Secondary Source Blueprint of Alexander’s Argument

I. Citation:

Alexander, Michelle. The New Jim Crow. The New Press, 2011.

II. Thesis:

Alexander’s Thesis:

We have not ended racial caste in America; we have simply redesigned it (Alexander 2).

This book argues that mass incarceration is, metaphorically, the New Jim Crow and that all those who care about social justice should fully commit themselves to dismantling the new racial caste system. Mass incarceration—not attacks on affirmative action or lax civil rights enforcement—is the most damaging manifestation of the backlash against the Civil Rights Movement (Alexander 11).

My Words: Michelle Alexander argues that the system of mass incarceration and the criminal justice system has replaced the Old Jim Crow as the “New Jim Crow.” Mass incarceration is the current (new) most harmful system in currently in place against the Civil Rights Movement. Systems like Jim Crow haven’d ended or disappeared, just redeigned with a fresh coat of paint.

III. Analysis:

-Introduction:

Michelle Alexander starts her book by recounting a generational restriction of the most basic freedom that democracy promises. Jarvious Cotton’s great-great-grandfather was a Slave. His great-grandfather was beaten dead by the KKK for attempting to vote. His grandfather was prevented from voting due to KKK intimidation. Then, his father was unable to vote due to poll taxes and literacy tests. Finally, Jarvious Cotton also had his right to vote taken away due to being labeled a felon and is now on parole. 

Alexander seems to be preventing the “New Jim Crow” with this “New Grandfather Clause” idea sorta. Originally if your grandfather could not vote, neither could you. With the system of mass incarceration, the cycle continues.

This is how Alexander’s first thesis ties in; “We have not ended racial caste in America; we have simply redesigned it (Alexander 2).” Nothing has truely ended or become void, it was simply been designed and rebranded.

Alexander uses her personal experience in the industry and field to build her persuasiveness and ethos on the matter. She recounts how she did not believe in the comparison that the “Drug War is the New Jim Crow.” She got a new job soon after as the Racial Justice Project of the ACLU in Northern California. Orginally, Alexander believed mass incarceration and the criminal justice system were just another system with racial bias problems. Once she left the ACLU, she discovered it was a beast of its own. The poster wasn’t random theory. We walk through her journey in building the connections and drawing the conclusion. It allows us to understand how Alexander reached the conclusion she did. How the argument became persuasive and why she must persuade us.

Then introducing the counterargument and doubts about this new racial caste system that exists in “contemporary” US.

Central to Alexander’s argument is the discussion of the Drug War. Adding in this history was to show that the government can choose the extent to which it punishes people. Alexander spoke of how even if it was supposed to be for the people it still gave a negative image to the community. With new images of “crack whores,” “crack dealers,” “crack babies,” (Alexander 6) and the CIA never denying claims, the theories presented about the true nature of the War on Drugs seemed to have some traction.

Alexander then compares the legal system to slavery and provides many statistics about incarceration. By using other countries as a scale in comparison to the US really puts into perspective how the US fails to address the injustice in the justice system and how much of a problme.

“Between 1960 and 1990, for example, official crime rates in Finland, Germany, and the United States were close to identical. Yet the U.S. incarceration rate quadrupled” (Alexander 7) and “One in three young African American men will serve time in prison if current trends continue” (Alexander 9). Both of these are evidence Alexander uses to further this point.

war on drugs history (using only part of history for a whole)

“What is key to America’s understanding of class is the persistant belif—despite all evidnce to the contrary—that anyone, with the proper discipline and drive, can move from a lower class to a higher class We recognize that mobility may be difficult, but the key to our collective self-image is the assumption that mobility is always possible, so failure to move up reflects on one’s character. By extension, the failure of a race or ethnic group to move up reflects very poorly on the group as a whole.” (Alexander 16)

This part of the text also puts into perspective how the system works in America. Eveyone has an equal chance, but if you fail to move up even with “equal” chance there clearly must be something wrong.

Alexander then introduces her thesis statement about what her book hopes to achieve.

“What this book is intended to do […] is to stimulate a much-needed conversation about the role of the criminal justice system in creating and perpetuating racial hierarchy in the United States” (19). will be.

Finally Alexander goes into what each chapter will dive into.

Chapter 1: briefly reviews the history of racialized social control and the US. How did we get here?

Chapter 2: The structure of mass incarceration, with focus on War on Drugs.

Chapter 3: The role of race in the US criminal justice system.

Chapter 4: How the caste system operates once people are released from prison.

Chapter 5: The many parallels between mass incarceration and Jim Crow.

Chapter 6: Reflects what acknowledging the presence of the New Jim Crow means for the future of civil rights advocacy

One thing we noted in class was how it only seems like Alexander cherry picks information rather than using the whole picture. Jarvious Cotton was incarcerated for murder, not just some petty crime, falsly convicted, or framed. Even when describing the War on Drugs, she doesn’t speak about the War on Poverty that preceded it, or why the criminal justice system isn’t on the rader for African American leaders.

-Chapter 5:

Uses Obama’s speak on missing father’s and this search for where black men have gone to set up the conversation of mass incarceration and the War of Drugs. Because no one had said anything regarding them in the conversation.

“The unfortunate reality we must face is that racism manifests itself not only in individual attitudes and stereotypes, but also in the basic structure of society.” (Alexander 184)

Alexander borrows from thoersit Iris Marion Young, who describes structural racism like a birdcage. Alexander does take into note that it may be difficult to understand structural racism, so she borrows the metaphor of a birdcage to help make structural racism more explicit for readers.

For the rest of Chapter 5, Alexander goes into the different headings and sections she puts into play. How it works speaks on how mass incarceration works to trap African Americans, Nothing New is a reminder that there is nothing new under the sun just renamed and remade, Mapping the Parallels talks on all the parallels between the New and Old Jim Crow, the limits of the analogy speaks on where the analogy don’t allign, and Fork in the road talks about how there countines to be a fork in the road with the issue at hand.

IV. Three Rhetorical Strategies:

1. Using a strong story as an opening that connects to the idea/argument presented.

Ex: Jarvious Cotton’s story (even if it was sort of falsly used)

2. Well seperated sections and good identification markers.

3. Personal shift on the argument. Why you didnt agree and why you do now, what convinced you.

-Pledge VVB