State of the Union, August 26th Edition

I would like to apologize for not blogging in a while. I have much to blog about, so this might be long.

1. Whites, Blacks, and Hispanics All Get Pulled Over By the Police at the Same Rate!

Unfortunately, blacks and Hispanics are much more likely to be mistreated, arrested, searched, handcuffed, or ticketed than whites. As the Washington Post (Lowering Profiling's Profile, Editorial, August 26, 2005) states:

The good, and perhaps surprising, news from the study, based on interviews with 80,000 people in 2002, was the absence of any significant differences in the rates at which white, black and Hispanic drivers were stopped by police -- about 9 percent of those in all three groups reported having been pulled over.

The disturbing news, though, was that black and Hispanic drivers were nearly three times as likely to be arrested as white drivers were (2 percent of white drivers stopped were arrested, compared with 5.8 percent of blacks and 5.2 percent of Hispanics) and even more likely to be handcuffed (2 percent of white drivers, 6.4 percent of blacks and 5.6 percent of Hispanics). In addition, police were more likely to search black and Hispanic drivers or their vehicles, with 3.5 percent of whites searched compared with 10.2 percent of blacks and 11.4 percent of Hispanics.

Of course, Bush tried to hide this report, as shown by Bob Herbert in Truth-Telling on Race? Not in Bush's Fantasyland. As always the statistics do not tell us why minorities are more likely to go to prison. That minorities are less likely to know their rights (to refuse a search, for example), or are more antagonistic towards cops, are two possible explanations as to why minorities seem to be abused by the police. The first explanation seems dubious, and the second one is plausible, but it is difficult to argue that this antagonism's birth is purely fictitious and indigenous to minority cultures only. If there is antagonism, it is most likely mutual, and has some basis in reality. The truth of the matter is that barring a freak accident in the statistics collected, there is some sort of discrimination occurring when the police pull over minorities; this discrimination does not appear when the police pull over a white person.

I know many will argue that the statistics only show that minorities are more criminally inclined than whites, or that minorities just don't know their rights. Unfortunately, the statistics here don't account for these variables, but it's a step in the right direction. The large discrepancy in vehicles searched is probably not due to the proper knowledge of the fourth amendment, and even if it is, it shows a problem in difference levels of education among minorities and whites. Being reasonable, one can only come up with one conclusion: something is wrong with the system. Hopefully further studies will pinpoint which variable domineers the problem.

2. Ay, Dios Mio, Iraq Me Va a Matar

First we went to war against Iraq because Iraq owned weapons of mass destruction, and harbored terrorists. Then we went to Iraq because democracy is good, and spreading democracy in the Middle East will kill terrorism. Now, we went to Iraq because...establishing quasi-democratic regimes that follow sharia is the best we can do. If this is what we went to Iraq for--a government that minimally embodies democratic values--then I am ashamed.

Having read part of the proposed Iraqi constitution (translation 1, translation 2), I will confess that I'm scared. The proposed constitution does not resemble a democracy. Religious freedom and an Islamic state that believes Islam is a "fundamental source for legislation" (or "a main source of legislation", depending on the translation) are mutually exclusive. This is a contradiction. Religious freedom greatly implies at least an iota of equality among religions; how is this possible when the state's laws are based on Islam, and cannot contradict "Islamic principles" (or explicitly mentioned by Juan Cole's translation, "Islamic law")? Nor does article two make much sense:

a. No law that contradicts Islamic principles shall be issued.

b. No law that contradicts democratic principles shall be issued.

Islamic principles--based on faith, belief in a single code, and organized religion--contradict democratic principles--plurality, individuality, freedom of belief.

Most analyst vaguely agree that women will have mitigated rights--especially since it appears Islam imams and clerics will have judicial power in Iraq. Most analyst seem to shrug, and say that this is okay. On Meet the Press, Reuel Marc Gerecht, an analyst, mentioned that in 1900, America did not allow women to vote, and it was still a democracy. What type of argument is that? Our democratic judgment is relying on democratic beliefs and theories over 100 years old? Some 200 years ago slavery was acceptable in a democracy; should slavery be tolerated now? Of course not; modern democratic values encompass three main values: plurality, equality, and freedom; the Iraqi constitution attempts to bolsters these principles in a manner that in actuality undermines them.

I could go on a never-ending rant about the vagueness and worthlessness of the proposed Iraqi Constitution (the President should be 40, why not must be?; freedom of speech is protected as long as it stays within moral boundaries? how do we define those moral boundaries?; what exactly are the prime minister's powers in this system? etc.) but I'll try to make just one more major point. If you notice America's Bill of Rights, American's rights are phrased in such a way were the limitation is imposed on the government. For example, part of the First Amendment goes:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press...

The Iraqi Constitution, on the other hand, places the restriction on the individual as well as the government.

If this Constitution passes, Iraq won't resemble a democracy. So why did we invade Iraq again?

3. 1984

Having re-read 1984 recently, that book kicks ass.

War is Peace.
Freedom is Slavery.
Ignorance is Strengh.