Youth in the Era of Mass Incarceration

The Hyper-Criminalization of Black and Latino Male

 Youth in the Era of Mass Incarceration

            The article by Victor M. Rios touches on key aspects that label Black and Latino young males as “deviant”. The term “deviant” means dissimilar from traditional standard, moving sharply from a traditional, customary, generally accepted normal, or displaying such different behavior. The key terms in this article are showing how minorities are marked by words such as: criminalization, youth, Latinos, deviance, and penalty.

            Rios suggests that Black and Latino youth are branded with “hyper-criminalized” when they come across the juvenile justice system even though most of them have committed non-violent offenses. All of these start for these young men around the age of eight.  Moreover, Rios describes, “These scholars have argued that punishment not only affect the confined individual but rather expands itself to family members and the inmate’s community.”(Page 226) which means now everyone is being punished for things that they did not do or take part in directly. Nonetheless, article suggests that mass imprisonment combined with political and economic arrangements, and culture makes an overwhelming negative impact on this young population. This population is so venerable that even when they have not done anything wrong, they are  being labeled as “at-risk” children. It is similar to saying that if you do everything by the book, you are acceptable, but if somehow you find yourself in bad circumstances, you would be marked as juvenile offender and end up as a criminal. Under the same law, something that in white community would look as an unwise act of childhood is now an act of crime in Black or Latino community.

            The article suggests that “governance” or the lack of it is the reason that this population is suffering. Overwhelming lack of jobs, education, and not being able to provide economic and social security to this most needed portion of society is the leading cause of the problems. If a young man cannot find a job because of his ethnicity, color of skin, or lack of education, he is going to end up in criminal activities and try to express his anger on his peers or bystanders. Many of these kids are bulled by their peers, ended up defending themselves by committing an act of violence, which in the end sends them to juvenile court. Most of them are so poor they cannot afford to buy essential goods that they need for school, nutrition, and clothing. They do not steal because it is enjoyable and fun, they do it because no one is there to help them, and to give them some directions to how they can make some money. In the white communities, poor children can work in school cafeterias during school hours, or in Unified School Districts summer job programs. Nonetheless, these kinds of jobs need and require having a higher GPA than other applicants.

            This article ends by saying that “dangerous moments” is facing Black and Latino youth community, and the way to find a place for these poor youth, from the governing point of view is hyper-criminalization and mass incarceration.

            This is something that I do not want to participate in or see.    

 

Q1. As a Latino youth, did you feel you had equal opportunities in your life?

Q2. Did you have any struggles as a high school student due to your race/ethnicity?

Q3. Did you see this type of discrimination taking place towards your family or friends?

Welfare and Demoralization

This reading is discussing the impact of conservatism on the social class system. The time period begins in the 1980s and onward. One quote that stuck out to me was by Charles Murray. He said, "We tried to provide more for the poor and produced more poor instead. We tried to remove the barriers to escape from poverty, and inadvertently built a trap". Murray criticized liberal welfare programs and said they "demoralized"urban poor. Murray became the most influential commentator for poverty. He was influential during the LA riots in the early 1990s. He advocated for the diminishing of aid to inner-city communities.

In general, whites find it easy to blame those of lower social class. As in our class activity, people in the upper class often blame those on welfare, EBT, disability, and other government programs. Many upper class people do not think they deserve to live in the same areas as those on these programs. On the other hand, many people on these programs often feel so comfortable with their accommodations that they do not work harder to get out of government assistance. This causes tension between the two social groups.

Do these welfare programs demoralize the urban poor as Murray suggested? Demoralize is defined as to "Cause someone to lose confidence or hope". In a sense, those on the programs that do not strive to better themselves are in fact losing spirit and confidence. It can be embarrassing to those on the program, although there is nothing to be ashamed of. As long as the person tries each day to better their situation, they should feel no shame and should not feel like they are being demoralized.

-Danielle Shapiro

Chapter Four

The fight mentioned in the beginning of the text was very significant because the fight is what woke Beto up and prepared him for the real world. When he came to the realization that his opponent was going to keep hitting him in the boxing match whether he fought back or not reflects social construction in a few ways. Even if we sat here and did nothing about it, the social structure of schools will keep coming at us. We are all in a situation that cannot be ignored, just like being in a boxing match and not fighting back. Eventually somebody has to step forward and lay out the truth about what is going on. In the case against three San Fernando High School administrators being tried as guilty of harassment and violation of the first amendment, a crucial question was brought to attention: Do teachers have the right to speak on matters of public concern during their off hours? I agree that they do. If a teacher is at a coffee shop complaining about the drop out rates at SFHS, the principle and staff do not have the right to treat the teacher any differently than the others for expressing an opinion out side of the classroom. Qualified immunity was being used to protect the administrators and say that they were not aware of the harassment that had occurred. SFHS claims that Beto broke school policies, and constantly did things his way. They claimed the problem with him was that he was self righteous in his approach to teaching and that he felt entitled to break policy based on observations of others. The truth of the matter is, he was not just simply observing others. He was taking into consideration that SFHS is an extension and continuation of white domination and the fact that the existence of white domination depends on social mechanisms that mass produce failure and ignorance within communities of color. However, the principle of SFHS does not believe in rocking the boat or exposing students to information that can be too controversial for their own good. If this information is never exposed to students, this social construction will never change. The administration is just an ugly extension of history. Times have changed. Reprimanding a teacher for making facts public to students such as the high school drop out rate in comparison to the excessive military recruitment is not right. Students have the right to be exposed to facts and teachers should have the right to speak on matters of public concern.