A quick background on the “Jena 6” case as the media has begun calling is that back in the late months of 2006 in the town of Jena, Louisiana a series of racially motivated incidents took place. It all started when several black students decided to sit under a tree that was reserved for white students after receiving permission to do so from their vice principal. The next morning nooses were found hanging from the tree. The principle recommended expulsion for the three behind the hanging of the nooses but the ruling was overturned by the school district committee who called it a prank and suspended the three white students who did it for three days.
After this racial tensions seemed to explode with student fights reported around town and on November 30th the main academic building of the high school was set on fire. The incident that however resulted in this case occurred four days after the fire when several black students assaulted a white student and beat him up for allegedly yelling racial epithets (The validity of this point is contested by the white student and his family).
After this happened the police arrested the 6 black students responsible and initially charged them with attempted murder and conspiracy to commit murder citing one of the defendants shoe’s as a murder weapon. Three of the defendants charges were reduced to second degree battery and conspiracy to commit second degree battery. The first and only one of the students to go to trial so far was Mychal Bell who was unable to post bail set at $90,000. Bell was charged as an adult and convicted of aggravated battery and conspiracy by an all white jury after his public defender never called a witness.
Recently however an appeals court has overturned the conviction on the conspiracy charge saying it should have been done in the juvenile system. Bell’s attorney’s are in the process of filling a motion to get him out of prison where he has been since December when he was arrested.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/09/14/jena.six/index.html?iref=mpstoryview (Link to story about overturned conviction)
Personally I think it is absolutely ridiculous that such things still happen in our country today. Everyone sits around talking about how Sunni’s and Shia’s can’t get along and that is the problem with Iraq, and at the same time they pretend that America’s shit smells like cinnamon bun’s and lollypop’s. While I don’t know about every incident that led up to this one in Jena, the fact that such a trial is being held is cause enough for concern to me.
The emancipation proclamation was enacted 145 years ago, the civil war ended 142 years ago, the post-war period of violence and rebuilding called reconstruction ended 130 years ago, the modern civil rights movement took place around 40 years ago. For the love of God can we not just get past this? Why has such a worthless issue a skin color preoccupied our countries mindset for so long? Who really gives a damn if some one doesn’t look like you, is there really nothing more important for you to spend your time worrying about?
I think the fact that we see such incidents occur in poor and remote parts of our country answers that question. NO!, these people do not have anything better to do with their time. The logic is quite simple, remote and poor parts of our country are not involved in mainstream things like politics, war, and the economy because none of these things are of practical concern to people in those parts and even if they were the people don’t believe that they have any control or influence over such things. So naturally they revert to worrying about things they do have control over, skin color. It’s similar to the way school children make fun of each other “Billy is fat” or “Jill has a big nose”, much like juveniles these people have nothing better to do with their time.
1 comment:
While I agree with you that things like this shouldn't happen to begin with, and that there is no excuse for exhibiting racism in this day and age, I disagree with your "simple logic" concerning why some people still put so much importance into skin color.
Coming from a remote area in the country and being in poor economic standing does not cause racism. However, I would not protest a statement expressing a correlation between such elements. In fact, I would go so far to say that a person's racism would lead them closer to poverty, which in turn could lead them towards living in a more remote area where it would be cheaper to live.
You see, by having such preconceived notions about someone based entirely by their skin, or any other single factor for that matter, limits ones potential in many areas, including the work force. If someone dislikes a certain group of people for no good reason and they meet someone of that category regularly at their job, chances are they won't get along and bad things could happen. This doesn't exactly lead towards promotions.
Your statement, that rural and poor communities breed racism because of a lack of better things to do, holds no merit. Have you ever lived in either of these situations? I assure you that farming and raising livestock, something that is very very common in my hometown, takes more than a small time investment. Also, people close or below the poverty line usually don't have the best hourly wages, which means more hours of work to buy the things they need.
Also, both communities are very interested in mainstream things like politics, as they are affected just as much as anyone else. In fact, things like a war change their lives more than most, as they tend to be the ones drafted or have their factories shut down. A lack of concern on their end isn't why we usually don't hear about their political views, it is the lack of concern for their views that many rich politicians hold that prevents them from having as much influence as they deserve.
Post a Comment