Over the past few days I've gotten into far too many arguments over the arrest of Harvard Professor Henry Louis Gates by Cambridge Police Officer Sgt. James Crowley. Some have said that I can't possibly be liberal, as I haven't automatically sided with Gates over the police report. On BoingBoing.net, someone suggested that I was "white, clueless and uncomfortable with the subject [of racism]".
I beg to differ.
I'm liberal and I'm white, but I'm neither clueless nor uncomfortable with the subject of racism in America.
I'm just willing to look at this situation with an open mind , and not use my predispositions to jump to the conclusions that Gates must be correct, that race must be at issue, and that the police must be wrong as so many commentators and friends have.
While racism and racial profiling are problems that our culture must address, this situation doesn't seem like one caused by these issues in the least bit. I'll reiterate that I do not mean to say that these issues are not important, nor that they must be addressed -- just that they do not seem to be involved in this particular sitation.
Examining reports from both parties, this entire situation seems like a routine incident that went ridiculously out of control -- not because of race, and not because of a police state, but because an angsty professor kept antagonizing a stupid police officer. Both parties are likely to blame, and their own stupidity is at cause. I contend that racism was not the mitigating factor in this arrest, and I'd go as far to suggest that if any sort of racism is involved, it was perpetrated by Gates himself.
The situation and the particulars of Gates' alleged "crime" are not at issue, and never have been. What has been at issue is the motivation for arrest -- the motivation alleged by Gates, his supporters and some journalists -- as a motivation being born of racist intent.
The legality of Gates' alleged "crime" is not at issue either. It is common, and sad, for police officers to abuse their power and arrest people for trumped-up charges that have no basis in fact; charges that are made-up for the sole intent of arresting an individual; charges that are dropped at the prosecution phase. The fact that charges such as these are invalid, illegal, abusive and indecent is irrelevant. Simply put, the validity of charges does not speak to motive -- and when the "Racism" card is played , motive is the core of the issue.
There are two entirely different concepts related to the arrest of Henry gates. One concept is the motive for his arrest -- was this racially based? The other concept is the validity of the arrest -- was it legal or just or ethical ? These two concepts are independent of one another, and should be treated as such. Conflating the two concepts does not address the issue, it merely weakens an argument. While a racially based arrest would determine an arrest illegal, an illegal arrest does not necessitate a racial motive.
Moving onwards...
My undergraduate degree is from Pomona College; a school that, very much like Gates' Harvard is elite, fancy, overpriced and liberal across all key metrics. While there I doubled majored in Media Studies and Political Science, and studied abroad for a semester in East Africa. That is to say that I'm not only familiar with Gates' fields of expertise ( Cultural Studies, African Studies, African-American Studies, Critical Theory, Media Theory, Postmodernism, Post-Structuralism, Semiotics, etc ) but also familiar with his own work -- and with the temperament of his colleagues.
Henry Gates is a brilliant , accomplished and important academic -- a characterization that I believe is the root of his arrest, not his race.
Much of Gates' work is rooted in Cultural Theory -- in looking at social , historical and economic topics , then re-examining under the lens of racial and cultural sensitivities to elicit new and further understandings. His work -- while brilliant and original in substance -- is largely typical in its academia oriented underpinnings and approaches. This isn't a bad thing, it just means that Gates is typical of many academics in the social sciences -- and particularly those that deal with critical theory: his expertise, passion, and daily routine is to look at situations and examine the role that his chosen subject plays in them. For Henry Gates, his specific routine is to examine how race and race-relations affect historical and current situations. To phrase this differently: day in and day out, Henry Gates looks to see how race may play a role in a given situation.
So many academics are mired in their own research and beliefs, that they try to apply it to every aspect of their field, the world, and their daily lives -- and often in ways that are grossly incorrect. Many students have a "reality-check moment" during a Literature, Film or Art course where they begin to question their professor's interpretations of an author's intent, or why they were tasked to arbitrarily apply concepts like "Light vs Dark" onto a body of work. When people in academic circles keep applying and examining theories into situations like this, things can begin to get out of hand.
When departments get out of hand, self-sustaining fringe branches of Academia start to form. These are subcultures of academic discourse where it is celebrated when a person over-analyzes and over-applies their concepts. A good example of this phenomena is illustrated by certain branches of Cultural Studies in which unrelated and inapplicable fields are brought together. In 1996 Alan Sokal, a physicist at NYU, perpetrated a hoax on an academic journal published by Duke University Press; Sokal's hoax was to get published a nonsense paper that strung together elements of mathematics, physics and political theory. Sokal's attempt was a success, and was then followed by a book he authored called "Fashionable Nonsense", which sought to debunk a considerable number of texts in Cultural Studies. Sokal illustrated how academics would not only stray from their areas of expertise , but also create interpretations where they do not exist simply to further their point.
Individual academics can get out of hand too, seeking to create issues to support their cause. I'll reference a woman named Kerri Dunn, who taught at a school next to my undergrad shortly after I graduated. In the midst of serious race-related issues on campus, Ms. Dunn found herself the victim of a hate crime -- her car partly destroyed and wholly vandalized with racial epithets. The campus was terrorized , yet rallied to support Ms. Dunn in both getting through her ordeal -- and addressing the race issues on campus. Months later, it would unfortunately be discovered that Ms. Dunn had staged the entire incident. Kerri Dunn was sentenced to several years in prison for filing a false police report and insurance fraud.
I don't mean to suggest that Mr. Gates would dare do something as atrocious as Kerri Dunn. However, I do want to illustrate that Academics - when dealing with subjects close to their own field, tend to over-analyze and project.
That is to say that while it is entirely possible a While Police Officer antagonized and arrested a Black Professor solely because of his skin color and then fabricated a report of the situation to support it, it is equally possible that a Black Professor antagonized a White Police Officer because he projected the beliefs and expectations that the encounter was racially motivated. In both scenarios a form of racism is encountered. The first scenario is a typical sort of racism against minorities; the second scenario involves an inverted form of racism, where a minority addresses a situation with the expectation of racist intent (where it does not exist) and analyzes all actions through the lens of racially charged motivation.
As I read more and more reports of the situation, from the perspectives of both Gates and the arresting police officer, I find the scenario in which Gates assumed and reacted as if there was racist intent to be the most plausible.
To recap the controvery, Gates and others suggested that the arrival of the police officer on the scene was racially motivated. I find this questionable. The arresting officer didn't appear at Gates' home because he was black -- he appeared because Gates' own neighbors saw two men try to break into the building and called the police. An attempted break-in did indeed happen -- one that Gates was involved in, as he and and his driver attempted to push down the door (it was broken). Some people have suggested that the police were called only because Gates and his driver were not white. I find that suggestion ridiculous -- Gates' neighbor called the police because she did not recognize either of the men as her neighbor -- a colorblind situation. Considering the fact that the 2 men were not 'milling around' the front porch, but actively trying to bust the door in, I think it is very safe to assume that the police would have been called whether they were white, black, orange or red -- if you see someone that doesn't look like your neighbor trying to break a door down, you call the police.
When the officer arrived on the scene, the accounts of the incident between Gates and the officer begin to differ: The officer claims that Gates was hostile, Gates claims the opposite.
According to his filed report, the officer repeatedly asked Gates for ID until Gates finally relented. Gates' lawyer has not made any comment on how many times he was asked his ID, but he does corroborate the officer's accounts that Gates had to go into the kitchen to get his wallet, and that he was arrested after exiting the building.
Gates' lawyer and colleague , Professor Charles Ogletree , released a statement ( viewable at http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/x737378901/Harvard-professor-Charles-Ogletree-releases-statement-on-behalf-of-Henry-Louis-Gates ), which stated in part:
As he was talking to the Harvard Real Estate office on his portable phone in his house, he observed a uniformed officer on his front porch. When Professor Gates opened the door, the officer immediately asked him to step outside. Professor Gates remained inside his home and asked the officer why he was there. The officer indicated that he was responding to a 911 call about a breaking and entering in progress at this address. Professor Gates informed the officer that he lived there and was a faculty member at Harvard University. The officer then asked Professor Gates whether he could prove that he lived there and taught at Harvard. Professor Gates said that he could, and turned to walk into his kitchen, where he had left his wallet. The officer followed him. Professor Gates handed both his Harvard University identification and his valid Massachusetts driver’s license to the officer. Both include Professor Gates’s photograph, and the license includes his address. Professor Gates then asked the police officer if he would give him his name and his badge number. He made this request several times. The officer did not produce any identification nor did he respond to Professor Gates’s request for this information.
Gate's himself also had some interesting quotes and descriptions on the matter in the Washington Post (the lines below are non-contiguous):
- Before he could finish the conversation, a police officer was standing on his porch and asking him to come out of the house. "Instinctively, I knew I was not to step outside," said Gates, describing the officer's tone as threatening. Gates said the policeman, who was in his 30s and several inches taller than him, followed him into his kitchen where Gates retrieved his identification
- "I was thinking, this is ridiculous, but I'm going to show him my ID, and this guy is going to get out of my house," Gates said. "This guy had this whole narrative in his head. Black guy breaking and entering."
- After handing the officer both his Harvard and Massachusetts state identification, which included his address, Gates said he began to ask the officer this question, repeatedly. "I said 'Who are you? I want your name and badge number.' I got angry."
- The officer left and Gates followed him outside. There were about a half-dozen police officers standing in his front yard. "I stepped out on the porch to ask them his name," said Gates.
While I'm willing to believe that the Police Officer's report is not completely true and slightly biased in his favor, I'm fairly certain that Gate's account -- one that is largely authored by a Harvard Law professor and one of the world's top legal experts -- is equally as stretched, redacted, and tweaked to seem the most appealing and least-damaging as possible.
I'd also note that Gates' official position seems to gloss over what could be significant amounts of time , as it does not address events that are not only claimed in the Arresting Officer's report, but can be substantiated by others:
The officer radioed in a call in the time between his allegation that Gates refused to identify himself, and Gates ultimately identifying himself
The officer radioed in a call at some point after getting Gates' ID or claim, for Harvard Police to handle the matter
The omission of items like this from Gates' account do not mean that the officer's account is more true or absolute -- but they do illustrate that Gates' claim to the timeline is indeed incomplete and has been edited, redacted, and prepared.
The two reports from Gates on the situation make me ponder a few questions :
If a Police officer were to come to my door and say "I'm investigating a break-in" , and I had just broken in , I'd probably respond with something like "Yeah, it was me. I live here. The door was busted". I would not be thinking in terms of instincts to not step outside. Perhaps I feel that way because I'm white -- or perhaps I feel that way because I would fully expect a police officer to believe that I could have illegally broken in as that is exactly as how the situation would have seemed.
Gates' remark in the Washington Post "This guy had this whole narrative in his head. Black guy breaking and entering," is a clear admission of preconceived notions and the expectation of racial motivation. Why was Gates projecting onto the cop?
Was Gates angry before or after asking for the name and badge number? The cop was uniformed, and Boston uniforms clearly show the name above the pocket and the number on the badge. Unless they're wearing a jacket -- and its' been pretty warm in the North East the past few weeks -- these items are pretty hard to miss if you have a clear mindset. I should also note that all the police officers in photos of the incident are wearing short-sleeve shirts with visible name badges. Personally, I've transcribed Police Officer information like this before, and I've never seen anyone ask for a name & badge number that wasn't already under some form of mental/emotional distress. I don't mean to challenge the claim that Gates did not ask for the officer's information and was denied -- which may very well be true -- I simply question why Gates would have needed to ask for the officer's info.
Why did Gates go outside to confront the officer, after earlier having an instinct and apprehension to specifically not go outside ?
These questions simply make me question his state of mind and his official account of the events. This apprehension to believe Gates' account is strengthened by two more points:
Gates has a professional and personal temperament to analyze situations through a lens of race relations
Gates just got off a plane from China -- which is reported to be about 20 hours of total travel time
Based on the accounts of both Gates and the officer, I believe the most plausible version of events is this:
- Gates breaks into his own own because his door is damaged
- Gates is tired and ornery from nearly a full day of travel. A cop arrives at his door, and his mind starts spinning on race relations and the audacity of a cop questioning him -- an elite Harvard Professor and an African American
- The police officer is an idiot and lets the antagonism between them escalate. This is supported by the fact that the antagonism between the two verifiably escalated, and only an idiot would have let that happen.
- Gates becomes increasingly irate at the situation, and convinces himself that the situation is racially motivated
- The cop becomes increasingly pissed off
- Gates leaves the building yelling
- The cop , who is an idiot , snaps and arrests him on a trumped-up disorderly conduct charge to humble Gates
Under this scenario, it becomes very clear that the police officer didn't arrest Gates or give him attitude because of his skin color; the officer was responding -- quite poorly -- to Gates' own antagonism and attitude.
Yes, the arrest was likely unnecessary, uncalled for, illegal, unfounded, and all sorts of other bad things -- but not one of them was likely related to racial motivation. Gates' arrest was related to pissing off an idiot cop.
I'd like to remind people that free speech , a police state, nor the right to piss off a cop are not at issue here -- racism is.
If Gates were white and behaved towards the cop like I believe he did, he would have been arrested. And if Gates were a neuroscience or math professor -- or less sleepy with a bit more tact -- he probably would have been a lot nicer to the cop when he knocked on the door. He may have even thanked the cop and said something like "Thanks for reporting so fast. I did have to break in, because it seems like the door was broken during an attempted robbery." Gates may have even expected the cop to ask for ID and been glad to provide it -- because that's what most people would expect a Police Officer to ask for when they're investigating a potential robbery... and that's how most people would react when they know a Police Officer would have good cause to think a robbery took place if they had just tried to break down the door themselves.
Few people have been willing to address this situation and its exact particulars. Far too many people assume that racism must be the motive, because there was a white Police Officer and a black Professor - or that only racism could ever explain why the esteemed Henry Gates could ever be arrested.
And this suggests another form of racism that seems to be at play. Not only is there the element of racism that I believe Gates exhibited - where he assumed that the Police Officer was racist - but another kind where bystanders and readers assume that race must be at issue when there are power dynamics involved between people of two different skin colors , especially when the minority is a powerful icon.
So I ask this question - could Henry Gates commit any crime and not have his arrest bring up the issues of race in our society? I don't think so.
Whenever I've tried to make the point that racism was not involved, the people that I've discussed this matter with have tried to reframe the situation so that it must be the core issue. Over the past few days I've wondered why people are so eager to prove Gates right and the Police Officer wrong, why racism must be the issue, why the Police must be wrong, and why Gates must be infallible.
The only explanations I've found are in the motives of people who are predisposed to :
- want Gates to be right , so that he can shed-light-on and make-issue-of race relations in America
- hate all Police
I've been so surprised at how polarizing this is. So many people look to this as an iconic example - a situation that finally can bring their personal beliefs into the national spotlight, and spark the same outrage they have realized for years in others. So many people exhibit such outright bias, necessitating that conclusions and facts match their beliefs.
Racism is indeed an issue our country battles with -- but so is blind idealism. Someone is not insensitive or uneducated because they don't believe a situation is based in racism.
I've also been so increasingly alarmed at how so many people simply want Gates to be right - and keep trying to make excuses. I read the forums on DemocraticUnderground.com pretty regularly ( often to judge if I'm still liberal or not ) - and the comments that some people make there have simply defied all aspects of common sense in trying to re-cast events as sympathetic. Several people tried to justify any hostility that Gates may have had towards police -- if those allegations were true -- as coming from the his experience growing up in a racist society. In other words: as facts come out to suggest that Gates was an ornery college professor who did not sleep much, there must be some way to excuse and rationalize his situation and keep the role of racism in America as central to this case. Another person was outraged that the Police Officer arrested Gates knowing that he lived in the neighborhood citing that the Police Report stated that - the report suggested no such thing. Another was outraged that someone could be arrested in their own home - however being in your own home is not an automatic "get out of jail free card", and many people are arrested in their own homes for a variety of reasons. We should also remember that Gates was not arrested for being in his home, he was arrested at his home and for a charge of Disorderly Conduct. Several people even questioned the legality of the police officer entering the home -- glossing over the fact that a neighbor called in a report of a possible robbery in progress, and as far as the Police were concerned... that robbery could still be in effect.
People also question why so many Police officers responded -- conveniently forgetting that a "burglary in progress" was the original call to police.
Finally , some people have suggested that Gates' neighbor was racially profiling the situation. A claim that perhaps could be true... but equally not be true. The neighbor , first and foremost, did not recognize Gates and his chauffeur who were busy trying to break the door in -- which can negate any sort of racial undertone as there were indeed two unrecognized people trying to break into a home. Yes, they had a valid reason (Gates lived there), but they were definitively breaking in and not recognized. It might also be worth nothing that the neighbor stated that the two men were wearing backpacks -- and that those two men may not have been Gates and his Chauffeur. It is entirely possible that Gates' arrival had scared off a burglary attempt -- and it is believed that there was a burglary attempt, because damage to the door is what caused Gates to try and force it open.
And before I forget, I should also bring up the fact that in the photos of the incident we see three police officers, one of which is African-American; and that one of the two police officers in the report has a Mexican-American last name.
Of course despite all these possibilities as to the numerous things that could have happened , people still mandate that racism was involved... and that only a racist would think otherwise. This is beyond ridiculous.
To make this situation even more ridiculous, NPR has reported today that Crowley was hand-picked to teach the Cultural Diversity class "Racial Profiling" at Lowell Police Academy [ http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=106936583 ] . Instead of re-examining the situation with an open mind , it has become common to hear remarks suggesting that it only illustrates how racially insensitive the Cambridge Police Department is, when their racial profiling expert makes an arrest like this. When people start making lines of comments like that, its clear to see that they're not open to looking at the facts or the situation -- they just want Gates to be right.
I think Crowley's position in the Police Department resonates very well with my interpretation of the likely events: Gates is tired and increasingly arrogant, and starts alleging racism at the officer; the officer, an expert in the field, is made even more increasingly upset by these allegations, and eventually explodes with an arrest.
I hope audio tapes surface of this event - someone must have been taping the radio chatter.
Incidentally... news reports on this situation brought to light another situation from 2004 where a neuroscience professor at Harvard Medical School , S. Allen Counter, was subject to racial profiling and the threat of arrest by Harvard police when he couldn't produce ID. If you want to talk about race issues in America , that is a much much much better example.
There's also a pretty good user-generated-content video on CNN where an African Amercian woman suggests that Gates is "racially pimping" this situation into a promotional opportunity for himself -- and there are several important racially motivated abuses of Police authority that should be addressed instead. The video is located here: http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-303137 ; and one of the cases is the harrowing video of Oscar Grant being shot to death in his back while in handcuffs by Police Officers in an Oakland train station.
And if you still don't agree with me, let me pose this one question: Why in the world would a cop want to arrest a Harvard Professor at his home ? The professor "Being black" just does not make sense. But a stupid cop being increasingly pissed off at a professor who was antagonizing ass ? That sounds just about right.