Social Caste System In The New Jim Crow By Michelle Alexander

In Michelle Alexander’s book The New Jim Crow, she analyzes the use of the War on Drugs to not truly be against crack, but those of a minority; as well as considering the shift of using race to describe and discriminate in the Criminal Justice System, and in society. On top of the switch of who is able to define someone as colored, the Criminal Justice System is in a sense, the new Jim Crowe, seeing that the system affects those in the minority groups more than those who are not. It used to be that the everyday person could describe a person by their race or skin tone, which would then group minorities by their described race. Grouping these people made discrimination stronger, especially when history of how these people were treated is

21). America first saw the growth of the idea of race when slavery had come along, as well as, the extermination of the Native Americans after Columbus found the now United States; but before that, race was not important or similarly used in most societies (Alexander, 2012, p. 23). It is noted in the book that the racial caste system became concrete by the Mid 1770’s, and subsequently, minorities were consistently looked down upon while being viewed as inferior due to older beliefs from decades before. Slaves and minority workers were considered a lesser group, lacking intelligence and overall the ability to be similar to a white person (Alexander, 2012, p. 25). Even more concerning, is that Alexander discusses that the Constitution was perceived as colorblind because it never used the words like negro, yet it was made to keep blacks and whites separate (Alexander, 2012, p.

The current activists are fighting for legal battles, such as racial profiling laws, disenfranchisement, and crack sentencing policies (Alexander, 2012, p. 224). These advocates have become more focused on the legal battles of racism and disparity, making them not nearly as connected as they were with their communities (Alexander, 2012, p.225). Furthermore, it means that these groups are not fighting for the moral cause like they used to. In the ages of Rosa Parks, these advocates fought for the moral stance, to help a woman and all of those who experienced the same thing be treated as an equal (Alexander, 2012, p. 225). Yet you look at the civil rights movement now and they are disconnected from who they are fighting for and on a legal crusade. Alexander notes that those advocates may also be a part of the problem, helping change this battle into something new, away from its initial cause (Alexander, 2012, p.