Systemic Violence

In August 2019, twenty-three-year-old Elijah McClain was walking to his home in Aurora, Colorado, when three police officers approached him and told him to stop. They grabbed him, explaining they had a right to do so because he was ‘suspicious.’

McClain, a chronic asthma sufferer, became distressed when the officers put him in a carotid restraint, which restricts breathing and blood flow to the brain. He vomited several times and told the police, ‘I’m sorry, I wasn’t trying to do that; I can’t breathe correctly.’ Paramedics gave McClain a dose of the sedative Ketamine and he suffered a heart attack in the ambulance. He died in the hospital a few days later. By all accounts, McClain was a gentle young man. Friends say he used to visit an animal shelter on breaks from his job as a massage therapist. He was said to play his violin for cats in the shelter because he believed it made them feel less lonely.

On the other hand, the officers on the scene claimed that although Elijah was only one-hundred- and-forty pounds, he had ‘incredible, crazy strength,’ and worse yet later took selfies laughing and joking as they mimicked putting Elijah in a chokehold.
 

The community that Elijah came from did not believe his treatment was a joke and, with pressure, the police chief terminated officers involved, expressing that he was ‘disgusted to his core.’ What happened to Elijah McClain is only one of hundreds of examples of state-sanctioned large-scale violence borne of conflict with communities of colour and poor people in the United States. The lethal results of essential day-to-day encounters with law enforcement reflect deep historical and cultural roots of racialised social control.

Social justice advocates are working tirelessly to change these norms so that the responses to non-white communities are treated with understanding, de-escalation techniques, social advocacy and counselling.

Data overwhelmingly evidence that the courts and prisons are over-represented with folks who live in communities of colour in numbers that cannot be accounted for by criminal activity (R0driguez and Rogler, 1980). These communities reflect all the social problems associated with deliberate disinvestment and dislocation: violence, deportation, failing schools, few healthy food options and poor transportation options. People in these challenged neighbourhoods, which are structurally ‘othered,’ are usually poor and subject to state violence with minimal accountability.
 

These significant disinvestments reflect local priorities. There is an expression that says, ‘You invest in what you care about.’ It is no secret that, too often, communities of colour are not a priority for investment in well-being. Instead, local officials have decided it is better to invest inpolicing these neighbourhoods rather than supporting them. The decision to promote surveillance and containment, too often resulting in brutality and inhumanity, is perceived as ‘necessary and proper,’ and yet would never be tolerated in communities of the elites.

Equity and fairness in applying justice are vital cornerstones of democratic institutions. At the Haywood Burns Institute (BI) we work with local governments to develop and encourage just and humane approaches for lawbreakers which use restorative positive services and consequences to provide safety for us all.
 

Our organisation is dedicated to demonstrating that reducing racial disparities and mass incarceration while keeping us safe is an achievable goal. We believe local governments could make great strides toward transforming their daily operations in the interest of equity by acknowledging that transformation cannot be achieved without a willingness to examine attitudes and change beliefs, procedures, practices and policies.
 

Since we began, we have worked in over 200 localities. We have pursued this mission in small, medium and major metropolitan areas. We have worked in rural places with more veterinarians than physicians and large cities with jails bigger than some smaller towns.

Approximately 25 years of experience have informed our analysis of re-imagining justice. Our new justice agenda reimagines a different approach to keeping us safe, fairly and equitably. If we have the societal will, we can be kept secure without invoking the racism that impacts all aspects of American life and the justice administration that has supported it since our country’s founding. This result should not be considered impractical or impossible; it should be regarded as vitally necessary.

Throughout history, voices have risen to intercede against and mitigate the forces of retribution. Before now, the alchemy of punishment and incarceration has been too potent to overcome. Today, the ‘tough on crime’ mantra and its related legislative agenda have led to unprecedented levels of mass incarceration in the US. It is no coincidence this retributive approach has resulted in direct disinvestment in communities of colour by using those dollars to fund the punishment industry. Local governments have increased their spending by a whopping 521% more dollars on incarceration since 1977 (Horowitz et al., 2021).

Ironically, those increases were authorised while criminal activity was in decline. No wonder communities of colour feel aggrieved. With crime at historic lows, the justice apparatus looted their communities and transferred those piles of cash to strengthen the instruments of mass incarceration.
 

As monies were taken from these communities, practitioners in the justice sector noticed an increase in people with more severe behavioural health issues, substance abuse and lack of housing.  While legislators at all levels lavished billions of dollars on incarceration, they simultaneously gutted other well-being approaches. Reports issued by the National Sheriffs Association and the Treatment Advocacy Center documented more mentally ill people in jails and prisons than in hospitals. (The National Sheriffs’ Association (NSA) and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS Office) hosted a Mental Health Roundtable in 2017.)
 

Indeed, this reimagining of justice provides an aspirational and forward-looking vision of public safety. It is a public safety system that responds to behavioural transgressions in restorative and equitable ways and increases public well-being. It is also a system that is mindful that some folks’ lives are so damaged that they must be separated from society.
 

Justice reimagined fully understands our current forms of incarceration, at their core, are steeped in the philosophy of structural violence. We will no longer use and accept structural violence as a foundational component of safety. Its usage is ultimately harmful to civil society.

Reimagining justice begins by reframing the punishment paradigm to one in which non-punitive responses address behaviours requiring specific intervention types. This approach necessitates investing in an infrastructure that currently does not exist. We begin with new investments in community-based resources. 

The new well-being infrastructure replaces the current punitive model by creating a series of practices and facilities, including Family and Community Centers, Community Hubs and Safe and Secure Healing Centers.

These newly created entities will provide various services such as accessible community clinics, secure housing, education programs and viable transportation. An essential foundation is that workers have skills and values directed towards well-being, not punishment and retribution.
 

Reimagining justice from punishment and retribution toward well-being involves a vision that includes new ideas that have not been tried in the US and some emerging approaches that are being tried in real-time. In this reimagined approach in the US, some ideas are new and need to be created while others are beginning to be tried.
 

To adopt structural well-being through a re-imagined justice apparatus, there must be a foundation of common themes before implementation. The BI’s work engaging communities nationwide on better ways to achieve safety revealed common themes. Investments should be made in two types of resources designed by and operated with assistance from the communities: Family and Community Centers (Centers) and Community Hubs (Hubs). Family and community centres are easily accessed, providing 24-hour primary health care, counselling, temporary housing and recreational services.
 

Local Centers would provide rich preventive services by offering classes in various culturally and linguistically appropriate subjects for residents. They would be staffed by neighbourhood-based workers intimately familiar with the community. They know the community’s most isolated parts, popular gathering places, natural community leaders and crisis-hit families. As such, they can provide strategic preventive services accordingly.
 

In addition to the Centers discussed above, we would establish a network of Hubs. Certain places created and utilised hubs as a resource during the COVID-19 pandemic to address the educational needs of poor and disinvested families. They provided wireless internet for distance learning, meals and recreation.
 

In a reimagined justice sector, Hubs would address specific needs that, by their very nature, require more attention. Issues such as intimate partner or family violence would be directed here, as would other law violations involving non-violent behaviours like theft, transportation violations, vandalism, some behavioural health and a variety of nuisance activities. Using Hubs to address these issues provides an alternative for approximately 50% of the cases administered by our justice sector today. They will engage in the law violations that most people experience with minimal participation from the machinery of justice.
 

These resources are essential to mitigate entry and penetration into the machinery of justice and engage those harmed in meaningful ways. Research reveals multiple traumatic impacts of mass incarceration on people of colour. They include lower educational attainment, infant mortality, increased stress and mental health diagnoses — all attributed to trauma resulting from mass incarceration. These community options are geared to specifically acknowledge and address the trauma associated with the experience of mass incarceration by providing structural well-being. Neighbourhood-based caring services will be more cost effective and have better safety outcomes than our current punitive approach.
 

Better and cost-effective services are possible because they are less duplicative and involve a restorative approach. The Centers and Hubs are contained within a central administrative structure that monitors interventions’ effectiveness to ensure positive behaviour change and which improves safety because accountability for behaviours is immediately addressed. Each locality must design a robust accountability structure focusing more on life outcomes and those harmed rather than process compliance.
 

These elements of structural well-being are to be adopted and implemented instead of the status quo use of law enforcement for almost every misbehaviour. Three hundred years of structurally racist social control will not be eliminated overnight. We are beginning a journey to co-design a new justice north star that will deliver justice for all Americans. It is possible, and like all changes in social justice in the US, it is time to make good trouble.

James Bell, Founding President of the W. Haywood Burns Institute, promotes equity in justice systems across the U.S. and internationally. He trains professionals, addresses racial disparities, and consults on justice reform, drawing from global experience in South Africa and Europe. He has authored articles, contributed to anthologies, and is completing a manuscript.

James can be reached at jbell@burnsinstitute.org.

Horowitz, J., Velázquez, T. and Clark-Moorman, K. (2021). Local spending on jails tops $25 Billion in latest nationwide data. Online. The Pew Charitable Trusts. Rodriguez, O. and Rogler, L.H. (1980). Minorities and criminal justice — research and conceptual issues. Office of Justice Programs Research Bulletin 3(4):1–8.

Article published on the 12th of December, 2024.