“If acting ‘normal’ is symptomatic of sociopathology as a ‘condition,’ how
would one ever demonstrate reform or rehabilitation?” (Cacho, 72).
For there to be a demonstration of reform and rehabilitation there would
need to be the opportunity given for that demonstration, and it does not seem
too bleak or harsh to claim that that opportunity is denied to people of color
both within the legal system and outside of it in the U.S. Beyond that lack of opportunity,
there is no desire for that opportunity to be given. Intrinsic within basic
systems of evaluation, like psychology and other such practices that seek to
get at the ‘heart’ of the human experience, are criteria that implicates those
who do not fit within neoliberalist standards as being morally deficient and
socially disabled (Cacho, 92). As seen in the psych evaluation of Ma, the
refusal to comply with ‘normal’ expressions of guilt and acceptance of 'guilt' are incriminations in and of themselves that denote an overall defect in the
accused. How is it even possible for a person to show that they ‘have value’
when they are assumed to be incapable of value from the start?
De facto status crimes are defined by Cacho as “specific activities that
are only transparently recognized as ‘criminal’ when they are attached to statuses
that invoke race (gang member), ethnicity (“illegal alien”), and/or national
origin (suspected terrorist)” (Cacho, 43). This concept of transferable meaning
in many ways invokes the ideas set out by Sara Ahmed about hate being a
transferable commodity. Though there is nothing intrinsically criminal in
bodies of color, bodies of color are seen to be sites of criminality. Bodies of
color that cross into the U.S. are told from the beginning that they are of
less value, from the random screenings at airports to the ‘alien’ label they
receive upon entrance.
If ever there were to be an example of cognitive dissonance, it would be in how the U.S. claims to be the land of the freedom while having the highest levels of incarceration in the world.
Hi, Sarah. I enjoyed reading your post. I have discussion lead this week, so I'm trying to get a sense of where everyone is accessing the text. I'm sure we can save it for class, but I'm interested to know what you mean by, "For there to be a demonstration of reform and rehabilitation there would need to be the opportunity given for that demonstration, and it does not seem too bleak or harsh to claim that that opportunity is denied to people of color both within the legal system and outside of it in the U.S." I appreciate your writing this post, but I wonder about exactly by whom this opportunity would be "given." It seems to me that the text is challenging us, above a lot of things, to question the naturality with which many of us (even in social justice work) deploy language and representations. For instance, claiming that POC need to be given an opportunity recasts them, however unintentionally, as passive receivers of oppression that cannot escape their own self-perpetuated inactivity. I think that Cacho goes into this idea several times, and she challenges us to re-think what it means when people, Trumps and Immigration Activists alike, assume that "being" is something one must earn from others through respectability, recognition of subordination, and obedience.
ReplyDelete