Carving "Jena" in Anti-Racist History

No doubt, yesterday was big. I'm proud of our little brown corner of blogland (Sylvia!) for playing a part in spreading the story of the Jena 6 and watching it grow and grow until it blossomed into a massive grassroots civil rights march on the international stage. Perhaps in time, "Jena" will take on the historic ring of such place names as "Selma", "Birmingham", and "Little Rock" in the annals of anti-racist struggle.

Now that most semi-conscious people out there have heard the basic outlines of the story, I see it as the job of (real) progressives to assert an anti-racist narrative frame in popular discourse. All too often stripped of historical and social context, the story can get fragmented and reduced to a random series of isolated incidents to be pondered like some cheesy Law And Order script, hyper-focused on legal technicalities and the minutiae of violence. But properly contextualized, the story neatly illustrates the fundamental realities of institutional racism in action: the white control of decision-making offices at all levels — school board, law enforcement, district attorney, judge and jury — and the draconian penalties which befall young persons of color who resist the racist social order, as hauntingly symbolized by the wide leafy oak tree in the center of the schoolyard whose cool southern shade was jealously reserved for white skin only.

In my view, the most striking element of the extensive CNN coverage I watched yesterday was the profundity of white denial of racism. Almost without exception, white Jena residents who were asked whether there was "racial tension" in their town suddenly looked as though a major chunk of their brain short-circuited and went dark, their eyes went flat, and they mass-hypnotically mouthed hollow statements such as "No we're not that kind of people, we play football together." And that's because one of the effects of racism is precisely a sort of mass hypnosis which insidiously blinds people to the flagrant system of power and oppression under which they live by making the racist power structure seem as natural and invisible as the air we breathe.

Thus it is impossible for most white Jena residents, questioned about racism, to think it over for a few seconds and say, "Yes, racism has been a serious historical problem in these parts, just like in the rest of the country, and we're still struggling to get past that dark legacy; but we've made a lot of progress and we're trying our best to see to it that African Americans in our community have equal rights and protections, and I hope that's the case with the Jena 6 too." You might think this would be a good thing to say, an easy way to diffuse the situation and avoid a ton of bad press. But most white Jena residents are literally incapable of saying such a thing because the brain functions which organize such thoughts have been shut down by racist socialization. Indeed, it didn't even occur to most of the white Jena residents whom I saw interviewed that the story was about black folks, not white folks; the suffering of black families ripped apart by unjust incarceration did not even register on their mental radar screens, all they could see was their own suffering at being portrayed as racist.

This isn't to say that Jena is necessarily a town teeming with Klansmen. Then again, who are we kidding. This is an area that voted for David Duke. Between 1878 and 1946, there were at least 421 recorded lynchings in Louisiana. Of course, lynchings have never been strictly about killing one specific person; lynchings have always been an ideological statement designed to communicate the sociopathic psycho-sexual ferocity with which the racist social order will be guarded. Nooses hanging from a white shade tree, though physically unused, nevertheless make the same ideological statement and are therefore just as mentally, emotionally, and socially injurious as a blow to the body. And that's what this story is about: a group of black kids who refused to swallow that ideological statement and in fact fought back in self-defense, and the venomous disregard for young black lives which the legal system has exhibited in responding to that pushback.

So the question is: now what? In the coming days and weeks, we'll see what kind of impact yesterday's demonstration had on various decision-makers; but judging from the decidedly nasty whiff coming off district attorney Reed Walters, I'm guessing that this is far from over. Many different groups are now involved, so there will likely be plenty of distributed, decentralized activity, which in my book is a good thing for progressive activism. If you have any local or national groups working on this issue which you'd like to get involved with, I say go for it, now is the time.

The good news is that we — meaning, our little corner of blogland — are presently sitting on a piece of heavy political artillery: our petition addressed to the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice, which has now gathered almost 400,000 signatures and is still going strong as ever. I've been corresponding closely with Tom (who posted and is maintaining the petition in the face of near-constant racist spam attacks) about what to do with this hefty list of names. We're planning on launching a simple website dedicated to the petition and Jena 6 activism, a place which activists and journalists can google to find out what's going on. We're planning on putting together a press release about the petition (in response to interest from the media) and a coalition-building memo seeking collaboration and participation from all interested parties. We're looking for help, both in terms of ideas and execution.

Personally, I believe it can be shown in court that the disproportionate prosecution of the Jena 6 violates the Fourteenth Amendment of the US Constitution, which guarantees due process and equal protection under the law. Therefore, my thinking at this time is to use the petition as political theater and moral pressure in pushing key decision-makers — the attorney general, the presidential candidates, the state governor, etc. — to bring the case into constitutional compliance. These public figures must be compelled to calculate that it's more costly to ignore the problem than to solve it. (Moreover, the case can be used to discuss the racism of the criminal justice system more broadly, and to illuminate the systemic mass violence that is occurring every day in the prison-industrial complex.) As chairman of the Judiciary Committee, my understanding is that Rep. John Conyers has the power to move this issue forward with the Civil Rights Division. Maybe that's as good a place as any to start making noise. I'd love to hear some of your thoughts.

Comments

[rootlesscosmo]

Great post--I sure am glad I found this blog, just wish it had been sooner.

I'm not a lawyer but I'm not sure the 14th Amendment violation as such is a workable peg to hang legal action on. What I'm remembering is a section of Reconstruction-era civil rights law that prohibits state and local governments from depriving people of their rights "under color of law." This was used successfully in a number of cases in the 60's and 70's and might be a way of putting the harsh light of legal scrutiny on Walters.

[Nightprowlkitty]

I think you are absolutely right that this is not the end of the story.

I took a call today for a lawyer (I'm a legal secretary), it was a fellow from Louisiana. I blog a lot about NOLA, so I asked him where he was from. He said Alexandria, and then made a comment about how that was near Jena. He made some sort of joke about how they all were making a lot of money because of all the folks going to Jena to protest.

Got a sinking feeling in my stomach, but tried to stay professional. I said I hoped things worked out for all, that justice was served. He made some comment that he didn't like the "stereotyping" going on. The sinking feeling in my stomach grew worse -- I responded, "well, I think a lot of folks in this country are getting sick of being stereotyped." His voice became a bit colder and we quickly ended the conversation.

Equal protection under the law. That is exactly what this is about. Law makes no sense at all unless it is applied equally. In the case of the Jena 6, it is crystal clear that was not the case.

Thanks for the great work you have done -- have signed the petition and will blog about this myself as well, to get more signatures.

[prof black woman]

Did you also notice how some of the CNN reporting downplayed the initial incident by calling this a "war of words" or focusing in on the one interracial family they could find? While trying to find out if they were going to repeat the broadcast, I also noticed that they had it juxtaposed against the latest OJ Simpson Debacle a clear undercut of the cries of injustice in the "black community."

I am glad CNN got people talking but I am equally glad that you are calling for a critical stance on racism that goes beyond the march and the tv soundbites. I think there were a lot of ways that the media played into mystifying the larger issues even while rhetorically calling them up and that is much harder to fight than blatant racism. We have to come with all our tools sharp if we are going to fight against those of "the masters."

[Kai]

rootlesscosmo, yeah I'm not a lawyer either, so I'm not too sure about my 14th Amendment approach. We'll need to hear from some lawyers before settling on a legal strategy, but thanks for suggesting the "color of law" idea.

Nightprowlkitty, well it sounds like your Louisiana dude expected you to respond differently to his social cues. Good for you for defying them. And thanks for promoting the petition on your blog!

[Kai]

Prof, I missed the segment with the interracial family, but I did absolutely catch the OJ juxtaposition, which was pretty bad. I couldn't agree with you more about the pitfalls of TV coverage, which usually misframes stories about race; and yes self-congratulatory white liberal narratives are often more insidious than overt racism because they require much more rigorous analysis and critique, as you suggest. So my prescription is to ride the story but leapfrog the misframing and assert our own anti-racist narrative frames. Not sure if it works yet, but it's an idea anyway... Thanks as always for your thoughts.

[Tom]

Another framing issue that seems to creep up even among those of us who support the accused is the "six" business. Six young men have been accused, and we support justice for all six. So far, so good.

But that has been turned around into some kind of very odd -- but pervasive -- idea that the fight at the school was six on one. Where's the evidence for that?? Then our opponents go from there to saying, wow, six of em, look how serious that makes it.

But eyewitness accounts of who and how many were all over the map! As far as I know, there is not agreement among eyewitnesses over whether Bell was involved at all. I haven't seen any serious effort to present any one narrative that actually involves six assailants, let alone the particular six who have been accused.

[Kai]

Good point, Tom. We really don't know exactly what happened that day, though we do know that the Barker kid did get his ass kicked by somebody or other, probably for slinging the n-word (before later getting expelled from school for bringing a shotgun onto campus). We also know that two of the witnesses called against Bell were two of the original noose-hangers. My impression at this point is that DA Walters semi-arbitrarily picked out six "troublemakers" as a sort of representative body of black kids through whom the town's white power structure could send a sinister collective message to the black community.

[Theriomorph]

Thank you for this, Kai - linking, and another person glad to have found your work here.

[prof black woman]

yes Kai and add to that that the testimony of many at the Bell trial could not concretely place him there at all! The stuff that leaked out from the court made it very clear that this was a brawl involving multiple people and that some of the accussed may not have even been present. Worse, the idea that this fight took place in isolation, meaning that we cannot count the number of gun toting (literally) white students in the preceeding incidents of part of the numbers we count in this fight maybe legally true but realistically false. What is especially interesting to me is that leaving an argument at the local store, gas station, or the high school to get a shot gun and come back is nothing but using your shoe in a fight is "assault with a deadly weapon." There is so much to this case that is obvious that it would be astounding that people still see this as a black community issue instead of a N. American society one if I hadn't had students ask me innocently "what is so wrong with blackface?" in one of my first classes after a unit comparing the laws, the violence, and black face performance to each other and then to modern day blackface parties on the campuses in our area. There is a blatant unwillingness to see oppression even amongst those who do not consider themselves racist and belong to no white supremacist groups, I think there are more of them quite frankly.

Anyway, I am ranting so I will stop now.

[Blackamazon]

It is amazing hwo badly people seek to reframe this as if we're talking baout letting the kids off scott free or no punishment at all.

It would be mind boggling if it wasn't so damn predictable

[Nezua Limón Xolagrafik-Jonez]

we could whip out all bob dylan's songs about emmet til and hurricane and hattie carroll and william zanzinger and they would fit like a glove today. what a fuckin shame.

[psa23dg]

Thank you for the information you provided on this blog. I already signed the petition to the Civil Roights Division and forwarded the information to 60 email buddies. I was met with hostility on Firedoglake yesterday when I commented that the liberal blogs refuse to engage on a discussion about racism. The groupthink appears to be "if we don't acknowledge it there is no problem". There is a big problem, and liberal, progressive Democrats are a large part of it. I am 55-years old and have voted in every election since I was 21. I always voted for Democratic candidates. Those days are over. I am tired of getting played by the Democratic party. Hell will freeze over before the Democratic Party replays the loyalty to African American voters. I will not vote for any Presidential candidate or member of Congress who voted for the war in Iraq. I will not vote for any Presidential candidate who does not immediately address this isssue and push for equal justice under the law for all Americans.

[underdog]

The act of naming is a powerful device/tool. To call a thing by it's rightful name. Maybe it's time to call acts of racist violence (hate crimes) against citizens, acts of Terror; KKK, Neo-Nazi's, should be refered to as Terrorist groups. The act of naming has worked for the Neo-Cons for the last thirty or so years. To go on the offensive is to use the language of your oppressor to neutralize them.

[Cero]

I am somewhat freaked out/unhinged to discover exactly what so many of the whites actually think and are willing to say.