Sultan Knish/Daniel Greenfield Ping List (notification of new articles). FReepmail or drop me a comment to get on or off.
Posted on 09/26/2012 4:11:00 AM PDT by expat1000
This summer, Obama issued an executive order calling for equal outcomes in school discipline policies. A racial quota system for school bullies requires that disciplinary action be handed out on the basis of race which terminates any behavior-based school discipline system. But the movement for racially equivalent outcomes is going to bigger places than just your local elementary school.
Our criminal justice system punishes crimes based on the harm inflicted on the individual and on society. The redistributive racial justice approach adds another component whose goal is neither the punishment of individual or communal harm, but the balancing out of disparities in racial crime statistics. This can be achieved in one of two ways; either as with bullying, by racially selective punishments linked to a statistical quota or by criminalizing and prosecuting entire categories of offenses based on race.
New York State’s radical Attorney General, Eric Schneiderman, who during the election promised to give Al Sharpton his own office, has been restructuring the drug laws to produce racially equal outcomes. Schneiderman had waged war on the Rockefeller Drug Laws that cracked down on street drugs and pushed aggressively for drug laws that target white offenders by criminalizing prescription drugs.
I-STOP is Schneiderman’s solution, a drug database that monitors everyone’s prescriptions and intimidates doctors into not prescribing painkillers for suffering patients out of fear of criminal prosecution—all in the name of racial justice.
As one article boasts, “The theory behind I-STOP represents a sea change in how drug crimes are handled. Where the Rockefeller laws ended up criminalizing the actions of poor blacks and Hispanics, prescription-drug-monitoring programs like I-STOP are as likely to affect the wealthy as they are to affect the poor.”
Street drugs such as heroin and crack cocaine were heavily prosecuted, not for racial or class reasons, but because of the violent behavior and social problems of their users. Schneiderman’s efforts to decriminalize street drugs did nothing to help minority communities dealing with violent crime and serious social problems caused by drug use and drug trafficking. Dragging wealthy white people into court may make Sharpton’s Attorney General feel smug, but does not accomplish anything either.
I-STOP is part of a wave of racially redistributive measures whose goals go beyond equal access to the justice system and attempt to artificially achieve equal outcomes. Schneiderman’s efforts to shift drug abuse and drug dealing prosecutions from the ghetto to the medical office are an example of how the left uses crime statistics to artificially racially balance outcomes by cracking down on types of offenses based on the racial group statistically likeliest to be guilty of that offense.
This type of tinkering with the gears of the machine produces equal outcomes only by completely destroying the purpose and functionality of the justice system, turning it into a mechanism for imprisoning an equal number of black and white people in order to meet an ideological quota.
These efforts go beyond attempts at erasing disparities in stops, arrests, prosecutions, convictions and sentencings; instead recognizing that the only way to truly achieve equal outcomes is by rigging the game from the start. And beyond the inherent racism of a quota system for crime, the disruptive effects of a racial quota justice system will be far more devastating than even the lenient justice system of the seventies.
For example, while white people were more likely to be arrested as drug users (though not when accounting for the relative percentages of both groups in the population) the number of white and black drug dealers was nearly the same. Considering the dramatic difference in population sizes, the statistics showed that a far higher percentage of the black population is arrested for dealing drugs. If the racially redistributive solution is applied to this disparity, that would lead to drug users receiving heavier punishments than drug dealers to balance out the racial justice scales and achieve equal outcomes.
The traditional racially redistributive justice methodology focused on reducing enforcement, the new approach is not satisfied with decriminalization, but works toward the criminalization of white people. One example of this is the shift from a law enforcement focus on crack cocaine to methamphetamines which has resulted in a 21 percent drop in the number of black people convicted of drug offenses and a 42 percent increase in the number of white people convicted of drug offenses.
The hype over meth being the country’s single largest drug problems has been dealt with elsewhere, but what has not been addressed is the racial motive in promoting a shift from heroin and cocaine dealers and users to meth users and dealers as the leading causes of the country’s social and criminal problems. Part of that shift has been a conscious effort to reinvent drug use as a “hillbilly” or “redneck” social problem backed up by television shows and misleading statistics.
The actual number of meth users remains far lower than the number of cocaine and heroin users, but the war on meth has led right back to a war on prescription and even non-prescription medications.
As a Senator, Obama was one of the sponsors of the Combat Methamphetamine Epidemic Act. That name may not ring a bell, but it’s how cold and allergy medicines became criminalized, why you need photo identification to buy them and why buying more than a 30 day supply can bring a SWAT team to your door if you show up on the cold medicine registry.
A year after the Combat Methamphetamine Epidemic Act was passed; Tim Naveau was arrested in Illinois for buying the Claritin-D tablets that his son needed to take along with him to church camp. The arrest and humiliation of a man for buying slightly more allergy medication than the legal limit was another victory for the new racially redistributive war on drugs.
Racially redistributive justice efforts were unable to change the realities of drug use, so they refocused the drug war away from the crack den and aimed it at the local pharmacy. And the story doesn’t end there. Similar racial statistics are behind the law enforcement shift from stranger rape to date rape and from gangs to white collar crime. Offense categories where minorities score highest are being deemphasized in place of those where they score lower. The quotas for the justice system are being met at the cost of public safety and justice.
What, you mean to tell me this guy STILL hasn’t been impeached? How is that possible?
Social Justice & equal outcomes. Merit, behavior & character don’t matter. Just an extension of AA, quotas et al. This will spread to all aspects of our society. It is a direct war against whites and most don’t even know it.
It's pretty much a war against minorities, as well. No sane person wants to raise their children in an environment of rampant drug abuse and violent crime, yet these "social justice" advocates have no trouble whatsoever with condemning minority children to these environments.
I've heard but not seen evidence (other than the general Marxist agenda), that the planned endgame of RTTT is government deciding when the child is in around 2nd grade, what he/she will do for the rest of their life, and then putting them on the track to be trained only for that area.
Anyone have any more verifiable info on that?
There is a large segment of the black community who believe that whites commit just as many crimes as blacks, but are not prosecuted in equal numbers because of...wait for it..... institutional racism. The rampant, violent crime in most large, black neighborhoods should tell them that idea is false, but many agitators and activists have convinced many average blacks that the system is just racist, and powerful, greedy whites get rich by building prisons and filling them with young, black males. The “prison-industrial complex.” Don’t ask me how they could believe such a ridiculous thing, but many black do believe that to be true.
It’s a well-kept secret at LAUSD that black boys are more problematic than... well... anyone else. We talk about “inner-city schools” as a euphemism for black-n-hispanic, but when you start talking to teachers and administrators about which inner-city schools have the kinds of problems involving serious violence, they can all tell you which schools are on the list. If you ask “What’s the demographic,” then the truth comes out in lowered voice. It’s not the hispanic schools. We are a hispanic school with a handful of black students. The girls are very sweet, generally. But the boys, let me tell you... almost every one of them is a problem. I’m sorry, but it’s true. I can only think of one who was a sweetie all the way through. The others have Attitude, Attitude, Attitude. Against teachers, against other students, against each other... it’s bad.
I have a nephew who was raised by one of my overindulgent sisters. He was never disciplined and allowed to get away with everything. No spanking for him. Nobody could say anything to my sister about her darling's bratty behavior. He had problems adjusting to school (acting up and disobeying the teacher),and naturally my sister blamed it on the teachers. He grew out of it (he's very intelligent) and is now an investment banker. But no thanks to my sister who did not understand the value of discipline.
But how many boys who are not as smart or grow up with as much material things that my well-off sister was able to provide for her child get into trouble because their single mothers couldn't bear to discipline her darlings? We're still seeing the tragic consequences of the Great Society.
And that's fine. But the things men will put up with from a woman, they will NOT put up with from other men. Men have a code when dealing with each other, you see it in their sports, you even see it when they fight. Women have no code; our attitude is usually that we're going to do what we want. That's why women fighting is such a spectacle. It's truly a cat-fight, and there are no rules.
Single mothers cannot teach a boy how men deal with one another (well, some can, but they are rare.) These black women who pride themselves on their sassy black bitchiness are imprinting this mindset on their boys, who then go into the world unaware that there is a code among men.
That's my working theory right now.
And a darn good one it is.
But in this instance, when I yelled STOP, the half-hispanic boy instantly turned his back and started walking away, but the black boy attacked him from behind. This shocked me. That's something a girl would do, not a boy.
I got in there and he just kept trying to go right through me. Again, not something the boys usually do to a middle-aged woman.
Finally, as I dragged him away and escorted him up to the counselor, I told him "You do not attack from behind!" (I was just so appalled... I grew up in the midwest and I had really absorbed Wild West rules: you don't shoot a man in the back sort of Annie Oakley stuff, you know?)That boy argued with me all the way up three flights of stairs that he had a perfect right to attack till he was tired because the other boy took his ruler. "He touched my stuff, he put his hands on me, it was self-defense." This is just not how young men operate. They wouldn't even put it that way.
My experience with hispanic boys is that if they violate the internal code, they at least feel shame, hang their heads, mumble that they were just mad. But this boy's attitude was "You make me mad, I have the right to do whatever I please. You shouldn't have made me mad." That's a woman's attitude through and through. But it took me about 24 hours of pondering to figure out what was so "off" about his behavior.
Very interesting. I had not associated the restriction on decongestant purchase with the effort to re-jigger racial percentages in drug crime.
I have an “A-HA!” moment reading just about every column Daniel Greenfield writes, and almost always come away amazed at his insights into our modern problems.
He has a perspective that I don’t see from other writers and is able to connect elements that don’t seem related, like Sudafed and “racism,” in a way that is very enlightening.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.