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.
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
Anne Braden
Quaker - American Friends
Study Guide
Jewish Currents
Unitarian Universalists
Samuel Dewitt Proctor -
Baptist Church affiliation - unfortunately they are charging $14 for the guide
Kansas African American
Affairs Study Guide
Some recommendations to the City Council: http://www.southerncoalition.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/HRCDPDreport.pdf
