 |
Story of the Jena 6: Racism’s Still Here |
 |
Today, around the nation, thousands of protesters will be demonstrating against the indictment of the Jena 6, and against the systemic, de facto racism that plagues America. If you haven’t heard of the Jena 6 story, then please read up (or listen up, or watch up).
The Jena 6 story is one that brightly outlines racism in this country. Although whites and those in the dominant group are very quick to say that racism doesn’t exist in the U.S., it does in fact touch lives in very real and very concrete ways. Nowadays, we’re so concerned with personal behaviors and experiences that it’s difficult to sit back and construct a real analysis of racial tensions in this country. This means trying to find out the objective situation of racism, which, if you’re in a powerful majority, may be a difficult investigation.
Being objective about racism is difficult because the bulk of racism that’s still around isn’t in individual prejudices or behaviors. The bulk of American racism is institutional, born and bred in the very structures with which we participate. It’s in our legal system, in our schools, and city geographies. At a time when in schools we attempt to reduce racism through subjective techniques (Jane Elliott’s exercise epitomizes this), objective facts of racism go unchecked, unchallenged, and unnoticed.
Situations like what’s happening in Jena — not to mention what happened two years ago during Hurricane Katrina — bring racial tensions to the forefront. Despite what individual conditioning has told us, there are racial distinctions that have implications at this place and point in time. As Cornel West says in his book with the same name, “Race Matters.” The founding documents of this country state that all [people] are created equal, but we know that everyone doesn’t have an equal chance and does not face the same kinds of oppression. We know that the law — against which the Jena 6 is being tried and convicted — has been constructed through racism.
In doing a little research for this article, I looked at which periodicals were picking up the Jena story in time for the protests. A few articles reported that the protests were occurring today, but note the tone of some of these headlines: “Civil ‘Jena Six’ town braces for rally” in USA Today, the newspaper with the widest national distribution. Note that USA Today uses the word “braces”, the same word used to describe an attempt to sustain something as damaging as weather phenomena.
“Protesters to Converge on Louisiana Town” announces the Washington Post. At the time of this writing, the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times have yet to publish stories, but CNN.com has, with this peculiar announcement: “U.S. Attorney: Nooses, beating at Jena High not related”. Not related? This is a case of rising racial tensions, and the activities that came together on this issue were not of single frames of time. Something else that’s seems oddly fitting is that this U.S. Attorney has been saying the two incidents aren’t related since July, and CNN has chosen to prominently announce this on the eve of nationwide protests.
I really didn’t think anyone would so flatly take the law’s side, but big media has proved me wrong once again. It took me a few more searches to find an article that dares to come out and say it outright. The Retriever Weekly, the student newspaper for University of Maryland, Baltimore County, (rightfully) shouts “The Jena 6 tragedy epitomizes American racism”. It’s worthy to note that UMBC has 40% minority enrollment, with a 15% African-American population.
Institutionalized racism only comes to the forefront when someone breaks the story, when someone can put two-and-two together. That arithmetic can’t always be done by someone whose group is doing the oppressing. However, now that this has garnered so much attention, media is forced to deal with it. This is in a large part thanks to the different voices coming out of the netroots. Presidential candidates too are being forced to address the issue, albeit some are taking this to be a rather isolated incident. I was particularly struck by Chris Dodd’s statement on the incidents:
The events in Jena, Louisiana are a sobering reminder that while segregation was outlawed long ago, de facto segregation in many parts of this country is still very real. No reasonable person would call what these young men have received ‘equal justice.’
De facto segregation is right, but fighting this racism isn’t the job of presidential candidates, or presidents for that matter. This is something the netroots, blacks, whites, and everyone needs to take to task.
Today, Thursday, September 20, wear black and green to show solidarity with the Jena 6. Sign the petition, attend vigils in your area, and pass out flyers. This is only one instant of a whole system of inequality. As long as institutional racism exists, we’re going to keep seeing blatant racism seep through the cracks. Let’s get at the heart of the problem.
“…No reasonable person would call what these young men have received ‘equal justice.’”
I’m curious, when an assault occurs in Jena what are the accused usually charged with?
In my opinion anyone who attacks somebody in this manner should be charged with a serious crime. If there is a disparity between how people with different colored skin are charged then that should be addressed. But these guys(if they participated) aren’t special and people shouldn’t confuse the issue of parity with the fact that there was a serious crime committed.
The answer is to beat up more innocent white guys.
Yes, but ‘equal justice’ isn’t being doled out. The white students hung nooses from a tree that they sat at and only were charged with three days of suspension. Later on, white students threatened black students with a shotgun. I repeat, with a shotgun, which they wrested away from the white student. The state didn’t charge the white student with anything (although he should have been charged with assault with a deadly weapon), but charged the black students with theft of a firearm, second-degree robbery, and disturbing the peace.
Crimes don’t occur outside of a sociohistorical context. The group in power also has the power to make choices of who they charge with a crime.
Interesting. I have been watching local Wash. DC news all morning and never got the full story. The accused students are being portrayed as heroic… Realistic?
“Later on, white students threatened black students with a shotgun…” “…charged the black students…”
I hadn’t read about that. Do you have any links to news articles?
Did the student who was attacked hang the nooses? Beating someone is serious- been in the wrong neighborhood a few times myself.
Did anyone actually think they were going to be lynched? I don’t think so- I think it was immature and possibly a threat of some sort that could be prosecuted but certainly not as serious as a beating.
The question here isn’t whether the black students are blameless, the question is whether they deserve a 2nd degree attempted murder charge for what was essentially a schoolyard fight. On top of that, there are questions as to why the white students who engaged in racism aren’t being punished in any way, with either hate crimes charges, dismissal from school, etc…
As for the news stories, there are links at the top of the article that have a lot more detail on the story. The NPR and DemocracyNow! pieces are longer and more in-depth, and the Wikipedia page cites about 40 news articles.
“Crimes don’t occur outside of a sociohistorical context”
Does anything? What does that mean anyway? Which societal forces are most important, which historical. How do you measure them?
“…whether they deserve a 2nd degree attempted murder charge for what was essentially a schoolyard fight…”
Really? Have you ever been beaten like that? How does the schoolyard location somehow lessen the fact that the kid was assaulted? If a group of people punch you(you personally), knock you out and kick you in the head in a schoolyard you won’t press charges? *News alert* being kicked in the head while unconscious can result in death.
“…why the white students who engaged in racism aren’t being punished in any way…”
That’s a scary sentence… racism isn’t a crime. They were suspended- I probably would have expelled them, of course I’d have to see the evidence first.
No, of course nothing happens outside of both a social and a historical context. But people tend to forget that in favor of looking at a single event as an isolated frame of time. You can’t “measure” them per se, like you would an event of natural sciences, for the very reason of them being in a social and historical context. That means we can’t exchange the state of whites and blacks. It means something very different to be black in America in 2007 compared to being white in America in 2007, not to mention being black in South Africa in 1978 or Native American in what was to be the U.S. in the 17th century.
You obviously haven’t read up on the story and don’t know the law. Hanging nooses from a tree in this context is in fact a hate crime.
More importantly, tensions had been flaring for months, and yet the authorities did nothing to calm them down until the assault happened. Those tensions included protests, racist speeches, and a few other fights.
“You can’t “measure†them per se, like you would an event of natural sciences, for the very reason of them being in a social and historical context”
Which means that using sociohistorical context to examine an event is subjective in the extreme. Which, to me, means that while it may have some value it’s not as important as the situational context.
“It means something very different to be black in America in 2007 compared to being white in America in 2007″
I get it, people experience life differently. People who participate in the same cultures generally have similar experiences.
“You obviously haven’t read up on the story and don’t know the law. Hanging nooses from a tree in this context is in fact a hate crime.”
You said they engaged in racism and weren’t punished.
Actually have been reading about this for a while. Most of the reporting is just people making allegations against each other.
So, then, the hanging of nooses. A hate crime or no?
For one, I am not saying that this is purely subjective. When I say that you can’t measure it like natural sciences means an empirical approach is incorrect. You need an objective approach that is more holistic, but does not also neglect the subjective.
Secondly, what I was getting at with the “it means something very different…” is about the kind of oppression that that person faces in that society. They experience it differently because it is objectively different; they face different situations, experience different loves and hates. You can’t make a statement that “people in the same cultures generally have similar experiences”, unless you’ve found a way to be a lot more omnipotent than the rest of us, or have a very narrow view of culture.
“…or have a very narrow view of culture.”
Are you talking about a person’s individual sociohistorical context or a groups’? If it is a group you already have to generalize just to define the group. If it’s an individual then I think it would be hard to apply a historical perspective to their actions.
“…about the kind of oppression that that person faces in that society”
So everyone experiences oppression? Are there different degrees? What is your definition of oppression?
“So, then, the hanging of nooses. A hate crime or no?”
If the law defines it as a hate crime then it is. Do I think it is? No, I think that anything defined as a hate crime should include physical violence. Anyway you specifically said that racism was what wasn’t punished.
I
So what you’re saying is that racism is ok as long as it doesn’t go into physical violence, correct? Basically, one racial group can provoke another until the provoked groups gets violent, and then the provoked group is punished, and that’s ok. Not that I’m condoning violence, but that’s just a silly way to see things.
“So what you’re saying is that racism is ok as long as it doesn’t go into physical violence, correct?”
No I’m saying that what people think shouldn’t be regulated by law.
“…one group can provoke another until the provoked groups gets violent.”
Each person/group is solely responsible for their actions. If you commit a violent action you are the one responsible not the person you violated. I’m sorry but “they were mean to me” doesn’t cut it.
Again, if you’ve read about the case, you’ll know the details. Are you saying it was ok to:
- Hang nooses from the “white tree”?
- Not let black students into a party?
- Allow a principal to say provoking things to the student body?
- Not allow black students to address the school board?
The more you look into this case, the more you realize that the black community did everything they could to solve this peacefully, and they were stopped every step of the way. So, again, I’m not saying the black students shouldn’t be held responsible for violence. But, the charge is way to harsh. Simple assault would be fine.
And the white students, they deserve a hate crime charge.
- Not let black students into a party?
Are you talking about the student who asked to sit under the tree during a school assembly? I guess he did it then because that’s how people interact with others…. during a school assembly.
I can’t think of any motivation he might have had beside causing a scene. If he really wanted to connect to the students under the white tree I’m sure he could have just talked to them- individually at least.
“And the white students, they deserve a hate crime charge.”
Then don’t the “Jena Six” as well. Their only motivation was to beat up a person because of his skin color. Was the kid guilty of anything besides being white?
I would be satisfied with hate crime charges for both. But the 2nd degree attempted murder charges must be dropped. 22 years in jail for a schoolyard fight is a miscarriage of justice.
“Again, if you’ve read about the case, you’ll know the details. Are you saying it was ok to:
- Hang nooses from the “white tree�
- Not let black students into a party?
- Allow a principal to say provoking things to the student body?
- Not allow black students to address the school board?”
A couple thoughts on the above. First, your 3rd charge is incorrect. According to wikipedia as well as other sources, the Principal recommended expulsion for the white kids who hung the nooses, but was rebuffed by the school board. When tensions got high after the weak punishment, he called an assembly in which the District DA spoke to the student body. It was the DA who said things like, “With a stroke of a pen, I can ruin your life blah blah blah.” Many have claimed that this was directed toward the black students. Others have disputed this.
Second, it is not whether it is “ok” that these things occurred. It splits into two categories, the first being whether it is illegal and the second is whether it is morally right. The 1st and 4th charge could certainly be deemed illegal, but that’s hazy (it depends on Jena’s and Louisiana’s laws… and if the FBI gets involved, hate crimes are federal, I believe). The 2nd and 3rd charge are by no means illegal. All 4 charges strike me as inherently wrong (if the 3rd charge did involve direct accusation toward the black kids). Such racist tactics are immoral to the bone and can set off even the most mild mannered folks. While the black kids were wrong to resort to violence, and they should be punished, the rest of the story should be taken into context when it comes to charges and sentencing. It sounds like this town has a major, deeply rooted problem. A forward thinking judge could have seen this and through charges and sentencing brought this issue to the surface, instead of driving a massive wedge between the people of that town, and now our country.
I agree. I’m not saying the black kids shouldn’t be charged, but that their sentence was far too harsh, especially in respect to the earlier fight where a group of white kids who beat up a black student were charged with simple battery.
That’s a problem, no two ways about it. And that’s racism.