Most definitely. I couldn’t agree more. A competitive police and court market would not only eliminate bad laws, but such laws would never come about because they’re economically bad.

Is that what you mean? Or do you mean making a new government? What exactly?

The American criminal injustice system is not “our” system. It’s your system–White America’s system. Just like every other institution in the USA.

Don’t act like it’s one big happy family. It ain’t.

White racism in the American gulag is just a reflection of the USA in general. It’s a system of control to keep “troublemaking” populations under lock and key–particularly minorities, who have a history of rebelling against your system.

See the 1960s and 1970s urban rebellions from Watts to Detroit to Newark for examples. Or the 1992 Los Angeles Rebellion or the 2001 Cincinnati uprising or the recent riots in Oakland over the police murder of Oscar Grant. The beat goes on.

And it’s not a question of a few racist jurors or “crappy laws.” It’s the entire criminal justice system. And ultimately, it’s the beloved American Way that is the problem.

White “Progressives” are always trying to spindoctor the terms of debate to minimize this fundamental problem.

It’s their attempt at political damage control to sucker minorities into putting their faith in White American institutions–usually with a few band-aid reforms and a whole lot of sugar-coated rhetoric.

But’s that just White pretty talk.

And like most political scams, it can only fool some of the people for only so long.

The reality on the ground has always been very different from White boy lies.

The bottom line for minorities is to reject these European American institutions and start building alternative ones instead–whether that be courts, police, media, etc.

But this is what White America–including disingenous White Liberals–are fearful of, isn’t it?

Larry,

The reports regarding racism in our justice system sound more like problems of bad laws. While the lawmakers themselves may have been racist when they made the laws, it sounds like eliminating bad laws (drug, immigration, etc.) would level the playing field a little better. Do you agree? Or should we leave the laws and just go after the racists?

And debate on the web is by its nature contentious and spirited. If you expect a polite tea party, the internets in general is probably not the place for you.

And I sure as heck don’t have a degree from Harvard. Never said I did. But whatever.

Nice to see you again!

Have you read through this whole thread? I’m talking to Micah and Blake tomorrow for the podcast, but would you agree that some of the comments left by Pete Lee and Gail Yip were quite inflammatory? Even Ed, whom I’ve grown to like, came out and said some really crazy stuff both on this blog and BcB.

Judge for yourself. The original BcB post is linked in the original post, and you can see how the conversation grew from some comments that perhaps were inappropriate. If you look at it from the beginning, from the perspective of people who live with these demeaning stereotypes all the time, I think the story will tell itself. Larry reacted the same way Vu did, the same way I did, the same way all red-blooded Asian American activists did.

Anyway, water under the bridge for me. I won’t harp on the past. Both Ed Kahana and Eric Jacobus have agreed to meet for a podcast, so hopefully we can clear stuff up then. Like I said, I know that Micah and Blake are nice people, and I’m looking forward to talking to them. You and I should talk sometime soon too. Maybe you should talk to Larry as well. He really is brilliant. You might like him, and he could recommend some good books and resources.

I think you misunderstood my point. My issues with you don’t really pertain to any particular post, just a general animosity that you seem to emanate toward anyone who posts a viewpoint different than yours. I speak from experience dealing with you in my posts which were certainly not intended to be inflamatory in any fashion – more a discourse, which was relatively civil until your responses. However, I see your condescension riddled throughout this blog to multiple posters, so I’m not offended. My point, and I presumed it could be detected was that for someone who claims to have a degree from Harvard, your ability to persuasively communicate with others leaves a lot to be desired. I merely sought to point that out here. *shrug* I’m quite certain that you have no respect, nor inclination to care about my opinions of you or your abilities to communicate, and I assure you it is mutual, so at this point, I’ll let you get back to your accusations.

The reports regarding racism in our justice system sound more like problems of bad laws. While the lawmakers themselves may have been racist when they made the laws, it sounds like eliminating bad laws (drug, immigration, housing, etc.) would level the playing field a little better. Do you agree? Or should we leave the laws and just go after the racists?