Advertisement

Beyond the Trial: The Disproportionate Imprisonment of African Americans

  • Joshua Page
  • Sarah WhetstoneEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

The United States’ unprecedented expansion of imprisonment since the late 1970s has disproportionately affected African Americans, intensifying inequality and transforming the very meaning of race. Understanding the dynamics of criminal punishment is now essential for teaching about race. This chapter describes a common epistemological obstacle students encounter as they study the relationship between race and imprisonment – the “logic of the trial.” As they assign blame to the “culture” of the “underclass” or to “racist actors” in the legal system, students do not see the historically rooted, systemic nature of racial domination in American punishment. We propose three related strategies for getting “beyond the trial” and deepening students’ understanding of race in an era of mass incarceration. These strategies can help students transcend individual-level analysis and wrestle with the extensive, complex sociological factors that explain the causes and consequences of the hyper-incarceration of African Americans.

Keywords

Racial Disparity Criminal Punishment Drug Trade Racial Profile Book Club 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Alexander, M. (2010). The new Jim Crow: Mass incarceration in the age of colorblindness. New York: The New Press.Google Scholar
  2. Beckett, K. (1997). Making crime pay: Law and order in contemporary American politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bourdieu, P., & Wacquant, L. (1999). On the cunning of imperialist reason. Theory, Culture & Society, 16, 41–58.Google Scholar
  4. Comfort, M. (2008). Doing time together: Love and family in the shadow of the prison. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Garland, D. (2001). The culture of control: Crime and social order in contemporary society. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  6. Lichtenstein, A. (1996). Twice the work of free labor: The political economy of convict labor in the new south. New York: Verso Books.Google Scholar
  7. Manza, J., & Uggen, C. (2006). Locked out: Felon disenfranchisement and American democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Moskos, P. (2009). Cop in the hood: My year policing Baltimore's eastern district. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Oshinsky, D. M. (1997). Worse than slavery: Parchman farm and the ordeal of Jim Crow justice. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  10. Page, J. (2011). The toughest beat: Politics, punishment, and the prison officers union in California. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Pager, D. (2007). Marked: Race, crime, and finding work in an era of mass incarceration. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Perkinson, R. (2009). Texas tough: The rise of America’s prison empire. New York: Metropolitan Books.Google Scholar
  13. The Pew Charitable Trusts. (2010). Collateral costs: Incarceration's effect on economic mobility. Washington, DC: The Pew Center on the States.Google Scholar
  14. Stowe, H. B. 1998(1852). Uncle Tom's Cabin. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Tonry, M. (2011). Punishing race: A continuing American dilemma. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Wacquant, L. (2008). Punishing the poor: The new government of social insecurity. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Wakefield, S., & Uggen, C. (2010). Incarceration and stratification. Annual Review of Sociology, 36, 387–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Western, B. (2007). Punishment and inequality in America. New York: Russell Sage Foundation Publications.Google Scholar
  19. Western, B., & Beckett, K. (1999). How unregulated is the US labor market? The penal system as a labor market institution. The American Journal of Sociology, 104(4), 1030–1060.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of MinnesotaMinneapolisUSA

Personalised recommendations