Michelle Alexander on The New Jim Crow, at Union Theological Seminary

[Axum Ezana]

good watch imo.

 

[Elle Driver]

I really really like her.

 

[Field Marshall Bradley]

 

[KOohbt]

My boo

 

[agnosticlady]

I read some of her book and it was worth it. She is elegant classy woman. Much respect to her...

 

[valet]

What are your thougts on this rebuttal. It's a long read but if you have the time I'm curious
http://harvardjol.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/HLL104_crop1.pdf

 

[Grano-Grano]

Michelle Alexander is the only one keeping it hunnid, the rest are fufu half pseudo-intellectuals

 

[EndDomination]

Love her, great watch.
The New Jim Crow, and a number of her academic publications should be required reading for anyone going into Criminology, or (Godforbid) law enforcement.

 

[EndDomination]

What are your thougts on this rebuttal. It's a long read but if you have the time I'm curious
http://harvardjol.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/HLL104_crop1.pdf

I don't know how I feel about this. A few of the statistics seem to be completely made-up.
First one I noted was on pg.176, where it says "For all the talk about drug incarcerations driving up prison populations, drug offenders comprise only 17% of state prison populations and explain only about 20% of prison growth since 1980."
The Department of Justice has showed that the number of inmates incarcerated in federal prison for drug and drug-related crimes is in the area of 48%
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/p11.pdf
This rebuttal seems to be a more of a gloomy outlook, systemic rebuttal, than anything concrete and unbiased.
Not a bad read, but this wouldn't pass in my undergraduate Methods class, just by appropriation of reported statistics alone.

 

[David_TheMan]

I don't know how I feel about this. A few of the statistics seem to be completely made-up.
First one I noted was on pg.176, where it says "For all the talk about drug incarcerations driving up prison populations, drug offenders comprise only 17% of state prison populations and explain only about 20% of prison growth since 1980."
The Department of Justice has showed that the number of inmates incarcerated in federal prison for drug and drug-related crimes is in the area of 48%
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/p11.pdf
This rebuttal seems to be a more of a gloomy outlook, systemic rebuttal, than anything concrete and unbiased.
Not a bad read, but this wouldn't pass in my undergraduate Methods class, just by appropriation of reported statistics alone.

I think you made a mistake in reading the stats.
The section you quote says 20% of prison growth since 1980, not the percentage of drug related prisons that you cite from the DOJ at for federal prison 48%

 

[David_TheMan]

What are your thougts on this rebuttal. It's a long read but if you have the time I'm curious
http://harvardjol.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/HLL104_crop1.pdf

Thank you for the article, I think the writer has brought up some very strong points to the data Michelle uses.
I think he might be a bit too narrow though in his focus, I think he severely discounts the violence brought by the criminalization of drugs and the war on drugs itself in creating the violent crime and property crime incarceration increases that he notes.

I wish they would work together, author of your paper and Alexander, because I think the truth is somewhere in the middle.