In this class, we discussed the politics of racism. We particularly focused on how white politicians use dog-whistle politics to invoke racial fears and racist views among white voters. We looked at the relevance of colorblind racism to the existence of dog-whistle politics, and how they play into each other. We traced dog-whistle politics through the last half-century and talked about how politicians have used it for a long time. This was relevant as it refutes the narrative of a post-racial America under Former President Barrack Obama. The class discussed the existence of dog-whistle politics abroad in Singapore, Indonesia, and Malaysia. It could be interesting to explore that further and see how politicians invoke racism abroad.

I would have liked to have expanded more on both the idea of race signaling and the presence of race in politics beyond dog-whistle racism. I wanted to get to the question of how white identity is often referred to in coded language as well. This is particularly important, as our society often treats whiteness as a no race or the norm even though it is an active player in our racial system. By talking about how politicians speak about white identity, we could have a more complete understanding of how race plays into our politics.

The conversation would have centered around a clip of the President. In the clip, we would have looked at President Trump refers to America as a Christian nation and talks about the plight of the Christian family. He expressly speaks about protecting the country’s “Christien heritage” and working against the media. Through his rhetoric, one can see that he is talking about protecting white identity and particularly a non-Jewish and non-Islamic identity. This connects to our conversations about the racialization of Islam in the United States. Through this conversation, we could have explored how the military and aspects of patriotism are often used as coded language to refer to the white identity even though people of color disproportionately serve in the U.S. military when compared to the percentages of the population they make up. This conversation could have connected to the readings we did later about the proud boys and the alt-right. Those conversations could have further revealed how these populations attempt to speak to those groups both through employing dog-whistle politics to invoke white fear and by employing coded language to speak about white identity.

It would have also been interesting to look at how politicians use policy to dog whistle to their bases and what happens when dog-whistle politics turns into real-life violence. From the crime bills of the late 20th century to voter identification laws and the immigration debate in the early 21 century, politicians use their policy positions to signal to white voters their viewpoints on race. In a colorblind world, we then frame Policy debates around race without acknowledging the connection to race that these positions have. Looking at the ramifications of dog-whistle politics would have been interesting as well. Often the words uttered by these politicians bolster alt-right groups. Over the last several years, there have been several mass shootings that have targeted Mexican communities, Jewish communities, and Muslim communities. Each incident seemed to be influenced or have a connection to dog-whistle rhetoric uttered by a politician. It would be interesting to explore questions of accountability. Should these politicians be held accountable? In a colorblind society, is accountability possible?

Crook County weaves a narrative familiar to those who follow the news: something is deeply wrong with the criminal justice system. In essence, the book explores how the criminal justice system strips black and brown people of their humanity and aims to reclassify them as nameless caricatures on which white people can place their fear. Our discussion centered around the last three chapters. These chapters detailed the way defense attorneys, public and private, prosecutors, and judges support a racist criminal justice system. It examined how a racialized form of justice forces defense attorneys to employ racist logic to defend their clients and how those defense attorneys perpetuate the same logic with their clients. It analyses how criminal defense becomes a zero-sum game where the prioritization of one client’s freedom means the loss of another’s freedom. 

To frame the conversation, Kennedi and I showed a video that details how mass incarceration has affected black and brown communities. The video talked about the scale of mass incarceration, and how it has generational effects. Through our presentation, we aimed to have a conversation about the impact of the information revealed in the book on our society and institutions. The video touched on the legacy of slavery in America and how it relates to mass incarceration. We were then able to investigate the ways that the criminal justice system act perpetuates the legacy of slavery and how both systems link through the denial of freedom. I think we could have expanded on the links between slavery and mass incarceration at the beginning of our presentation. I also think that we could expand on the experience of prison, as it would have helped to craft a thorough picture of the impact that racialized criminal justice has on the defendants and their community. This information would work against the image that mass incarceration tries to create for the black and brown people it consumes. 

Through our discussion, we explored the themes of the chapters and their connections to our readings throughout the semester such as the Inheritance of the Ghetto, the White Space, and No Place on the Corner. The story of Crook County exemplified many of the themes that we have talked about throughout the course. It touched on our conversations about colorblind racism and white fragility, particularly in the ways that attorneys and judges separated themselves from the impacts of their actions. We talked about how there were levels of generational inheritance to incarceration that could connect to the inheritance of economic inequality. At the end of our presentation, we explored how the criminal justice system works with the police force to create white spaces in black and brown communities.  

I think the discussion went well; however, there were moments when conversation felt forced or stilted. The exposition we gave before some of the questions could have caused this tension. If we asked the questions and gave the class time to answer before explaining our thought process, the class may have responded more. I also think we could have brought forth news stories that related to the chapters. This could have created a more interactive discussion.

The conversation raised several interesting questions, and I find myself wondering whether intergeneration poverty and the racialized criminal justice system have compounding effects. Further, does the racialized criminal justice system act as a mechanism that supports intergenerational poverty? How does the criminal justice system act as another mechanism to create white spaces within black and brown communities?