Skip to content

Exhibit one

October 13, 2012
Sign on a restaurant: "We Cater to White ...

Sign on a restaurant: “We Cater to White Trade only.”, taken in Lancaster, Ohio (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Conflict theory offers the most comprehensive explanation for the disproportional involvement of racial and ethnic minority’s involvement in the CJS and apparent criminality.  Recount the story of Raymond Tyler who was released from prison after serving nearly 30 years of what I am assuming was a life sentence for crimes he did not commit (his exoneration having been based) on irrefutable DNA evidence.  His conviction for these [black on white] offenses was based on the “eyewitness” testimony of the victims, who being only 11 and 12 years old are legally defined as children.  Other exculpatory testimony was apparently disregarded presumably because it came from Mr. Tyler’s friends and therefore could not be trusted unlike the “eyewitness” testimony of the victims whose veracity despite their age and the traumatizing nature of the event itself, should have given a “reasonable” person pause.  In addition there was no damning physical evidence of Mr. Tyler’s involvement or guilt.  Meaning Mr. Tyler was in fact just another in a long line of victims, scapegoats, straw men, and other entities of collateral damage produced by the ongoing conflict between those with power and those without it.  History provides numerous examples of this conflict as well as the many different factors and facets of its nature.  Exhibit one is America’s own history which includes the oppression and “extermination” of this continents’ aboriginal persons who due to an error in judgment became known as “Indians”.  Clearly in this case the ensuing events ultimately led to a struggle for power and eventually survival for members of the weaker group whom even upon their defeat continued to be defined as deviants by those with power thus needing further control, segregation, and re-socialization.  Exhibit two, the de jure institution of slavery in a nation founded upon ideals of the Age of Reason otherwise known as the Enlightenment such as “inalienable rights”, the Rule of Law, impartial justice, and egalitarianism, and which had no less just fought a war in hopes of “freeing” itself from “tyranny and oppression”.  Could/would anyone today really try to make a case for a slave owner vs. an enslaved person arguing for his freedom?  Perhaps, nonetheless most of us would reject the “right” of a slaveholder attempting to claim ownership of another human being.  Yet many of us uphold the right of “society” to force its values and laws on others wishing to reject them based on the “greater-good”.  Interestingly this is essentially the same argument used to defend de jure slavery in colonial times then later during Jim Crow and it’s the same argument used now to make Constitutional end runs around many of today’s issues.

These and many others examples plainly make the case for conflict theory and it’s dynamic of the have’s dictating to the have-nots what [is] good or bad, right or wrong, legal or illegal.  All in terms ultimately designed to protect the interests of a shifting group of elites who hold the reins of power.  However unlike a pure dictatorship, to ensure its hold on power a democracies collective body of norms, mores, and laws must contain enough overlapping values at any one time to provide cohesion amongst a plurality of the members of the dominant culture thus appearing to be a republic in nature while in truth it is likely more a plutocracy.  The simple reason for the disproportional minority/ethnic involvement with the CJS lies in the near certainty, that it is these groups and the persons who make them up that comprise those having less power and as such they have been and are structurally discriminated against, labeled, controlled, and disenfranchised by those who do (Walker, Spohn & Delone, 2012).

About these ads
3 Comments leave one →
  1. October 16, 2012 3:07 am

    I want to be with you on this one, too, but one sentence seemed to stand apart and scream for explanation: a life sentence for crimes he did not commit based on irrefutable DNA evidence. I know there can be problems with DNA evidence, but your post does not address those problems. Instead it seems to address things like eye-witness accounts, which we all know are for sure unreliable. I’m just puzzled, is all…

    • October 19, 2012 4:31 am

      Hi, thank you for pointing that out… I just added some clarification that I hope clarifies that his exoneration / innocence was based on DNA evidence.

      I really want you to know how much I appreciate your input and support!

      Thank you Rangewriter

      • October 19, 2012 5:02 am

        Invincible, I’m not sure what you changed, but as i read through it this evening it makes complete sense to me. ;-)

Really and what do you think?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Tracing Knowledge ... Στα ίχνη της Γνώσης

Periklis D. Livas | Περικλής Δημ. Λιβάς

The Inverse Square Blog

science and the public square -- by thomas levenson

The Honest Courtesan

Frank commentary from a retired call girl

Adask's law

The Profit of Injustice

Mobilizing Ideas

Activists and Scholars Debate Social Movements and Social Change

Rangewriter

What Comes Next?

This Day - One Day

Be aware of what your Country will not do for you!

Zwinglius Redivivus

οὐαὶ ὅταν καλῶς εἴπωσιν ὑμᾶς πάντες οἱ ἄνθρωποι· - Jesus

The Fifth Column

Sorting out the crazies...and other ruminations

de-conversion

Resources for skeptical, de-converting, or former Christians......

euzicasa

Share something you learned everyday!

Freethought

observations on science and religion

invincibleignorance

An insoluble intrapersonal state of factual denial motivated by a persistent need to be right in order to shield the conscious from the absurdity of the ideas and position’s populating it. ______________This is an attempt to explore the lunacy of an otherwise supposedly enlightened society… or not...

invincibleignorance

An attempt to explore the lunacy of a supposedly enlightend society

WordPress.com News

The latest news on WordPress.com and the WordPress community.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: