterns of discrimination, whether we consciously discriminate or not. Racism is an insidious social disease infecting us all because we live in a post-Apartheid society that has never faced directly our racial divide. We have never looked in the mirror of a Truth and Reconciliation process the way South Africa did.

Dr. King also marched against poverty. He spoke incisively against the greed and materialism of our malignant capitalism which refuses to pay a living wage to poor people in order to line the pockets of the rich. At the end of his life, Dr. King was leading a poor people’s campaign to block streets in Washington and demonstrate that poor lives matter.

Also, as a gospel minister of non-violence, Dr. King taught us that militarism, the use of massive doses of force of violence to solve problems, only creates more problems. He saw our own government as the greatest purveyor of violence in our society. The social and economic resources need to cure the social disease of racism and lift us out of poverty with an annual minimum wage were being squandered in the nightmare of war and organized mass killing. He spoke clearly against war, showing its connection to both poverty and racism.

We see in this misguided and self-defeating War on Drugs the same malignant and monstrous giant triplets of Materialism, Militarism, and Racism. This three headed monster lurks the streets of Durham under the name of the War on Drugs. We see clearly now the racial aims of this war, the militarized nature of this war, and the profits of this war from the lives of poor people of color. It is time to declare defeat and imagine an exit strategy.

But how do we end this war, without leaving in its place yet another new monster of social control and decimation?

A Radical Revolution of Values

Dr. King called us to a “radical revolution of values.” He said “I am convinced that if we are to get on the right side of the world revolution, we as a nation must undergo a radical revolution of values. We must rapidly begin the shift from a "thing-oriented" society to a "person-oriented" society. When machines and computers, profit motives and property rights are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, materialism, and militarism are incapable of being conquered.”  “A true revolution of values will soon cause us to question the fairness and justice of many of our past and present policies.” He said that it is not enough to toss a coin to a beggar on the road to Jericho, but “the whole Jericho road must be transformed”  “True compassion is more than flinging a coin to a beggar; it is not haphazard and superficial. It comes to see that an edifice which produces beggars needs restructuring. A true revolution of values will soon look uneasily on the glaring contrast of poverty and wealth.” We cannot watch capitalists profiting on the black flesh from our neighborhoods and remain silent. “With righteous indignation,” we must look at the malignant capitalists profiting off our poor children of color, with “no concern for the social betterment” of our neighborhoods and say: "This is not just." This revolution of values will look at our police breaking into homes of people of color in riot gear and say "This is not just." It will look upon our City Police using a TASER gun against a minor and his father and say, “This is not making us more safe.” “A true revolution of values will lay hands on” the war on drugs and say of this war: "This violent and exploitative way of handling what is truly a mental health problem is not just." This business of throwing smoke bombs at citizens, taking hundreds of thousands poor black prisoners of war, filling our nation's homes with children orphaned by Prisoners of the War on Drugs, of sending men home from prison mentally handicapped, psychologically deranged, and forever marked by the scarlet letter of a felony conviction cannot be reconciled with wisdom, justice and love. A local government which continues year after year to spend more money on drug investigation, detention officers than educators, on armored vehicles than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death. Do we pay federal detention officers more than we pay elementary school educators? How can we spend 30,000 a year to house an inmate instead of investing in their employment, education, and mental health?

The Exit Strategy

Let Durham become the first city in America to officially declare the end of the war on drugs. Let's begin to imagine and implement the exit strategy. What I have in mind is not surrender to open air drug markets, or acquiescence to the infestation of drugs in our community. No, what I am imaging is a way of dealing with drugs as a public health problem rather than a criminal problem.  Arresting a 16 year old for possessing less than half an ounce of marihuana is like punishing a sick person for being ill. As other States legalize marijuana it becomes increasingly absurd to impose long sentences for drug trafficking here while companies are getting rich in Colorado for the same conduct. And, the long term economic effect of imposing a criminal record on our child is catastrophic to our struggling communities. Let's invest in treatment.  Let's provide restorative circles of support and accountability. Let's provide jobs. A summer jobs program for youth in high risk neighborhoods in Chicago provided a 25 hour a week job at minimum wage, resulting in a 43% drop in violent crime. When white people were suffering massive unemployment during the depression our government invested in public works programs to put them to work. Let's invest in our youth and provide meaningful, living wage jobs.  When Portugal decriminalized all drugs more than a decade ago, drug use was reduced in half. According to many sources, including Forbes magazine, Portugal’s experiment shifting from penalties to treatment has been an overwhelming success. Drug treatment is cheaper and more humane than prison.

In addition to investing in the health and economics of our struggling communities, let’s re-purpose and de-militarize our police department. Look at our police budget. We pay more for drug investigators than we do homicide investigators. Let’s shift most of the money we are paying for drug investigation to violent crime, property crimes, and white collar crime.  Let’s have our police trained as community mediators and ask them to resolve conflicts instead of making drug arrests.  The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime has found international consensus around the idea that drugs are a matter of public health, and that police should focus on community policing, mediation, deferral programs, and restorative conferencing.  Imagine our police as positive role models, mediators.   

Think about the thousands of dollars our Durham Police Department spends paying addicts in our community to set up undercover drug transactions.  Let’s imagine that instead of giving that “snitch” a couple of hundred dollars to make a drug arrest, we gave her a job with a living wage and health care to help treat depression and addiction. Right now, we give an addict a few hundred dollars to help us arrest another addict. Let’s stop treating these folks as means to an end, and embrace and support their full humanity.

One of the areas of greatest hope in my work is in the area of Restorative Justice. This is an international movement that imagines the resolution of conflicts and crime in a way that is more healing and less harmful. Our retributive system of crime and punishment should be restricted to our most serious violent crimes. Our court system is a hammer. And when all we have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail. Let's put away the hammer, and reserve its use for violent crime and stop prosecuting low level drug offenses. People should not go to Durham County Jail for less than half an ounce of marijuana, or failure to have insurance on their car, or having no operator’s license. People with mental illness need treatment, not jail. Children in trouble at school need guidance and support, not jail. We should move toward a system which asks the victim how they have been harmed and what they need for healing. We should ask the community what are the underlying causes of these crimes and how can we work together toward solutions for the root causes. We should ask offenders how they can heal the harm and best reintegrate into our community. At every stage of our criminal process from pre-arrest, to pre-guilt determination, to sentencing, post-conviction, and re-entry from prison – there is a more restorative process that heals the victim, involves the community, and holds the offender more accountable. Let’s imagine ways to replace our adversarial system of guilt and punishment, hammer and nail, with a more therapeutic and healing method.

Instead of suspending or expelling children, let’s use positive behavior interventions and supports and restorative justice and keep them in school.  One of the greatest risk factors for failure in our society is dropping out of school. We complain about the number of kids who are dropping out, and wring our hands to find solutions to the dropout rate.  I have a brilliant and time tested method of keeping kids in school – stop kicking them out! Let's work together to make Durham a place where every child gets three healthy meals for their body, and exemplary education for their mind, and dignity, equality, and freedom for their souls. Let’s begin by ending the war on drugs, and developing a humane exit strategy.

 

Please stop arresting people for non-violent crimes of poverty

Dear Prosecutor, Magistrate Judge, and District Judge:

I write to you as a concerned citizen reviewing the arrest list and recent occupants of the Durham County Jail for the last thirty days.

I think jail is on the whole and destructive and ineffective way of dealing with crime for minor, nonviolent crimes. I wish our police would not arrest people for such crimes and would issue citations instead. However, when they bring these cases to you I hope you will think about other ways of dealing with these problems rather than incarceration. Most people who commit crimes are victims of crimes, individual and social, that have led to hard circumstances.

In reviewing the list for the last thirty days, I’ve noted the following cases that seem to illustrate this problem:

·         It is horrible that people should go to jail for minor traffic offenses, particularly driving while license revoked. Jessie and Edwar spent 2 days in jail. Terry spent 9 days in jail. Deonte, Kelly, Keith, Chester, Tracy were arrested for driving while license revoked. Jessie spent time in jail for having no vehicle insurance.

·         Several people were charged with possessing less than half an ounce of marijuana: Maurice, William, Mark, Cortez, Phillip, and Craig.  Terrell spent 4 days in jail for less than half an ounce of marijuana and drug paraphernalia.

·         Lamar and David were arrested for possession of drug paraphernalia, but no other drugs.

·         Some people were arrested for resisting arrest, but no other charge. This is often a sign of police misconduct and abuse of authority. Christopher spent 3 days in jail, and Terri spent 5 days in jail for resisting. Others were arrested for resisting arrest, but no other charge including Dereese, Raymond, Benjamin, and Artezra.

·         Some people were arrested for minor theft or shoplifting including, Alvin, Richard, Deon, Malik,    Denise, Hiram, Jase, Dottie, and Wayne. Jerome spent 3 days in jail for shoplifting, and Otha spent 2 days for misdemeanor larceny.

·         Some people were arrested for minor trespass when they could have been given a citation, including James, Lydia, Toriko, Dominic, and May.

·         Joey spent 2 days in jail for consuming a malt beverage on city property

·         Michelle spent 5 days in jail for possession of marijuana and shop lifting

·         It also appears that Christian, a minor, was arrested for disorderly conduct at school. Court referrals from school have increased significantly in the last few years and represent a criminalization of children. We can do better with our kids, and don’t need jail to help them learn and grow into our community.

It is hard to calculate the social cost of sending someone to jail because we do not ask or document whether the person lost a job, lost custody of their kids, failed to make rent, didn’t get a job, got kicked out of school or training. The collateral consequences of incarceration do far more harm than good for these minor-nonviolent offenses.  Also, many of them are related to poverty which suggests that we are criminalizing poverty.

Please encourage police to issue citations if they must bring these cases to court, that is a less harmful and more restorative approach to these kinds of social problems.

Thank you
Scott Holmes

Denial, Minimization, Avoidance, Diversion in response to "Black Lives Matter"

       Since my last post, I have received many questions and appreciated feedback from my friends from all walks of life and many perspectives. I have felt led to continue this hard conversation about racial inequality in our criminal justice system.

I was disappointed to read the guest column of Bob Wilson on January 2, 2015 in which he claimed that the real issue is not racial inequality in the criminal justice system, but instead, “black on black crime.” He characterized this as a “Civil War” in the black community and minimized the problem of racial inequality in the criminal justice system. (http://www.thedurhamnews.com/2015/01/02/4438124_bob-wilson-black-on-black-is-the.html?rh=1)

          Mr. Wilson wants avoid the difficult conversation about the reality of racial inequality in our courts. He called “police attacks on communities of color” as “rare as they are regrettable.”  While admitting that there was real violence against black people during slavery and Jim Crow, he says not anymore: “That isn’t today’s America.”  His response to the plea for Black Lives is “Yes, but, all lives matter.”

This retort denies and avoids the centuries of racial pain and suffering expressed in the declaration that “Black Lives Matter.” When I say that “Black Lives Matter” he seems to hear “White lives don’t matter.”  Here, Mr. Wilson has become defensive, and cannot critically examine the painful truth of how our society systematically values black lives less than white lives. On any measure of social health, education, housing, health care, employment, wealth, access to justice, and life expectancy, people of color suffer inequality when compared with white people. Racial inequality in wealth is worse now than in the 1950s.

My white children have unique privileges and protections as a simple result of the color of their skin. My child will largely escape being unfairly suspended at school because of their race. Because of the color of their skin, my child is less likely to encounter demeaning and discouraging remarks from adults in authority. My child is likely to have more opportunities at school, avoid diversion to less quality classes, and escape being labeled “at risk.”  My child is more likely to graduate from high school. If my child goes to college, they will have more financial opportunities to pay for it. The predominantly white institutions my child may attend will not subject them to increased police surveillance and the higher risk of stop, search, and seizure. My child is less likely to be denied a job, or the opportunity to rent an apartment because of race. If my son or daughter wants to buy a house, it is more likely they will pay a lower interest rate on their mortgage because of their race.  These positive outcomes for my child does not take away from their hard work, intellect, or talent; however, no matter how smart or gifted my children are, the loving culture and institutions give them a head start and erect fewer barriers toward their success. The statistically better outcomes that white children experience over their black and brown peers is a reflection of a broken, racist system, and not on their merit.

One of the most persistent, and dangerous, differences for whites and people of color are our individual and collective experiences with the police and the criminal justice system.  Black and brown individuals stopped for a speeding ticket are more likely to be unfairly searched for drugs than a white driver. The Durham Human Relations Commission has recently found, as a fact, that the Durham Police engage in racial profiling. (http://www.wral.com/report-racial-bias-exists-within-durham-police-department/13611396/ ).

In one of my recent cases, the Durham Police TASERed a black child for no reason. (http://www.thedurhamnews.com/2015/01/06/4451421/family-takes-complaint-to-police.html) The rate of investigation, arrest, and incarceration for black people is much higher than it was in the 1950s. People of color in our community are the victims of police use of force at a greater rate than white people. Why is that? 
Many citations and arrests occur as a result of proactive police investigations, police out looking for potential violations of the law. The problem with racial profiling is that police are spending too much time fishing in the poor communities of color, when studies show there is just as much crime happening in white communities. When was the last time you heard about a major undercover drug operation on Duke campus or in an affluent white neighborhood? Statistically speaking there is as much- if not more- drugs there too. At its core, the racial injustice in our criminal justice system is that our laws are not being equally applied to people regardless of their race.  If the justice system is a hammer, it pummels black and brown lives more often and much harder than white lives.

Mr. Wilson’s claim that the real issue is “black on black crime” and that there is a “civil war” within the black community is most disturbing. Noting that 93% of black homicides were committed by other blacks, Mr. Wilson concludes that the “real war” is a “civil war” in the black community. This is a particularly insidious form of diversion because it redirects the focus from the underlying causes of racial inequality by blaming poor communities of color for the effects of racial injustice. By rhetorical sleight of hand, Mr. Wilson moves the spot light from the underlying causes of systematic racial inequality by blaming the people suffering from the manifestations of this inequality.

This argument simultaneously reinforces dangerously false racial media images of the “violent black man.” Mr. Wilson has erred in his selective statistical narrative, and would rather talk about the crimes of black people than the systematic criminal injustice in our policies and government. He fails to mention that 84% of the white homicides were also committed by other whites. And yet no white person would seriously contend there is an ongoing “civil war” in the white community. That is absurd. It is just as absurd to claim there is a “civil war” within the black community.

This absurdity illustrates the cognitive distortions that arise in our thinking when we see the world through our racial lens. This thought betrays a deeply embedded racialized view of our community.  It uncritically accepts racial segregation within our community as a historical and acceptable status quo: there is a “black community” and a “white community” and they are separate. This idea of a “black civil war” also falsely portrays individual criminal acts as actions of the entire black community. This reinforces false stereotypes of race by confusing criminal acts with racially motivated hate crimes. A police killing as a result of racial profiling is a different kind of crime, a hate crime based on racial prejudice. Racially motivated killings receive greater punishment in our criminal justice system because they are really acts of terrorism on a vulnerable group motived by race. When police unlawfully target people on the basis of their color and then detain, search, harass, beat, TASER and kill those people - this creates a fear of unlawful State sponsored violence against people of color. This differs in kind and in quantity from the individual acts of “black on black” crime Mr. Wilson is calling a “civil war,” and yet he implicitly tries to equate the two. These kinds of arguments divert the conversation away from an important critical discussion of systematic racial inequality in police behavior, and reinforce false racial visions of our community.

This idea of a “black civil war” also refuses to see our community as a whole, a beloved community.  Yes, there are criminals hurting and killing our black and white brothers and sisters.  When searching for crime, Durham Police are unfairly targeting innocent people of color for stops, searches, and acts of violence when they should be working to gain the trust of communities and solve violent crimes.  We cannot have a conversation about racial reconciliation if we are viewing each other as separate. 

Another disturbing aspect of Bob Wilson’s argument is how it acknowledges that police kill people of color, but tries to avoid this problem by 1) blaming the victim, 2) minimizing our oversight responsibility to govern the police, and 3) changing the subject entirely by pointing to crimes of black individuals. This kind of thinking glosses over our collective responsibility for the actions of our police. They work for us. As our public servants, paid by our tax dollars and governed by our elected leaders, the police are killing people in our name. The Police practice of racially selective surveillance, detention, and use of force leaves the blood of black lives on our public hands. And who can we call when the police commit a crime? No one. There is a persistent refusal to charge police with crimes, and a myriad of economic and legal barriers to holding them accountable in civil court.

There is no one in the Durham Police Department or District Attorney’s office talking about arresting the officer for unlawfully assaulting my black child client who was TASERed by a Durham Police Officer. He probably did not miss a pay check for his unlawful conduct.

          We would rather criticize the protesters than hear their message. Mr. Wilson and others say the protests are a “war on the police.” Some say the protesters are inciting violence against the police and supporting physical attacks on the police. They intentionally confuse legitimate criticism with violent physical attacks. When I say “Black Lives Matter,” these folks hear “police are bad, so hurt them.” This is failure to hear what I am saying about racial inequality, which effectively denies the problem.  This is a defensive reaction that feels the need to defend police at all cost, rather than critically examine the specific racial disparities in police practice.  These folks would rather defend the good officers than have a hard conversation about how the whole system is infected by racial inequality.

This reaction has taken on some bizarre manifestations of late. The police in New York have engaged in a work stoppage as a protest and have stopped making “unnecessary arrests.” (Which begs the question why they are arresting people unnecessarily to begin with?) The police turned their back on the Mayor for admitting he has had to talk to his son of color about the risks he faces, and “It should be self-evident, but our history requires us to say that black lives matter.”  The police complain when someone on the street disrespects their authority, and then do exactly that. When the protesters criticized their poor behavior, the police of New York City intentionally behaved worse – disregarding the law and their duty. In so doing they exhibited the kind of arrogance of power that is a symptom of the unhealthy police blue-wall culture.

When the Mayor said “black lives matter,” the police heard “All police are bad.” But that is not what we are saying. We are trying to have a broader conversation about racial inequality as it is expressed in police power.

It is easier to talk about sticks, stones, and graffiti than systemic racial inequality. I hear comments like, “I may agree with the protesters message, but they shouldn’t disrupt traffic.” This kind of complaint is a way to dismiss content by criticizing form. It also forgets our long history of protest and civil disobedience. Jim Crow would not have fallen without sit-ins. Have we truly forgotten how disruptive the civil rights era protests were? We all need to spend some time in front of the new Durham Civil Rights Mural on the wall next to the Arts Council until we know all of the stories depicted. (We also need to raise money for its completion)

Change is disruptive. As a Quaker, I am committed to non-violence, and so I personally abhor any act of violence toward the police. And yet, I understand the frustration of a young person hurling a stone at a protest much more than I understand a trained professional police officer unlawfully TASERing a black child.

Chief Lopez has engaged in this “criticize the protester” form of avoidance and denial when he characterized protesters as “outside agitators” and complained that the cost of police work for protests were diverted money away from solving crimes. You only have to look at the addresses printed in the news of the people arrested to see they are from the Triangle. And the hundreds of other people who have protested without being arrested are also from our area. This “outside agitator” argument is an effort to say that people in Durham are really fine with the police, it is other people who are complaining and it’s none of their business.  This was a diversion and avoidance tactic used often by white supremacists during the civil rights movement to suggest that no members of the community were concerned with racial equality.  The truth is that the Human Relations Commission found racial profiling in the Durham Police Department after public hearings. The truth is we have a problem and people in Durham care a lot about how the police are functioning.

     Chief Lopez’s complaint about how much money the protests cost is also a diversion and a sad comment on his attitude about the freedoms of our Constitution.  Silence is cheaper. A system that does not allow criticism is more efficient. But democracy requires protest and critical examination of government policy. It must be a hard time for police at to be the center and focal point of the criticism, and I am sure Chief Lopez would rather concentrate on other duties than to keep people safe during these protests against the police. But, it is the job of our police officers to protect our right to peacefully protest, even if they disagree with the message that “Black Lives Matter.” Our First Amendment rights cannot be reduced to the cost of policing protests. Complaining about the cost of protests belittles the freedom of our democracy.

So I make a plea to Mr. Wilson, Chief Lopez, and others to stop denying or minimizing the problem of racial inequality. If you are still in the denial phase, go read peer reviewed studies about racial disparities in education, housing, employment, education, health care, and criminal justice. Hear the pain behind the plea for black lives before you dismiss it and try to change the conversation.

          When I say “Black Lives Matter” I am trying to have a conversation about deeply rooted systematic racial inequality in our systems of government. I am not personally attacking police officers or saying all police are bad. I respect and honor the hard working men and women who risk their lives to keep my family safe, and handle horrible situations beyond my imagination in the late night.

          What are afraid of? Why do we engage in denial and avoidance when it comes to hard conversations about race? We are afraid because we don’t want to admit how deeply our own lens is infected by the disease of racism. We don’t want to see how deeply we are complicit in these unfair systems. We want to believe that everything is equal. We want to think there is equal opportunity.  We want to see the world as a place where all people have the same level of comfort, safety, and opportunity as we do.  We don’t want to face the possibility that our wealth, comfort, and opportunity have come at the cost of another’s suffering. I know that the racially discriminatory application of the GI Bill and the national racial housing policies of the Federal Housing Administration gave my poor share-cropping grandfathers an opportunity for education and building wealth that helped them escape poverty, leaving most of their black peers behind. It is hard for me to face that my own education and wealth are the product of this history of white supremacy. But, we will never get past denial and avoidance as individuals or as a community until we face these truths and engage in the hard and messy racial conversations.

In the process we must be gentle with ourselves and others. Judgment, blame, and name calling only reify racial oppositions. Great compassion toward ourselves and each other is required. So is great courage. The work of reconciliation is a process of owning the Truth of racial inequality and working with compassion to support the dismantling of racism together.

Scott Holmes

With assistance from Amelia O’Rourke-Owens

Durham Residents, Attorneys, and Quakers

We are trying to organize our community to read the New Jim Crow, Michelle Alexander, and conduct study groups in February. Here are some good study guides:

New Jim Crow Website 

http://newjimcrow.com/take-action/study-guides

 

Anne Braden 

http://anne-braden.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/New-Jim-Crow-Book-Discussion-Kit.pdf

 

Quaker - American Friends Study Guide

https://afsc.org/document/study-guide-new-jim-crow

 

Jewish Currents 

http://jewishcurrents.org/jewish-study-guide-new-jim-crow-29393

 

Unitarian Universalists 

http://www.uua.org/documents/lfd/commonread/crow_discussion.pdf

 

Samuel Dewitt Proctor - Baptist Church affiliation - unfortunately they are charging $14 for the guide

https://org2.salsalabs.com/o/5955/t/17034/shop/item.jsp?storefront_KEY=538&t=&store_item_KEY=1825

 

Kansas African American Affairs Study Guide

http://www.kaaac.ks.gov/docs/default-source/documents/the-new-jim-crow-tool-kit.pdf?sfvrsn=0

Some recommendations to the City Council: http://www.southerncoalition.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/HRCDPDreport.pdf