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 (3rd 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 (11th
ed.). New York: Routledge.
Schmalleger, F.
(2008). Criminal justice: A brief
introduction (7th 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 (5th ed.). Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth.
Woodiwiss, M.
(2001). Organized crime and American power.
Toronto: University of
Toronto
Press.
Comments
Post a Comment