It seems to jerk a certain chain with the
right whenever it is discovered that the cop who kills or maims the black
person is black too. The point made is that this is, then, a priori not a
racist act.
There is a larger point here, a truth that
is in real conflict with the conservative vision of America – for surely it is
not only a racist act. The
militarization of the police, and their elbow room to do illegal acts and acts
of brutality, is not simply racist. It is also the effect of the way in which
domestic affairs in America, since the Nixon era, have been framed in military
terms – for instance, the War on Crime. It is also the effect of class. The
overwhelming number of victims of police brutality are in the bottom of the
income and wealth brackets. And the African-American population has long been
on the bottom of the pole, statistically, with regard to wealth and income. It
is a fact that nobody cares about in the United States that the Great Recession
struck black households harder than anybody else. Pew Research had this to say
in 2014:
“The wealth of white households was 13 times
the median wealth of black households in 2013, compared with eight times the
wealth in 2010, according to a new Pew Research Center analysis of data from
the Federal Reserve’s Survey of Consumer
Finances. Likewise, the
wealth of white households is now more than 10 times the wealth of Hispanic
households, compared with nine times the wealth in 2010.
The current gap between blacks and whites
has reached its highest point since 1989, when whites had 17 times the wealth
of black households. The current white-to-Hispanic wealth ratio has reached a
level not seen since 2001.”
1989 – twenty years of painful progress
wiped out. Do we want to talk about this every day? No, we don’t want to talk about this every
day. We will not talk about this on a
boat, we will not talk about this with a goat, we will not talk about this on
the tv news and we sure as hell won’t talk about this in the halls of Congress.
Clearing out the underbrush, then, we still
have the fact that three of the cops charged in Freddie Gray’s death are black.
Here, I think we should turn to the indispensible
Charlotte Linde and her ethnographic study of an insurance company. In
explaining how the insurance company tells a story about itself, Linde made the
point that the persistance of the company depends upon “drafting” people into
that story: this she called “narrative
induction.”
The title
of her article is: “The
acquisition of a speaker by a story: how history becomes memory and identity.”
Narrative induction properly locates story as part of a
process of initiation (which, being a “native” thing, or occult, failed to
qualify for the verbal place held by identify with). Linde, in this paper, is
obviously moving from her concern with stories people tell about themselves –
the point of which is to say something significant about the self, and not the
world – to stories people tell about the world. Those stories often are about
experiences not one’s own. They are non-participant narratives.
Linde divides the NPN process– as she calls it – into three bits: how a person comes to take on someone else’s story; how a person comes to tell their own story in a way shaped by the stories of others; and how that story is heard by others as an instance of a normative pattern.
This is all about how the police work. Police departments lean on their members to become police, to identify as police, to see their enemies as the police define their enemies, to define their friends as the police define their friend. As Linde points out, most of the work on this kind of thing has been done in religious studies. Specifically, the study of metanoia, conversion stories. But there’s metanoia and then there’s metanoia. There’s St. Paul on the way to Damascas, and there’s Updike’s Rabbit Angstrom, on the way to the relative wealth of a Toyota Car Dealership, owned by his father-in-law. That’s why Linde, not having access to St. Paul, opted to study the trainees of a major American insurance company in the Midwest. Linde is interested in class issues. In particular, stories of occupational choice. In her Life Stories book, she presented some evidence that professionals present their occupational choice stories in terms of some vocation or calling, while working class speakers present it, more often, in terms of accident or need for money. Philosophy professors rarely will say, for instance, well, I needed a steady paycheck, looked at the job security of tenure, loved the idea of travel and vacation time, so I went into philosophy. They will give a story rooted in their view of themselves as emotional/cognitive critters.
Linde divides the NPN process– as she calls it – into three bits: how a person comes to take on someone else’s story; how a person comes to tell their own story in a way shaped by the stories of others; and how that story is heard by others as an instance of a normative pattern.
This is all about how the police work. Police departments lean on their members to become police, to identify as police, to see their enemies as the police define their enemies, to define their friends as the police define their friend. As Linde points out, most of the work on this kind of thing has been done in religious studies. Specifically, the study of metanoia, conversion stories. But there’s metanoia and then there’s metanoia. There’s St. Paul on the way to Damascas, and there’s Updike’s Rabbit Angstrom, on the way to the relative wealth of a Toyota Car Dealership, owned by his father-in-law. That’s why Linde, not having access to St. Paul, opted to study the trainees of a major American insurance company in the Midwest. Linde is interested in class issues. In particular, stories of occupational choice. In her Life Stories book, she presented some evidence that professionals present their occupational choice stories in terms of some vocation or calling, while working class speakers present it, more often, in terms of accident or need for money. Philosophy professors rarely will say, for instance, well, I needed a steady paycheck, looked at the job security of tenure, loved the idea of travel and vacation time, so I went into philosophy. They will give a story rooted in their view of themselves as emotional/cognitive critters.
Police work, in America, has often served as a transitional
profession, over generations, from working class to white collar. Since police
unions successfully raised the benefits and pay of police forces in the
eighties in cities around the country, the benefits are sometimes comparable to
that of a middle manager. However, it is very much the case that, like
philosophy professors, many a cop will say that they always wanted to be a cop –
not that, all things considered, driving a truck paid less than being a
policeman. There’s a strong vocational charisma, here. Blue doesn’t erase black and white, but the
kind of white that the police represent – that formed the police consciousness,
so to speak – is a legacy that the integration of police departments has not
negated – merely modified.
The right has never recognized racism as a structure – in the
same way that it has refused to recognize class as a structure. Alas, the latter
has now become mainstream: as the countervailing power of labor unions has dwindled, there is little sense, even
among supposedly lefty academics, of class or for class. There’s been a large
blindness about the class based imaginary that makes it hard to understand
class conflict when it rears back and punches you in the face. In Freddy Gray’s
case, you have a trifecta of racism, class conflict, and the militarizaton – or
should I call it the death squadization? – of the cops.
No comments:
Post a Comment