The Extended Hangover of American Patriotism and Hypocritical Crime Control

Introduction

            

          American values about freedom and liberty were never fully implemented into the country.  From the inception of the nation there was discrimination towards Native Americans and Black people, as well as other creeds who did not have Anglo-Saxon heritages – western European characteristics to be exact (Alexander, 2012; Kennedy, 2002; Walker, Spohn, & Delone, 2012).  The framers of the Constitution and Bill of Rights knew that these discrepancies would cause problems in the progression of the United States, yet they still decided to disenfranchise a specific group of people because of cultural norms that were abundant during their era (Alexander, 2012; Kennedy, 2002; Walker et al., 2012).  This contradiction is the major point in this essay and it will be explored through the practices of crime control in the United States.  More specifically, the mechanisms of the legal system are focused on because it is the legal system in the United States that mostly describes what is appropriate behavior, who is accepted in its society, and enforces violations of the proscribed norms that are aforementioned.  In sum, the ideas about freedom, liberty, and social morales are conveyed to citizens in the country by the laws in the United States and especially through the procedures associated with the criminal justice system.  

Maladroit professionalism is the result of these biases in crime control and general ideations about equality and freedom for all in the United States.  Moreover, these callous and inept practices by legal practitioners have been ongoing in the United States for such a longstanding duration that there is no doubt that hypocrisy and, simply put, dumb thinking has been the common recourse for those who work in areas of crime control.  Blatant hypocrisy is, unfortunately, normal in the United States’ criminal justice system and the law enforcers have been unable to rectify any of the deliberate biases because of the internal and external cultures that have been engraved in their employers and communities that they reside in (Alexander, 2012; Kennedy, 2002; Walker et al., 2012).  In other words, there is a false pride of patriotism because of the above-mentioned biases and the legal practitioners do not change it because it is considered to be normal in their minds (Alexander, 2012; Kennedy, 2002; Walker et al., 2012). 

False Patriotism for Over Two-Hundred Years

Individual pride for being a citizen in the United States is nothing to be ashamed of, nor is it improper to have quality beliefs about a nation that has assisted a person with many elements in their livelihoods.  The false patriotism of Americans arises only when general assertions are made about equality and freedom to all or obvious prejudices in the previously mentioned patriotic ideas by individuals (Alexander, 2012; Kennedy, 2002; Walker et al., 2012).  Again, this is primarily the United States’ framers' fault for not actually implementing such notions during the construction of the government in their part of history (Alexander, 2012; Kennedy, 2002; Walker et al., 2012).  Furthermore, these false ideas about liberty and justice for all have been carried on by many organizations and people in both the private and public sectors and, in turn, subjugated individual perceptions about the matters (Alexander, 2012; Kennedy, 2002; Walker et al., 2012).  That is, governmental agencies and private organizations have routinely instilled biased patriotic claims and ideas since the nation’s inception and, because of this, citizens have believed false ideologies about American patriotism and have been directly and indirectly condoning the prejudices that are very obvious in the current and past eras in the country (Alexander, 2012; Kennedy, 2002; Walker et al., 2012). 

The criminal justice system comes into effect due to its ability to enforce codified rules and norms in American culture, as well as because it is operated and evolved by human beings (Alexander, 2012; Kennedy, 2002; Pyle, 2002; Walker et al., 2012).  Equality, justice for all, and freedom are the basis for everything that law enforcers and lawmakers engage while on duty (Alexander, 2012; Kennedy, 2002; Pyle, 2002; Walker et al., 2012).  Legislators, police officers, prosecutors, judges, other lawyers, and corrections professionals are supposed to be upholding the ideas about the fundamental premises that the institutions of government, private organizations, and citizens suggest that they stand for (Alexander, 2012; Kennedy, 2002; Pyle, 2002; Walker et al., 2012).  However, this is not going on and it has been occurring for over two-hundred years now (Alexander, 2012; Kennedy, 2002; Pyle, 2002; Walker et al., 2012).  To be more precise, the government-based organizations, private agencies, and many individuals in the United States have been standing for biased law enforcement against poor people, racial and ethnic minorities, and applying criminal laws in a favorable fashion or not at all to persons who are wealthy or not a minority (Alexander, 2012; Kennedy, 2002; Pyle, 2002; Walker et al., 2012).  These administrations of justice are not ideas based on equality, liberty, freedom, or justice for all.  It is actually selective criminalization that has been done to cater to prejudices that are, unfortunately, abundant in the United States and condoned by many of its citizens and public and private organizations (Alexander, 2012; Kennedy, 2002; Walker et al., 2012).

Details of Hypocritical Crime Control in the United States

Crime control needs to be understood as actions conducted by state and federal agencies and not only activities by typical law enforcement organizations (Alexander, 2012; Kennedy, 2002; Pyle, 2002; Schmalleger, 2008; Walker et al., 2012).  Again, since the nation’s inception the United States and its ancillary components have attacked unwanted behaviors and individuals who have been labeled as inferior (Alexander, 2012; Kennedy, 2002; Pyle, 2002; Schmalleger, 2008; Walker et al., 2012).  The first two groups that were turned into criminals were the Native Americans and Black people (Alexander, 2012; Kennedy, 2002; Walker et al., 2012).  Military operations and police officers relentlessly sought the extermination of these two groups because of biased ideas about freedom, justice, and liberty (Alexander, 2012; Kennedy, 2002; Walker et al., 2012; Woodiwiss, 2001).  Moreover, it should be noted that these initial procedures in the nation’s early history were condoned because the legal system permitted the prejudiced actions by law enforcers and military personnel (Alexander, 2012; Kennedy, 2002; Walker et al., 2012; Woodiwiss, 2001).  There is no doubt that the Bill of Rights was not protecting these victims (Native Americans and Black people) for many years immediately after the revolt against King George’s forces, as well as up to the current date (Alexander, 2012; Kennedy, 2002; Walker et al., 2012; Woodiwiss, 2001).  Social control was first meted out through strict uses of violence and aggression, and when human rights activists cried out claims that described the government-based actions as cruel and inhumane the only change that occurred was furthering the control tactics through the implementation of the criminal justice system – which was less violent than the prior wartime and slave-based engagements against the two groups (Native Americans and Black people).  Yet the system still inflicted corporal punishments and even capital punishment at times mostly against the non-Caucasian groups (Alexander, 2012; Kennedy, 2002; Walker et al., 2012; Woodiwiss, 2001).  Therefore, the equal distribution of law enforcement was never properly established in the country (Alexander, 2012; Kennedy, 2002; Walker et al., 2012; Woodiwiss, 2001).  

   

When the criminal justice systems began to deal with scrutiny for their biased actions, the lawmakers turned to their powers to justify their actions.  Native Americans eventually were able to negotiate a peace offering and retreated to lands that were configured for their livelihoods, yet the social tensions still persisted when the people encountered White Americans when they traveled from their reservations (Alexander, 2012; Kennedy, 2002; Walker et al., 2012; Woodiwiss, 2001).  Of this, hatred and biased laws against Black people became the primary focus for law enforcers in the United States (Alexander, 2012; Kennedy, 2002; Walker et al., 2012; Woodiwiss, 2001).  Laws were made that allowed the biases to be legal which, in turn, not only harmed many Black Americans, but also condoned the racism by citizens and private and public organizations (Alexander, 2012; Kennedy, 2002; Walker et al., 2012; Woodiwiss, 2001).  The legal system, essentially, told Caucasian Americans that it was appropriate to apply the law differently to Black people – and other racial and ethnic minorities – in the United States and that hatred toward the group was acceptable regardless of the lack of purpose for the critical perceptions against the minorities.  Jim Crow laws are an example of the aforementioned legal discrimination in the United States, and even after the creation of the Fourteenth Amendment the law enforcers established a society and a criminal justice system that sought out poor people and social outcasts – which included Black Americans (Alexander, 2012; Kennedy, 2002; Walker et al., 2012; Woodiwiss, 2001).  The fact is that crime control methods have been mostly centered on targeting minorities in the United States and indigent persons altogether (Alexander, 2012; Kennedy, 2002; Reiman & Leighton, 2017; Walker et al., 2012; Woodiwiss, 2001).  These practices by law enforcers is, again, not in accordance to the values that entail justice, freedom, and liberty, and, once more, the claims about the values have never been fully true when delivered into the American culture by the institutions of government and entities in the private sector.  Optimistic lies have been routine and still are being performed in the United States to this day (Alexander, 2012; Kennedy, 2002; Reiman & Leighton, 2017; Walker et al., 2012; Woodiwiss, 2001).  Even with liberal reforms that have taken place in the United States, the actions and statistics of the criminal justice system speak for itself (Alexander, 2012; Kennedy, 2002; Reiman & Leighton, 2017; Walker et al., 2012; Woodiwiss, 2001). 

Conclusion

            

               The United States is built on false ideologies of justice, liberty, and freedom for all (Alexander, 2012; Kennedy, 2002; Reiman & Leighton, 2017; Walker et al., 2012; Woodiwiss, 2001).  Withal, sincere positive changes to rectify the discrimination have never been fully implemented and the criminal justice system and its practitioners have been deliberately seeking out poor people and racial and ethnic minorities since the nation’s inception (Alexander, 2012; Kennedy, 2002; Reiman & Leighton, 2017; Walker et al., 2012; Woodiwiss, 2001).  These biased actions still go on today, and the country’s mottos are not even close to being true when the activities by law enforcers is properly examined (Alexander, 2012; Kennedy, 2002; Reiman & Leighton, 2017; Walker et al., 2012; Woodiwiss, 2001).  Even when laws are created that should instill an appreciation for individuals and groups, there are always organizations and people who disregard the ideas because of the false ideologies that have entered the American culture since its formulation.  Lawmakers, police officers, court people, and corrections personnel have been making a living from deliberate harms against the lower classes in the United States, and the criminal justice system is used as a scapegoat when any claims of biases are made against them (Alexander, 2012; Kennedy, 2002; Reiman & Leighton, 2017; Walker et al., 2012; Woodiwiss, 2001). 

Overall, crime control is used to cover-up the obvious hatred that has been ongoing, and when there are no significant changes in the approach to the administration of law in a country it tends to be carried on (Alexander, 2012; Kennedy, 2002; Reiman & Leighton, 2017; Walker et al., 2012; Woodiwiss, 2001).  The flak that should be received for these prejudices does not occur because of the false pride that has been engraved in many citizens’ minds for their entire lives and, because of this, generational prejudices have been ongoing for over two-hundred years in the United States (Alexander, 2012; Kennedy, 2002; Reiman & Leighton, 2017; Walker et al., 2012; Woodiwiss, 2001).  The only changes have come in the advancement of the use of the legal system.  Rather than horrible corporal punishments, torture, capital punishments, and pure hatred toward a specific class of people, the legal practitioners now simply hide behind images of heroism and infer that victimization is being deterred and eliminated by them.  False premises are what the United States’ agencies and many of its private organizations and citizens have been participating in for a long time now (Alexander, 2012; Kennedy, 2002; Reiman & Leighton, 2017; Walker et al., 2012; Woodiwiss, 2001).  Crime control in the country is based on this long history of prejudiced behavior (Alexander, 2012; Kennedy, 2002; Reiman & Leighton, 2017; Walker et al., 2012; Woodiwiss, 2001).

References

Alexander, M.  (2012).  The new Jim Crow:  Mass incarceration in the age of colorblindedness.

            New York:  The New Press.

Kennedy, R.  (2002).  Nigger:  The strange career of a troublesome word.  New York:  Vintage.

Pyle, R. C.  (2002).  Foundations of law:  Cases, commentary & ethics (3^rd ed.).  Albany, NY:

            West Legal Studies.

Reiman, J., & Leighton, P.  (2017).  The rich get richer and the poor get prison:  Ideology,

            class, and criminal justice (11^th ed.).  New York:  Routledge.

Schmalleger, F.  (2008).  Criminal justice:  A brief introduction (7^th ed.).  Upper Saddle River,

            NJ:  Pearson Prentice Hall.

Walker, S., Spohn, C., & Delone, M.  (2012).  The color of justice:  Race, ethnicity, and crime in

            America (5^th ed.).  Belmont, CA:  Wadsworth.

Woodiwiss, M.  (2001).  Organized crime and American power.  Toronto:  University of

            Toronto Press.