Great Article about Normative Equivalence between Islamic Terrorism and Chicago's Gang Violence
I think
it's sad that if this was happening in a white neighborhood or city with
a predominately white population, I bet more would be done in order to
try to prevent it, but because it's black people in predominately black
neighborhood, nobody seems to care. Maybe I'm wrong, but if I'm not,
how sad is that. But why aren't we going into these high crime areas
with armies of social workers, special education teachers, job training
specialists, police officers, etc. and really making a concerted effort
to stop this violence and lack of education, which is affecting a whole
generation of black children who can't even go to school without
thinking they may not make it home that day. Just another example of how the priorities in this country are totally messed up.
Treat Chicago gangs as terrorists
April 24, 2013 -- Updated 1919 GMT (0319 HKT)
Editor's note: LZ
Granderson, who writes a weekly column for CNN.com, was named journalist
of the year by the National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association and
was a 2011 Online Journalism Award finalist for commentary. He is a
senior writer and columnist for ESPN the Magazine and ESPN.com. Follow
him on Twitter: @locs_n_laughs.
(CNN) -- You know things in Chicago are bad when 70
murders in the first quarter can be seen as a good thing. But context is
everything: Last year at this time there had been more than 120
murders, so I guess we should thank God for small favors.
It seems inconceivable
that the city President Barack Obama calls home is also the city where
his family may be least safe. Just this Monday a 15-year-old boy was
found shot dead in a backyard only four blocks from the president's
house.
What's responsible for the bloodshed? Gang violence, as usual. Police estimate that of the 532 murders in 2012
-- nearly 1.5 a day -- about 80 percent were gang related. And yet,
despite that rather staggering statistic, the national outcry is muted
at best -- nothing, to say the least, like the kind we saw last week in
Boston. What is it about the word "gang" that brings out the apathy in
us? Would we view Chicago differently if we called the perpetrators
something else?
I'm not saying the people
of Boston do not deserve our sympathy; they do. Nor am I suggesting the
apprehension of Boston terror suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was not
essential. But how do we explain our habit of greeting terrorists with
24-hour news coverage and relentless wrath while overlooking the gangs
that terrorize our streets daily -- as if terrorism were only an enemy
state and not a concept.
The murder numbers may be slightly better in Chicago, but they do not fully communicate the city's state of siege. In February CNN reported
that some children living in gang-ridden parts of the city carry guns
because, to them, getting caught and serving time for possession of a
gun is better than getting caught without one and dying.
Last month, city officials announced the closure of 54 "under-resourced" schools, which will force some kids to walk across warring gang territory to get to school. For example,
in the seven blocks between George Manierre Elementary and Jenner
Elementary there are three gangs fighting over territory: Black P
Stones, Conservative Vice Lords and Gangster Disciples.
If it all sounds scary, it's only because it is.
And if the name attached
to all of this violence were al-Qaeda instead of Gangster Disciples; or
if instead of "gang violence" the bloodshed were called "terrorism;" or
if instead of calling the people spreading fear and mayhem gangs we
were to call them what they really are -- terrorists -- the nation would
demand more be done.
After all, if children
are afraid to walk to school because they might get killed or if
residents are afraid to identify perpetrators for fear of retaliation, I
think it's safe to say they are being terrorized.
What seems like a
linguistic shell game is really an exercise in empathy. The thought of
elementary school kids walking across areas of a city controlled by
three terrorist groups becomes unacceptable to everyone, not just their
parents. Hearing that 25 Chicagoans were shot in one weekend becomes a
threat to national security, and not just the mayor's problem.
The story of 15-year-old Hadiya Pendleton,
who was caught in the crossfire of a turf war days after performing
during the presidential inauguration, was of interest briefly but her
story has since faded. She, too, died just a few blocks from the Obama's
home. Jonylah Watkins, a 6-month-old girl, was shot in March while sitting on the lap of her father, Jonathan, the intended target and a gang member.
Last week, millions
watched as an entire city was shut down to look for one guy. Every major
news station was covering the pursuit of one guy. We all know the face
and relatives of this one guy. And it's all because he is an alleged
terrorist. But more American were murdered in the south and west sides
of Chicago than there were U.S. servicemen killed in Afghanistan last
year, and yet for some reason we don't view those neighborhoods as
terrorized.
Last week, Abdella Ahmad Tounisi was arrested
at O'Hare Airport because the FBI believed he was on his way to Syria
to join a terrorist organization. Tounisi reportedly thought he was in
contact with a recruiter for a jihadist militant group, but it was
actually an FBI agent. I would love to see the FBI's anti-terrorism
resources used in that matter to stop would-be gang members from
flooding the streets of the country's third-largest city. Maybe
Cornelius German, the boy found dead down the street from Obama's house,
would still be alive.
Maybe Pendleton, who was
playing in a park with her friends, would still be alive. Maybe
Watkins, who was sitting on her father's lap, would have had a chance to
live.
Their deaths wouldn't be
considered "Chicago's problem" if authorities suspected terrorists were
involved. But it's "gang-related," so...
posted by Zarathustra at 5/06/2013 11:27:00 AM
<< Home