I looked at most of your video: The New Jim Crow.
Two things I had not known much about were covered in it:Tulia, TX, and the Iran-contra affair with the sale of Cocaine by the CIA
The “New Jim Crow” is the drug laws that were passed in the '80s and 90’s. These have caused a large group of black men to be incarcerated for drug related crimes, mainly possession. This is according to the video.
I did not check the stats on that but will accept them as accurate.
They give as evidence that this New Jim Crow is alive and well by citing the Tulia incident and the CIA’s trafficking in drugs.
The Tulia incident was the arrest of 48 people (40 blacks, 9 whites) on drug charges by the police of a small (pop 4000+) town in central TX by a free-lancing cop. Most of he Blacks pled out for lesser sentences to avoid longer ones they felt that prejudiced all white juries would mete out. Some were in prison for a few years before all being released because of some reporting by a paper in Amarillo, a little ways from Tulia.
The assumption of the video is that the whole country is like this little town, full of racists and people trying to imprison blacks. There has not been another incident like this one, so it is hard to extrapolate a universal Jim Crow on an incident in a small town.
The second line of evidence is the CIA Iran-Contra affair and the allegation that the CIA was funneling drugs to black neighborhoods in LA.
This was reported by reporters of a paper, (something or other) Mercury and then investigated by the WaPo, the NYT, and the LA Times. The evidence was “thin”, and even with congressional committees looking into it, it was thin.
The video assumes that the CIA was active, and was getting drugs into black communities so that they might be jailed. It is a great conspiracy theory.
Soo… I am not convinced that any kind of “New Jim Crow” exists. Not by that evidence, at least.
I do know that blacks are over represented in prison. The reasons for this are complex, and to say that any one issue is the overwhelming one, ie, White supremacy or racism, is to grossly simplify the matter.
I do not deny racism. It is just that I don’t think it is the underlying motivation or issue of all or even a majority of white individuals. Hillary mentioned implicit racism, implying that the whole system is racist. I think that is a reach.
Recently, a Starbucks manager called the police on two black guys who would not leave, and would not buy anything; apparently she was following the rules set up by the corporation, you are to buy or leave (which are not racist because they do not mention race). But the idea is that they are applied discriminately.
She has been fired, or she quit. Now, the response has been Starbucks doing some kind “sensitivity training” for all its staff, as if the whole corporation is racist, when it fact the corporation has a very liberal record on such matters: remember the “lets talk race” campaign? One individual might even be (sounds like she was just doing what she thought her job), but not the whole corporation! So, manage the manager, and don’t assume that the whole place is crawling with racist. It is not. Especially Starbucks.
In other words, the MANAGER may have been at fault, not the corporation. Correct her, not everyone. This is a shotgun approach.
And even when she did call the cops, several white patrons objected!
The video was slanted and poorly done. It’s claims were really not verified. There is not any New Jim Crow.
So, to ask me to view something that really does not prove your point, really, actually, only proves mine. I need better than a small town in TX, and make believe accusations against the CIA.
(I looked up the material on Wikipedia, not a conservative information site)
I did learn some things, though.