Katelyn’s Reviews > The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness > Status Update

Alexander acknowledges the influence of implicit bias on associating blacks and browns with crime, she does not discuss the next obvious question: are we and the system then racist even if we aren’t trying to be? Obviously the intent and tactics used to enforce the association was racist, but if we/our system perpetuates that subconsciously, are we then all racist?

Summary of Alexander’s claim of conspiracy: that the Reagan admin declared the war on drugs, gave extra resources to police dept’s that were complicit, and then made propaganda emphasizing crack users/dealers as the main target.

Claims that most illegal drug use and distribution happens in ghetto is myth- makes no mention of controlling for drug rates per capita in other areas (ex: you’re telling me that in one square mile of rural they use as much drugs as one square mile of city). Also makes no mention of different policing. Harder to police 50 miles of rural to find drugs than 50 miles of city? (Not saying racism doesn’t play in here)

I agree that having 4th A rights stripped is not cool. However, these people (though wrongfully searched) were found to be breaking the law. So is the issue really with the 4th A being breached, or is the issue that the 4th A prevents due process (as in if a criminal is breaking the law, they just have to do it smartly so as to not get caught). Maybe the issue is the 4th A only always stupid criminals to get caught.

Chapter 1- I’m unclear how the conclusion was drawn that the War On Drugs is a race issue over a poverty issue. Alexander makes that claim but I don’t see how it is justified by her data? How is it that only Blacks had access to crack cocaine, and not poor whites as well? Is it because the neighborhoods were already segregated? And if that’s true, the neighborhoods were already disproportionately patrolled?

Review in progress:

Intro- be warned that while this book covers a really important topic, no author or social position is devoid of bias and the means to misinterpret data to prove their point. This book is no different. I really wanted to back this book 100% because I believe in its message, but that would be irresponsible on my part.