The cruel and unusual punitiveness of American society is a frequent topic on these page. (The most recent piece is here.) No nation on earth puts as many of its people in jail -- both in real numbers and as a percentage of the population. And few if any have "justice" systems so savagely targeted at racial minorities. For the past 30 years -- concurrent with the organized effort by the monied, militarized elite to destroy any and all restraints on their predatory appetites -- the United States has waged an unrelenting war on its black population, and on other minority and marginalized groups as well.

Punitive incarceration has been turned into a lucrative resource for private profit (and public corruption), and a political tool by which ambitious poltroons in both major parties establish their "toughness," their fitness for power in an aggressive empire. The size and the harshness of the America's domestic gulag have very little to do with the actual level of dangerous crime; they are instead tied far more closely to the agenda of money and power than any reality.

David Cole lays out the details at the New York Review of Books, looking at three new books on the subject:

With approximately 2.3 million people in prison or jail, the United States incarcerates more people than any other country in the world—by far. Our per capita rate is six times greater than Canada's, eight times greater than France's, and twelve times greater than Japan's. Here, at least, we are an undisputed world leader; we have a 40 percent lead on our closest competitors—Russia and Belarus.

...For one group in particular, however, these figures have concrete and deep-rooted implications—African-Americans, especially young black men, and especially poor young black men. African-Americans are 13 percent of the general population, but over 50 percent of the prison population. Blacks are incarcerated at a rate eight times higher than that of whites—a disparity that dwarfs other racial disparities. (Black–white disparities in unemployment, for example, are 2–1; in nonmarital childbirth, 3–1; in infant mortality, 2–1; and in net worth, 1–5).

In the 1950s, when segregation was still legal, African-Americans comprised 30 percent of the prison population. Sixty years later, African-Americans and Latinos make up 70 percent of the incarcerated population, and that population has skyrocketed. The disparities are greatest where race and class intersect—nearly 60 percent of all young black men born between 1965 and 1969 who dropped out of high school went to prison at least once on a felony conviction before they turned thirty-five. And the incarceration rate for this group—black male high school dropouts—is nearly fifty times the national average.

These disparities in turn have extraordinary ripple effects. For an entire cohort of young black men in America's inner cities, incarceration has become the more-likely-than-not norm, not the unthinkable exception. And in part because prisons today offer inmates little or nothing in the way of job training, education, or counseling regarding their return to society, ex-offenders' prospects for employment, housing, and marriage upon release drop precipitously from their already low levels before incarceration.

That in turn makes it far more likely that these ex-offenders will return to criminal behavior—and then to prison. Meanwhile, the incarceration of so many young men means more single-parent households, and more children whose fathers are in prison. Children with parents in prison are in turn seven times more likely to be imprisoned at some point in their lives than other children. As Brown professor Glenn Loury puts it in Race, Incarceration, and American Values, we are "creating a racially defined pariah class in the middle of our great cities."

...Until 1975, the United States' criminal justice system was roughly in line with much of Europe's. For fifty years preceding 1975, the US incarceration rate consistently hovered around 100 inmates per 100,000; criminologists made careers out of theorizing that the incarceration rate would never change. Around 1975, however, they were proved wrong, as the United States became radically more punitive. In thirty-five years, the incarceration rate ballooned to over 700 per 100,000, far outstripping all other countries.

This growth is not attributable to increased offending rates, but to increased punitiveness. Being "tough on crime" became a political mandate. State and federal legislatures imposed mandatory minimum sentences; abolished or radically restricted parole; and adopted "three strikes" laws that exact life imprisonment for a third offense, even when the offense is as minor as stealing a slice of pizza. Comparing the ratio of convictions to "index crimes" such as murder, rape, and burglary between 1975 and 1999 reveals that, holding crime constant, the United States became five times more punitive. Harvard sociologist Bruce Western estimates that the increase in incarceration rates since 1975 can take credit for only about 10 percent of the drop in crime over the same period.

Much of the extraordinary growth in the prison and jail population is attributable to a dramatic increase in prosecution and imprisonment for drug offenses. President Reagan declared a "war on drugs" in 1982, and the states eagerly followed suit. From 1980 to 1997, Loury tells us, the number of people incarcerated for drug offenses increased by 1,100 percent. Drug convictions alone account for more than 80 percent of the total increase in the federal prison population from 1985 to 1995. In 2008, four of five drug arrests were for possession, and only one in five was for distribution; fully half of all drug arrests were for marijuana offenses.

African-Americans have borne the brunt of this war. From 1985 to 1991, the number of white drug offenders in state prisons increased by 110 percent; the number of black drug offenders grew by 465 percent. The average time served by African-Americans for drug crimes grew by 62 percent between 1994 and 2003, while white drug offenders served 17 percent more time. Though 14 percent of monthly drug users are black, roughly equal to their proportion of the general population, they are arrested and imprisoned at vastly disproportionate rates: 37 percent of those arrested for drug offenses are black as well as 56 percent of those in state prisons for drug offenses. Blacks serve almost as much time in prison for drug offenses (average of 58.7 months) as whites do for violent crimes (average of 61.7 months)

...If white male babies faced anything like such prospects, the politics of crime would look very different. We would almost certainly see this as an urgent national calamity, and demand a collective investment of public resources to forestall so many going to prison. Politicians would insist that we reduce criminal penalties, decriminalize nonviolent drug offenses, and promote alternatives to incarceration.

...The war on drugs has by most accounts been a failure, and we are all paying the bill. In 2008, 1.7 million people were arrested for drug crimes.[12] Since 1989, more people have been incarcerated for drug offenses than for all violent crimes combined. Yet much like Prohibition, the war on drugs has not ended or even significantly diminished drug use. It has made drugs more expensive, and fostered a multibillion-dollar criminal industry in drug delivery and sales. Drugs have become more concentrated and deadly; twice as many people die from drugs today than before the war on drugs was declared. If anything, the war on drugs has probably increased the incidence of crime; about half of property crime, robberies, and burglaries are attributable to the inflated cost of drugs caused by criminalizing them.

Cole also outlines some of the fitful steps being taken at reforming this monstrous system -- most of them being driven by the financial crisis, as states find they can no longer maintain vast hordes of their own citizens behind bars. And a few officials are dimly beginning to ponder the broader social (and economic -- always economic!) consequences of consigning generation after generation of American citizens to lives of incarceration, poverty, hopelessness and injustice. But as Cole concludes:

Our addiction to punishment should be troubling not only because it is costly and often counterproductive, but because its race and class disparities are morally unacceptable. The most promising arguments for reform, therefore, must appeal simultaneously to considerations of pragmatism and principle. The very fact that the US record is so much worse than that of the rest of the world should tell us that we are doing something wrong, and the sheer waste of public dollars and human lives should impel us toward reform. But as the authors of these three books make clear, we will not understand the problem fully until we candidly confront the fact that our criminal justice system would not be tolerable to the majority if its impact were felt more broadly by the general population, and not concentrated on the most deprived among us.

Comments (8)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

dp63 said:

Amen brother You hit this right on the head. Prohibitionists - mostly politicians, law enforcement, Christian zealots and the plain ole ignorant - have destroyed any idea of personal liberty in this country. Wow, I used to believe we were teh Good Guys... the Land of the Free... fighters of political oppressors such as the Soviet Union, and Communist China. I served my country, and put my life on the line. For THIS? Is is a disguting shame that we, as a nation, gleefully subscribe to the notion of prisons-for-profit. We tell ourselves lie after lie about "human rights" and how countries like Iran, Iraq and Afghanistan are "corrupt" and abuse these rights. Any MENTION that the US is the leading incarcerator cause our Republican "friends" to snap and grit their teeth about the evils of "terrorism" and "drugs" and how we must fight these wars to "eliminate" them. So we declare a "War on Drugs" to suppress those who question our government's wars; we declare a "War on Terror" as an excuse to invade other countries, and to pass the "Patriot Act", giving the US government authority to eavesdrop, spy and conduct warrantless searches our own people and their homes. Just like "they" taught us the Soviets did back during the Cold War. Now who is the oppressor?. The truth is that the United States government has abdicated the Constitution, and has been operating illgally for DECADES now. They won't even DISCUSS any facet that may indicate that these problems could EVER be caused by US policy. TO acknowledge that would paint one as a traitor, and by golly, we're PATRIOTS. It makes me sick to my stomach. And the problem is... it's NEVER going to change. Oh, we might chane a small thing here or there, but the REAL issue is simply one word..... GREED. While I do enjoy many of the benefits of capitalism, it is, in essence, and system built upon GREED and the compulsion to make MONEY. It's most brazen in our corporate prison industry. It has been happening the longest in the military-industrial complex. IT'S RIGHT IN FRONT OF OUR FACES. But we, as a people, just don't see it anymore. Anyone who points this out is labeled a "liberal", or a "kook". I do consider myself a conservative. But I don't subscribe to the actions of the Republican Party as "conservative". Nor do I believe for an instant that the Democrats are much better. This country was founded by people who despised the English for over-taxation, for heavy-handed punative laws, for refusing us a lack of self-determination, and the notion that we "belonged" to the British Empire somehow. Our government has been operating tacitly under the same gameplan for a while now, but they are better able to disguise it because the are responding to the "voter's wishes". Yeah, by dreaming up bigger and bigger scares to frighten us, then by promising to "save" us by passing increasingly harsher laws and sentences. So here we are. The "Land of the Free" must now be recognized, undistbutably, as the "Land of the Incarcerated". The Amerikan Gulag. The Prison States of Amerika. This makes me extremely angry and sad. How can we find our way now?

report abuse vote down vote up

November 05, 2009
Votes: +4

yankee 30 said:

	... dp63 said: "Is is a disguting shame that we, as a nation, gleefully subscribe to the notion of prisons-for-profit." Why is that? We gleefully subscribe to the notion of anything-for-profit. You said so yourself: "While I do enjoy many of the benefits of capitalism, it is, in essence, and system built upon GREED and the compulsion to make MONEY."
	report abuse vote down vote up

November 05, 2009
Votes: +0

trisha said:

	Guess what? Guess what? America remains part of the British Empire. In fact, it never left it. The British Bank of England (a privately owned bank) owns 75 per cent of the U.S. Federal Reserve (another privately owned bank). The largest investor in the private prison system in the U.S. is the Queen of England.
	report abuse vote down vote up

November 06, 2009 | url
Votes: +0

druff said:

... Does anyone have a good concept of why punitiveness increased so much starting in 1975? Was it just shell-shock from the 60's? Well I guess that and the reefer madness propaganda -- I believe the war on drugs was officially initiated by Nixon, not Reagan, but I'm too lazy to look it up. Oh, and to maximize profits on Vietnamese "imports" by intelligence agencies perhaps, and in anticipation of Iran/Contra? Just when did the private prison industry begin to bloom? Whatever, I'm bored. Also, I wonder just how different the public attitude would be if whites did get equal treatment under the law, equal to blacks that is. I'm cynical: I think to a large degree a white man forfeits his racial advantage as soon as he's convicted of something, in the eyes of the masses. He's just another criminal now. Good thing he's off our streets. And god help him if he's a pedophile. No? It's just hard for me to see anything like a majority rising in support of "criminals," no matter the hue. At least a majority of people who matter.

report abuse vote down vote up

November 06, 2009
Votes: +0

druff said:

	one more thing... By the way, when I was finishin up my comment I was thinking about that press conference BHO held a few months ago, when viewers voted marijuana decriminalization as one of the most important current political topics, and BHO laughed the question off along with that polite assemblage of courtiers. Chortle chortle, get real.
	report abuse vote down vote up

November 06, 2009
Votes: +0

cripes said:

Disgrace Yes, O'Bummer's snide dismissal of "little single payers" and marijuana decriminalization advocates should have demonstrated for anyone with functioning brain cells that he is nothing but a shill for corporations and the prison-industrial complex. This from the third president in a row who has admittedly used pot or cocaine, or both. Disgusting. I can't think of a president since Herbert Hoover who has done less for black people than Barack Obama. God, I hate these MFr's.

report abuse vote down vote up

November 07, 2009
Votes: +1

Bill Harris said:

peace on the home front One need not travel to China to find indigenous cultures lacking human rights or to Cuba for political prisoners. America leads the world in percentile behind bars, thanks to ongoing persecution of hippies, radicals, and non-whites under prosecution of the war on drugs. If we’re all about spreading liberty abroad, then why mix the message at home? Peace on the home front would enhance global credibility. The drug czar’s Rx for prison fodder costs dearly, as life is flushed down expensive tubes. My shaman’s second opinion is that psychoactive plants are God’s gift. Behold, it’s all good. When Eve ate the apple, she knew a good apple, and an evil prohibition. Canadian Marc Emery is being extradited to prison for selling seeds that American farmers use to reduce U. S. demand for Mexican pot. Only on the authority of a clause about interstate commerce does the CSA (Controlled Substances Act of 1970) reincarnate Al Capone, endanger homeland security, and throw good money after bad. Administration fiscal policy burns tax dollars to root out the number-one cash crop in the land, instead of taxing sales. Society rejected the plague of prohibition, but it mutated. Apparently, SWAT teams don’t need no stinking amendment. Nixon passed the CSA on the false assurance that the Schafer Commission would later justify criminalizing his enemies. No amendments can assure due process under an anti-science law without due process itself. Psychology hailed the breakthrough potential of LSD, until the CSA shut down research, and pronounced that marijuana has no medical use, period. Drug juries exclude bleeding hearts. The RFRA (Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993) allows Native American Church members to eat peyote, which functions like LSD. Americans shouldn’t need a specific church membership or an act of Congress to obtain their birthright freedom of religion. John Doe’s free exercise of religious liberty may include entheogen sacraments to mediate communion with his maker. Freedom of speech presupposes freedom of thought. The Constitution doesn’t enumerate any governmental power to embargo diverse states of mind. How and when did government usurp this power to coerce conformity? The Mayflower sailed to escape coerced conformity. Legislators who would limit cognitive liberty lack jurisdiction. Common-law must hold that adults are the legal owners of their own bodies. The Founding Fathers undersigned that the right to the pursuit of happiness is inalienable. Socrates said to know your self. Mortal lawmakers should not presume to thwart the intelligent design that molecular keys unlock spiritual doors. Persons who appreciate their own free choice of path in life should tolerate seekers’ self-exploration.

report abuse vote down vote up

November 10, 2009 | url
Votes: +1

Sean O'Neil said:

... druff, in order to make the government appear serious about wrongdoing --when it had just shown propensity for its own wrongdoing in ample amounts on two fronts, Watergate and Vietnam-- it had to become super-punitive toward the citizenry. It's like the dude who was beaten as a kid, he now kicks his dog without remorse because it's easier than looking at his own problems and fixing them. Take 'em out on the dog! Watergate proved that the White House was run by criminals who wanted to retain federal purse strings power, power that was waning in 1973 as the Vietnam war was a font of citizen irritation. It's easy to make money when there's a war on... harder to do so when there isn't. War generates big spending (duh!) so what's gonna fill that hole when the war is ended? Citizen displeasure with the Fed Govt in the early-to-mid 70s was easily the most obvious I've seen in my lifetime. That stuff spooks the people who hold the federal purse strings power. You can't get rich if you can't enrich your pals, and you can't enrich your pals if the citizenry is clamoring for you and your pals to be removed from power (and access thereto, in your friends' case). Citizens now are apathatic compared to how they were in Vietnam's ongoing public war era. People seem resigned to the nation being at war no matter who is president and who runs the congress. I find it strange that so many libwools and pwoggies are up in arms about Citizens United vs Federal Election Commission. I think it's because the SCOTUS is the last place the pwoggies and lib-wools can find Evil Rethuglicans at which pwoggies can poke fingers and lib-wools can whinge. Meanwhile, Barry O'Goldsachs and Joey "Corpwhore" Buy-In are giving us Bush-Cheney's third term, which merits scant criticism from those same otherwise angry (at the SCOTUS) libwools and pwoggies. It's strange.

report abuse vote down vote up

January 27, 2010
Votes: +0