Racism And Prejudices As Factor Of Criminal Behavior - Essay Example

Racism And Prejudices As Factor Of Criminal Behavior Crime and deviance perpetuates, or is a product of the seemingly inherent tradition of prejudice against minorities in this country, a social injustice that has been intricately and perpetually woven into the fabric of society from before the nation’s inception. Indigenous people discovered already living on the continent, possessing different skin tones and customs, were instantly labeled ‘savage’ and ‘uncivilized’ and thus placed on a significantly lower social level than the Europeans. This mindset lives on today. Overt discriminatory practices during all phases of the criminal justice system concerning ethnic minorities, especially those of African-American or Hispanic descent have been well-documented. The recent (post 9-11) increased implementation of law enforcement measures which are exclusively aimed at minorities and immigrants through tactics such as racial profiling have exacerbated long standing tensions with police agencies. These interactions are becoming increasingly tense as evidenced by a proliferation of physical and verbal abuse towards minorities and immigrants, a growing mutual distrust and an escalating threat of violence. A tendency to commit crimes in impoverished areas is understood. Racist perceptions are reflected in laws, traditions, and hiring practices therefore minorities are disproportionately represented in depressed neighborhoods. This is a rather obvious explanation for social injustice creating crime. An additional reason could be that because minorities are targeted for crime it is generally perceived by the majority that simply being a minority perpetuates crime. The U.S. incarcerates more of its population than any other industrialized country. Currently, more than two million prisoners are jailed in local, state or federal facilities. Not only the number of prisoners is increasing, the ratio of prisoner to population is widening as well. About a decade ago, for every 100,000 citizens, 703 were in prison. That number exceeds 715 today. When categorized according to ethnicity, a wide disparity of justice is apparent. “At midyear 2003 there were 4,834 black male prisoners per 100,000 black males in the United States in prison or jail, compared to 1,778 Hispanic male inmates per 100,000 Hispanic males and 681 white male inmates per 100,000 white males” (“Prison Statistics” 2006). As compared to constituents of the socially dominant faction, black men are much more liable to be detained, questioned, and searched by law enforcement officials. Once they have been arrested, minority members are also more likely to suffer police brutality and are more likely to be held in jail while waiting for their trial date instead of having an opportunity to post bond. When tried for a crime, they face a higher probability to be found guilty and are less apt to serve their sentences outside of prison such as serving community service. In addition, they are “more likely to be sentenced to longer prison terms, less likely to be granted parole, and when convicted of capital offenses, they are more likely to be executed, especially for capital offenses against dominants” (Sidaneus & Veniegas, 2000). Racism as an ideology is illogical in principle and diverse in practice thus difficult to explain by a single definition. It permeates the family tree of societies and is reflected in all its attitudes, behavior, and institutions. The concept of racism may be conscious or subconscious and is expressed in actions or attitudes initiated by individuals, groups, or institutions that treat human beings unjustly because of their skin pigmentation. Racism is rooted in dysfunctional belief systems resulting from distorted perceptions formed over a period of time and e cannot ignore the significant role of the socio-cultural environment in shaping perceptual patterns. The duty of humanitarian, social and political interests is to make certain all people regardless of cultural background are both recognized and treated equitably in the criminal justice system. Racism breeds a lack of opportunity for minorities and the lack of opportunity in the educational system adds to a great disparity of black men in prisons. The term ‘racial profiling’ is typically applied in the enforcement arena, but can be equally applied in the social realm. Prior to the terrorist attacks that took place in the United States on September 11, 2001, most people associated the term ‘racial profiling’ with the common but often unspoken practice of police officers to stop and harass young black drivers in a much higher percentage than they did this same activity with drivers of other skin tones. African-Americans of all ages correctly complained that they were being disproportionately detained and asked non-pertinent questions by the police for nothing more than the ‘crime’ of ‘driving while black.’ The practice of racial profiling is officially illegal, but police officers continue to point to statistics that seem to support its use (Turvey, 1998). The concept of criminal profiling has actually been used to assist law enforcement in preventing crime as the habits and behaviors of individual criminals can be tracked and predicted as a means of achieving capture and neutralization. Offender profiles, a series of behavioral and personal characteristics related with specific offenses, are also analyzed as a means of assisting enforcement officials in recognizing specific behavior patterns that may lead to future crime. However, criminal profiling progresses to racial profiling when the defining characteristics used comprise ethnicity, religion or race. Racial profiling occurs as officers begin to recognize a greater number of black people in prison than white, linking black people, particularly young males, with a higher prevalence of crime without taking into account the possibility that higher numbers may be simply a result of eagerness to arrest or other factors (Turvey, 1998). Since 2001, a new form of racial profiling has emerged that could be simply described as ‘flying while Arab.’ An attention-getting case occurred in November of 2006 in an airport in Minneapolis. According to reports, a small gathering of Muslim men were praying prior to their plane’s departure (Frommer, 2007). Later events would reveal that these men were actually Muslim ministers who had just participated in a symposium and were on their return journey home. Their prayer, as they reported, included appeals for the safety of all passengers and crew as well as for a smooth and uneventful flight. However, their activity made other passengers nervous, themselves practicing a form of racial profiling in assuming that these men might be terrorists despite their openly different behavior, so the airline made the decision not to allow these men to board. Many cases have been reported where Arab, or ‘Arab looking’ Americans have been ordered to depart airplanes simply because their appearance was making some of the other passengers uneasy. The horrific terrorist attacks left an ineradicable mental image in the minds of people worldwide. The government under George Bush and various agencies such as the entire transportation industry has been at the forefront of an anti-terrorism campaign focused on racial profiling of all individuals who appear to be of Arab descent or adhering to the Muslin faith. The term ‘War on Terror’ has been continually employed as a means of justifying abuses of basic civil liberties to those traveling. The rather obvious insinuation is that “one cannot condemn racial profiling because to do so will hinder the war on terrorism and undermine national security” (MacDonald, 2001). In contrast to these shaky statistics, there is overwhelming evidence that racial profiling on an official or pseudo-official level does nothing more than make matters worse by absorbing enforcement assets better used elsewhere, angers all those who might otherwise support American efforts against terrorism and significantly undermines the American ideals of equality, freedom and the right to fair treatment. While racial profiling on the part of organizations and government agencies might ordinarily remain a tacitly ignored element of modern society, this type of profiling occurring in conjunction with the type of alarming large-scale social experience represented by the terrorist attacks enflames latent social stereotypes. The majority of adult American citizens living prior to September 11, 2001 would have agreed that discrimination on the basis of race is morally and ethically wrong and unjustifiable. In many cases, individuals hadn’t really considered just how they felt about the Muslim religion or the races of the Middle East. With some variation to slightly antagonistic to slightly supportive, Americans essentially considered themselves neutral regarding their impression of the Arab’s place in the social hierarchy. However, the events of that date shocked the nation out of its perceived immunity from danger and thus seemed to justify greater caution. Those who felt a greater sense of threat were more eager to sacrifice personal freedom and individual rights in the form of racial profiling if this could provide a stronger perception of protection. Had the terrorists not been of obvious Arab descent, the profiling of airplane passengers and the widespread fear of this particular ethnic group would not be a matter of discussion (Polakow-Suransky, 2005). After the Oklahoma City federal building was bombed in 1995, no efforts were made to vilify or racially profile young white men, yet almost every individual with Middle Eastern features that has been detained at airports, kicked-off airplanes, had their bags searched or suffered ‘stare-downs’ with no provocation is not a terrorist any more than every white man is. Discrimination, no matter how it can be rationalized, causes the victimization of minority groups who are frequently already subdued as a result of their minority. When used to guide the practices and policies of ‘official’ organizations such as the police or airport security, discrimination of a specific group can leads to malicious stereotyping. Generalizations are then applied unilaterally to the race, which causes significant issues when witnessed and duplicated by the public (Hall, 2004). Common decisions of everyday life regarding which candidate to hire, what people will be admitted nearly free of search compared to those who’s every pocket will be invasively explored are based on the cultural attitudes that are set by enforcement agencies. For example, it is commonly assumed that black students will be unable to make the transition into college than white students, but actual scholastic comparisons indicate they are proportionately better prepared. If a person is physically beaten because they appear Arabic, that is termed racism, but when that same person is detained by security officers at the airport, it is called a necessary security measure. The change in terminology doesn’t make it right nor do some elements of society succeed in making the distinction. Even those who do understand the difference between official action and unofficial harassment have a tendency to fall in line with the prevalent modes of thinking in which Arabs are considered suspicious characters regardless of the context (Hall, 2004). It can be argued that the generalization of persons based on stereotypical characteristics is sometimes necessary and can be rationalized based on statistics. For example, if an explosive device has been reported being carried by a person on a plane full of passengers, when security officials board the plane looking for this person, they do not have time to consider the morality implications of stereotyping and generalizations. However, during less critical times, such as at the ticket counter or at check-in, the need to utilize profiling techniques simply is not as understandable yet are practiced and mimicked in numerous areas of life including the gift shop cashier, the bus driver, the rental car agent and the average fellow passenger. While the average citizen might ordinarily avoid any overt acts of racial profiling, impactful events such as shattering the nation’s sense of security have changed public sentiment. Arabs would likely answer differently than whites regarding whether this action was taking place and thus might reasonably expect some support from the black community, who also frequently suffer from immediate suspicion and anger. Unfortunately, this is not the case. Black persons are no less likely than is any other ethnic group to judge others by racial origin or cultural affiliation. It seems the ability to recognize racial discrimination only exists when it is one’s own race being maltreated. According to Urban League President Hugh Price, “…whenever people speak in favor of racial profiling, they always favor its use against some other groups, not theirs” (cited in Polakow-Suransky, 2005: 202). Public surveys have continued to indicate widespread public support of racial profiling of Middle Eastern persons among the African American community. Only recently has the trend begun to abate thanks to the hard work of black political and religious leaders as well as numerous civil rights advocates. The strength of the sentiment among the black population is particularly surprising in that these people do not seem able to draw the parallels. “Many blacks still view all Muslims with the same mix of caution, distrust and hostility as many white Americans do” (cited in Polakow-Suransky, 2005: 203). Of all the questions raised by the debate regarding racial profiling in the social realm, this has to be the most perplexing. NAACP President Frank Mesiah put it this way, “It is unfortunate that it would be African Americans that have suffered this type of terror and profiling at the hands of police…to then support this type of profiling” (cited in Polakow-Suransky, 2005: 203). While this seems to be highly hypocritical, the answer regarding why black people do not draw parallels between this and their own experience may be attributed to some of the rest of America’s willingness to vilify the Arabs. That there has always been an inherent mistrust of the Middle East can be discovered when one examines the images of the media, which serve to both reflect and reinforce these types of social beliefs. As several individuals have discovered through an examination of America’s major and minor media, there has been a long-standing tradition within Western culture of painting the Middle East as a land of dark mystery, suspicion, deadly intent and irrational behavior. These images became increasingly focused on the dangerously negative when extremist Middle Easterners shook the flawed American perception that they were invulnerable. In doing so, the attitudes of these extremists were linked with the ideas of the media in which Arabs were portrayed as evil and then generalized to apply to all individuals of these cultures and races. One of the first people to write about how the concept of the Middle Easterner as evil is largely the result of their representation in the media was Edward Said, who wrote about the concept of Orientalism. Said argues that the concept of the Orient as it has been created within the minds of the West is so deeply ingrained in Western life that it ‘unconsciously’ manifests itself through the intertextual context and is indistinguishable to the Western writer from his own ‘pure’ thought. It follows that this ‘unconscious’ element of the writer is also unconscious on the part of the reader and that these concepts are equally applicable to other modes of communication such as television, film and news reporting. Writing well before the terrorist attacks, Said indicated that the Arab was even then given only negative associations. “There exists here an almost unanimous consensus that politically he [the Oriental] does not exist, and when it is allowed that he does, it is either as a nuisance or as an Oriental. The web of racism, cultural stereotypes, political imperialism, dehumanizing ideology holding in the Arab or the Muslim is very strong indeed, and it is this web which every Palestinian has come to feel as his uniquely punishing destiny” (Said, 1979: 27). Pointing out that for many in the Western world, the only understanding they will have of the Middle Eastern world is brought to them through video and other media, already filtered through the biased eyes of the West, Said points out how everything reported was made to seem backward, simple and non-threatening by placing it in the context of a passive action. This was accomplished through the process of comparable linguistics, in which everything is placed in a dominant-recessive opposition. A side effect of this process is the generalization of everything into a single group, ignoring hints of diversity. This had, and continues to have, a negative effect upon the Western world’s perception as they tend to understand a multitude of cultures in terms of a single identity. Inequality is the practically unavoidable by-product of two prevailing dynamics, prejudice on the individual level and a political disparity on a societal level. All American citizens enjoy lawfully guaranteed equality but the equalities regarding access to the criminal justice system for ethnic minorities are unquestionably lacking. Minority members whether racial or ethnic are vulnerable groups who too often face persecution, subjective imprisonment, offensive treatment by law enforcement, and unequal treatment in the court system. “Ostensibly race or descent-neutral laws can have a disparate impact on vulnerable minorities or even majorities as a consequence of prosecutorial discretion, or sentencing policies, or the nature of the law itself” (Human Rights Watch, 1981). At the national and local policing level, ethnic inequities arise from practices such as racial profiling where an individual’s presumed race is the determining factor in placing them under suspicion. The criminal justice system has the vast potential for implementing an unjustified discriminatory outcome even when there is no obvious racist intention. “Discriminatory impact can be shown in patterns of police abuse, arbitrary arrest, incarceration, prosecution, and sentencing” (Human Rights Watch, 2001). There is an overrepresentation of minorities at every phase of the criminal justice system considered the beacon of progressiveness and justice. When asked to identify the source of socially inappropriate behavior and social anguish, institutional entities including law enforcement, politics and psychiatry have a tendency to fault an individual’s failure to regulate their actions. This presumes, incorrectly, that they consciously chose to become oriented to criminal activity. This common misconception may serve to justify reasoning pertaining to the ruling majority which is, generally speaking, upper class, well-educated, white Christian males whose economic, political and social privileges are dependent on a dominated majority. This privileged class who has historically enjoyed judicial privileges, voting rights and has, and continues to write the laws slanted toward their own interests conceals the realities of a supposed democratic structure. These individuals want to maintain and increase their domination and wealth which suppresses minority rights thus the prosperity and overall growth of society. Although we’d like to believe we have outgrown the issues of race and gender in the modern society, having discovered that there is no actual difference between the physical nature of a white man, red man, black man or olive-skinned, the process of racial profiling on a personal and official level seems unlikely to go away. This is because our attitudes and lack of experience are reflected through the avenues of the media and thus become the viewpoint of the people. When situations such as 9/11 occur, in which a particular race can be blamed for a singular event or otherwise perceived as a social threat, as in the case of the young black men of the city, the media continues to build on these notions, reinforcing them rather than attempting to defeat the inherent errors. Also reinforcing these beliefs are the official or unofficial but widely practiced policies of racial profiling such as detaining a larger number of young black men as potential criminals or a large number of Middle Easterners as potential terrorists. When the public sees these kinds of behaviors in airports and on roadways, the latent beliefs gained through media presentation are fanned into life again, contributing to a vicious circle in which there are only two outcomes – either we spin into an authoritarian state in which a specific segment of the population is denied its fundamental human rights or we awake to the madness and consciously work to put an end to it. Works Cited Frommer, Frederic J. “Senator: Racial profiling ban is priority, but a foe warns against handing U.S. to terrorists.” Chicago Sun Times. (January 29, 2007). Hall, C. Margaret. “Public Roots of Sociological Practice: Social Intelligence.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association. San Francisco, CA: (August 14, 2004). December 2, 2009 Human Rights Watch. “World Conference Against Racism Backgrounder.” (1981). December 2, 2009 Human Rights Watch. “Human Rights Watch and the World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance.” (June 22, 2001). December 2, 2009 MacDonald, Heather. “The War on the Police … and How it Harms the War on Terrorism.” Supra. Vol. 7, I. 16, (December 31, 2001). December 2, 2009 Polakow-Suransky. “Racial Profiling Goes Beyond Black and White.” What Matters in America. Gary Goshgarian (Ed.). New York: Longman, 2005, pp. 200-205. “Prison Statistics.” Bureau of Justice Statistics. (May 2006). U.S. Department of Justice. December 2, 2009 Said, Edward. Orientalism. New York: Vintage Books, 1979. Sidaneus, Jim & Veniegas, Rosemary C. (2000). “Gender and Race Discrimination: The Interactive Nature of Disadvantage.” Reducing Prejudice and Discrimination. Stuart Oskamp (Ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 47-69. Turvey, B. “Deductive Criminal Profiling: Comparing Applied Methodologies Between Inductive and Deductive Criminal Profiling Techniques.” Knowledge Solutions Library. (January 1998). December 2, 2009 Read More