Philosopher views
MUMIA ABU-JAMAL LIFE AND WORK
Download 5.81 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- MUMIA’S PHILOSOPHY
- ON INSTITUTIONAL RACISM
- ON PRISONS AND THE “JUSTICE SYSTEM”
MUMIA ABU-JAMALLIFE AND WORKBorn Wesley Cook on April 24th, 1954, Mumia Abu-Jamal occupies a place as a catalyst for international outcry against injustice and prolific critic of institutional, state, and economic exploitation of minorities and other marginalized groups. At age 15, Mumia began actively participating in the Black Panther Party (BPP) after attending a protest in South Philadelphia opposing presidential candidate George Wallace. A keen ability for writing quickly helped Mumia find his role in the BPP where he served as an information officer and journalists for the organizations newspaper and other communiqués. This revolutionary political outlook and activism quickly led to Mumia’s placement on the FBI’s Security Index and daily surveillance by police forces. In spite of these efforts, Mumia earned a career as an acclaimed journalists both within the United States and internationally. Among other networks, NPR, the National Black Network and the Associated Press broadcast Mumia nationally. His interviews ranged from Bob Marley to international political leaders. Named one of Philadelphia’s people to watch by the Philadelphia magazine and elected president of the Philadelphia chapter of the association of Black Journalists, Mumia’s brand of journalism that brought access to the press to those who were formally voiceless was gaining more power and popularity. A fact underscored by urging by political leaders that Mumia temper his comments because his perspectives and coverage incited unrest. This career was interrupted on December 9, 1981, when Mumia was charged with murdering a Philadelphia police officer. During his trial, Mumia was denied several aspects of his civil protections, including choice of jury and counsel. Likewise, much of the evidence used to secure the conviction has sense been disputed or found to be inaccurate. Although many organizations, including Amnesty International, and individuals, ranging from celebrities to activist, have taken up Mumia’s cause the subsequent conviction and death sentence are still in place. However, while appeals continue, Mumia has continued his journalistic career from death row. On a regular basis, the journalists/activists produces essays that address subjects running the gambit of political, social, and economic issues. In each instance, Mumia continues to treat the subjects from a critical perspective informed by his experiences with the topics he entertains. Many of these have been published in various volumes (see below) and have received both critical acclaim and earned Mumia harsher punishments in prison. Additionally, many can be heard on http://prisonradio.org/mumia.htm. MUMIA’S PHILOSOPHYMuch of what Mumia writes is constrained by the circumstances of his incarceration. Rather than full texts addressing the subject, the nature of his work is often smaller. Several vignettes on a topic shape an overall perspective on the issue or interrogation of a problem. The next section of this overview highlights several of the major topics addressed by Mumia that are also relevant to debate. Following a discussion of the arguments advanced by Mumia, I will consider more closely how they may be applied to debate. ON INSTITUTIONAL RACISMAs is elaborated in greater detail in the following sections, Mumia believes that racism and oppression exists not just in the acts of individuals, but are also facilitated and caused by institutional structures whose interests such acts serve. Mumia provides several arguments to warrant this claim. He suggests that the “so-called ‘international community,’ which actually represents a minority of the world’s people” utilize their power to create conditions that serve their interests. Likewise, he cites structures of discipline in prison that prevent prisoners from engaging in educational programs. Policies which studies reveal target minorities most strictly. Mumia believes that, “the state raises its narrow institutional concern, to control by keeping people stupid, over a concern that is intensely human: the right of all beings to grow in wisdom, insight, and knowledge for their own sakes as well as their unique contribution to the fund of human knowledge.” That, this institutional concern targets dissidents and minorities the most, for Mumia, underscores the racism implicit in the overarching policy. Similarly, Mumia suggests that institutional oppression is upheld by equally bleak opportunities for political recourse. As he notes, democracy means “government by the people, but a brief foray into history proves otherwise.” Noting the denial of rights to African-Americans, Native Americans, and Asian American citiziens by the Supreme Court, along with structural oppression women, Mumia suggests that the United States could hardly be considered democratic or offering political recourse to its citizens. As he puts it, “for, if women are 52 percent, Blacks 12.5 percent, Hispanics 9.5 percent, and Asians/Native Americans/others 3.8 percent, then Americans have been systematically from democracy’s empty promises. Only in America can a ‘democracy oppress a majority’”.
Nowhere does the institutional machinery of oppression reveals itself, in Mumia’s estimation, than in the prison system. Mumia believes that far from their proclaimed ends to serve justice, that prisons are “political organs of the state.” First, as suggested above Mumia believes that all persons are political prisoners. He argues that when people are caged in prisons for resisting the government and the system it attempts to instate, you have political prisoners. However, one need not necessarily be politically active for Mumia to consider them a political prisoner. Further, he argues, “every prosecution is a public and symbolic act, a political act by the state to give the populace an illusion of control, to show that ‘we’re taking care of this problem.’” Similarly, Mumia agrees with Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Justice Stephen Reinhardt, when he argues, “President Reagan and Bush have ensured that the federal courts will not be representative. Instead, they are a bastion of White America...[and] stand as a symbol of White Power.” Mumia argues that prisons and criminal justice are politically motivated both at the level of who is incarcerated and the reasons why, as well as the treatment receieved once incarcerated. Observing the unpunished brutalization of several prisoners at Pennsylvania’s Camp Hill prison, Mumia believes that concepts like “justice,” “law,” and “crime” have different meanings depending on who committed the act, against whom it was committed, and what position that person has in the system. For example, prisoner’s offenses often pale in comparison to the brutalization received by guards. However, Mumia believes, that in an American where African-Americans constitute a larger portion of prison, and especially death row, populations than the national and state populatces from which they come, the question of a politically motivated justice system is unmistakable. Last, Mumia believes that the justice system itself is implicated in a politically, and often racially motivated, institutional structure. Motivated by his experience with the criminal trial that led to his prosecution, several of Mumia’s writings target the problems with the “justice system.” Two instances reflect the problems that Mumia identifies in that criminal justice system. First, as you might expect, Mumia believes the death penalty is applied in racist manner. Citing the McClesky v. Kemp case, in which the Supreme Court rejected efforts to place a moratorium on the death penalty based on discriminatory application, Mumia argues that agreeing with the case’s claims would call into question the entire justice system. As Justice Powell said when reviewing the case, “McClesky’s claim, taken to its logical conclusion, throws into serious question the principles that underlie our entire criminal justice system.” Mumia believes evidence for McClesky’s claim is all to obvious in the numbers of minorities on death row. Likewise, Mumia suggests that the criminal justice system systematically denies rights to minorities. Citing the Georgia case of Hance v. Zant, Mumia suggest that the criminal justice system deliberately denies protections to minorities who come before. In the specific case he cites, an African-American man’s jury of peers included several white jurors who agreed a conviction would mean “there’d be one less nigger to breed”. A fact, Mumia explains gave pause to neither the appeals courts of Georgia, the US Supreme Court, of the Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles. Such inequitable protection for rights is not uncommon Mumia argues. He relates his own trial during which he was both denied his right to self-defense and council of his choice and forced to utilize a court-appointed attorney. At the same time in a courtroom in the same building, he notes that another defendant enjoyed the privilege of a private lawyer and his father, another lawyer, to aid in his defense. Mumia believes the disparate treatment can only be isolated to race and class. ON RELIGION AND THE STATE Mumia believes that the relationship between religion, particularly Christianity, and the state is both still alive and well, and is one that facilitates oppression. As he explains, “the reality of religion is this: it has often been less a force for liberation than a tool for oppression – an impetus for civil unrest, warfare and genocide.” To support his claim, several arguments are advanced. First, he suggests that a commitment to religion has failed to avoid brutal oppressions of small countries by self-proclaimed “peacekeeping forces.” Likewise, he cites the work of Jesuit scholar Ignacio Martin-Baro who claims that missionaries’ conversions of workers contributed to a breakdown in the political and labor organizations of those workers and led many plantation bosses to encourage workers to join the evangelicals and led to the intertwining of religious and state interests. In addition to harmful socio-political consequences, Mumia believes that the intertwined relationship between religion, state, and economic interests, cause cultural harms as well. Noting two cases, Mumia argues that religion in the US, in particular, has served to oppress cultural minorities to the benefit of the material interests of dominant cultures. First, he cites the history of the Cherokee in the US. In an effort to assimilate, Cherokees in Georgia adopted religious and political practice from whites in the region. The effect was that not only did this process efface their culture, but also that the newly “civilized” people were deprived of their lands and livelihoods despite efforts at assimilation. Second, Mumia suggest that Christianity and similarly organized religions undermine solidarity between struggling peoples. Mumia cites an example of a “half-Black” Episcopalian priest from his childhood whose religious office forced the priest to reject solidarity with other African-Americans and hide his racial background. As an alternative Mumia suggests individuals should place in organizations that value unity, natural law, and resistance and rebellion against systems bent on global self-destruction. For Mumia, the Move organization provides such a model. Directory: uploads uploads -> 587 Return function, r i(X) r i(0) r i(1) r i(2) r i(3) 1 0 2 4 6 Thermal Station, I 2 0 1 5 6 3 0 3 5 6 10 uploads -> Department of science and humanities department of mathematics part-a questions and answers uploads -> The Case Against the nypd’s Quota-Driven ‘Broken Windows’ Policing What Is It? uploads -> For want of a nail uploads -> Ownership Models There are two different types of ownership models uploads -> Police Militarization uploads -> City of rising star regular meting thursday, july 14, 2016 uploads -> Township of winfield uploads -> Stop Militarizing Law Enforcement Act of 2014 uploads -> The Black Panther Party’s Ten-Point Program What We Want Now! Download 5.81 Mb. Share with your friends:
|