John Ehrlichman, one of President Richard Nixon’s top aides, made a shocking admission during a 1994 interview. When asked about Nixon's War on Drugs, Ehrlichman said, "We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news (Baum).”
Since its inception in the 1970s, the United States' War on Drugs has had devastating consequences, particularly for Black communities. The government's implementation of this war to combat drug use and distribution
…show more content…
Some people are allowed to start closer to the finish line, while others are forced to start further back. The race is unfair from the beginning. No matter how hard or fast the runners in the back work, it’s likely that they will always be behind those who started closer to the finish line. This is similar to how the War on Drugs has impacted Black communities. The policies and practices associated with the War on Drugs have placed Black communities at a disadvantage, creating a cycle of poverty, trauma, and social exclusion that passes from generation to …show more content…
Doors are shut at every turn.
There are arguments that the War on Drugs has not disproportionately affected Black communities. This argument suggests that the impact of the War on Drugs on Black communities is not due to systemic racism, but rather a result of higher rates of drug use and criminal activity in those communities.
The argument fails to consider historical and social factors that have contributed to the high rates of drug use and drug-related crime in Black communities. Decades of systemic racism, poverty and the resulting impact on the Black communities, along with discriminatory policing practices, have created an environment in which drug use and drug-related crime are more prevalent.
In addition, Drug Policy Alliance research has shown that drug use rates are similar across racial and ethnic groups. In spite of the similarity, Blacks are more likely to be arrested, convicted, and sentenced to harsher penalties for drug offenses than their white counterparts. This racial disparity in the enforcement of drug laws cannot be attributed solely to differences in drug use rates and criminal
She argues that, “the war on marijuana has been waged primarily against black and brown youth.” This racial stigma is not a new concept; we all know about racial profiling and discrimination is prevalent in policing. There are criminological theories that suggest that there is a correlation between poverty and crime; however, most people associate poverty with minorities. The author suggests that police officers would not stop and search a white youth because they “look suspicious” or “seem out of place” whereas “black youth, get stopped, frisked and searched all the time.” Police officer’s patrol all areas and are trained to detect suspicious behavior.
In the process, Nixon increased the federal government’s role in fighting crime, and pressed for mandatory sentencing and “no-knock warrants.” According to Alexander, “The War on Drugs proved popular among key white voters, particularly whites who remained resentful of black progress, civil rights enforcement, and affirmative action” (Alexander, 2010, p. 54). When the “War on Drugs” took place, it allowed whites to express their hostility towards the black culture and black progress, without being visible to the charge of racial discrimination (Alexander, 2010, p. 54). By declaring the War on Drugs, it was another structure that was targeting African American men. Certain drugs were associated with the black community, for instance, crack cocaine – a form of cocaine that can be smoked.
The article I have chosen to write about is, The War on Drugs Is a War on Black Americans, by Jean-Gabriel Fernandez. The author discusses the long-standing issue of racial discrimination in the United States' criminal justice system, specifically regarding the war on drugs. It argues that the war on drugs is a war on black Americans, as they have been disproportionately impacted by the harsh laws and policies surrounding drug use and possession. The article highlights the historical context of drug laws in the U.S. and how they have been used to specifically target and criminalize black communities, while white drug users and sellers have largely been ignored or given lesser punishments. The author also discusses the negative impacts of these
Inside the war room, however, politicians understood the racist missions behind a firm carceral response to drug use. As Nixons’s chief domestic advisor John Ehrlichman admitted: by associating Black people with hard drugs like crack and heroin and
The people incarcerated for drug abuse are mainly Black or other minorities. The system can not be color blind when a specific group is incarcerated at higher rates than another. According to “ The Drug War as Race War,” Kenneth B. Nunn shares a fact from the Mental Health department saying that “ 76% are White drug users, 14% are Black, and 8% are Hispanic” ( Nunn). The incarceration rates should be higher for Whites given the fact that they have a higher drug usage reported. In all reality, it would not make sense to lock up any group at a significantly greater rate compared
Later in the 1980’s, President Reagan revamped this, with it being called Reagan’s Intensified War on Drugs. The issue was that some people believed Reagan had intended certain consequences with this “war” while others disagreed. Things such as police brutality rose and so did arrests on non-violent drug use. That being said, Reagan’s Intensified War on Drugs had more unintended consequences than it did intended ones.
Since, the majority of African-Americans live in areas of drug involvement, they are more likely to be racially profiled and investigated. This has created an uneven ethnic ratio in prisons and produced stereotypes that affect children that prevent them from becoming abiding citizens.
The War on Drugs was purely political. Before the ‘war’ was implemented, illegal drug use was not a prominent issue in society, it was actually declining. The police force just enforced federal orders. Alexander wrote, “ Huge cash grants were made to those law enforcement agencies that were willing to make drug-law enforcement a top priority.” Here, Alexander pinpoints exactly why the police force took part in the War on Drugs.
They began by introducing Berlin Boyd’s case and defining it as a vote that “pushed the need to do something different to aid African Americans in Memphis, to level economic disparities, and help keep them out of the criminal-justice-system quagmire” (Sells and Watts 276). The authors explain that when officers catch someone with marijuana, it is up to their discretion. They are allowed two choices: to issue a $50 fine or current state charge ($2,500 fine). By providing that comparison, it is evident to the reader that that is an unjust way to charge those with marijuana. The authors then show the statistics of the people who get arrested in previous years and state that “The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) says blacks in the Memphis area are 4.2 times as likely to be arrested for marijuana possession as a white person, though the two groups use marijuana at comparable rates” (277).
Thao Tran Professor Aboulian English 1C 21 March 2017 The War on Drugs: A Rhetorical Analysis The War on Drugs, which was declared by President Nixon in 1971, efforts to control drug use and sales in inner-city neighborhoods. The government has been recently targeting poor communities of color. In 1980, the skyrocketing drug arrests reflected a surge in illegal drug activity. In The New Jim Crow by Michelle Alexander, the author also stated that “huge cash grants were made to those law enforcement agencies that were willing to make drug-law enforcement a top priority” (73).
Since the Reagan administration, all proceeding presidents have continued to win votes by using this dog-whistle strategy. It sends abstract messages through coded language that sounds neutral on the surface, but plays on white resentment to minorities without appearing racially motivated (SG 16). The effectiveness of this strategy becomes obvious when reflecting on some statistics about drug usage and incarceration rates. Since 1983 when mass incarceration truly began escalating, African American incarceration has increased by 26 percent. This increase has caused approximately 80 to 90 percent of drug offenders currently in prison to be African American while no evidence exists that Blacks use or sell drugs any more than Whites (NJC).
A study conducted by the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services undertaking claims of sentencing disparities studies the felony sentencing outcomes particularly in New York courts between the years 1990 and 1992. Astonishingly, the study concluded that approximately one-third of minorities sentenced to prison would have received a shorter sentence with the possibility of a non-incarcerative penalty if they had been treated similarly to their white counterparts. Consequently, other sentencing data is consistent with the results of this study’s findings. On a national scale, black males specifically, who were convicted of drug felonies in state courts 52 percent of the time, while white males typically receive prison sentencing approximately 34 percent of the time. In addition, these figures are not constrained to gender given the similar ratio among black and white women as well.
In The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in The Era of Colorblindness by Michelle Alexander, she begins by points out the underlying problem in our Criminal Justice system. The problem being prioritizing the control of those in this racial caste rather than focusing on reasonable punishment and efforts to deter crime. Alexander begins by speaking of her experience as a civil rights lawyer and what soon became her priority after seeing a poster that mentioned how the war on drugs is the new jim crow when it comes to the application and outcome of it. As Alexander points out the correlation between the war on drugs and it being the new jim crow, she discusses the mass incarceration that is prevalent in our society and the number of African American
The use of narcotics like cocaine, claimed many lives and earned widespread coverage by media and news. Following this Nancy Reagan began the “War on Drugs”, a campaign to combat pre-existing drug usage and prevent future
Some may not be too familiar with the war on drugs and the effects it has had on the society we live in. The war on drugs was started by the Nixon administration in the early seventies. Nixon deemed drug abuse “public enemy number one”. This was the commencement of the war on drugs, this war has lasted to this day and has been a failure. On average 26 million people use opioids.