The lead in to my paper on racial profiling discusses the Stop Snitchin' movement, specifically Cam'Ron's famous "60 Minutes" interview. Here is a video, I'd recommend watching it if only for the pure entertainment value.
In my paper, I discuss why the movement exists (hint: racial profiling -> pressure in minority neighborhoods -> distrust of police), but I was not able to go on at length about the justness/unjustness of the Anti-Snitching movement. It would seem as if the sense of humanity that Antjie Krog talked to us about is ignored by Cam'Ron and those who agree with his philosophy. From the side of the Anti-Snitchers, it seems as if the priority is dissent from the police, a reasonable thing considering that racial profiling has pretty much stripped the police of all respect among low-income minority neighborhoods. Another defense would be "it's none of my business," again ignoring the humanity and brotherhood that is preached by Krog and documents like the UDHR.
The people behind Stop Snitchin' are no different than the man who lets the train kill the 5 people on the track (from the problem where one must choose between actively killing one person or letting multiple die with the train track-changing lever) just because they are trying to prove a point. That being said, there is an almost utilitarian principle behind the whole movement. Consider that Stop Snitchin' could easily have just been a way to bring attention to racial profiling in the U.S. With the serious possibility that it could indirectly help lessen the strain of racial profiling in the country, can the Stop Snitchin' movement be justified? Can it be justified regardless? Tell me what you think.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.