The New Afrikan group has formed to stand and defend their principles and existence. They realized it was time to end the running and face their revolutionary consciousness that they have a right to co-exist in this violence twisted and evil-minded social family setting called prison gangs and are organizing to survive their legacy against oppression and even slavery since inmate labor is cheap and plentiful. However the problem runs deeper than that.
They are at war with the system as well as the Mexican Mafia who targets all Blacks as the enemy regardless of their affiliations or social connections inside or outside prisons. Their “green light” on killing and assaulting Blacks has no discretionary decision making capabilities as it requires them to “hit” all those that are black.
Black inmates suffer discrimination inside or prisons more so than outside. They have no social support groups to hear their grievances and cannot speak without being silenced as troublemakers or rioters. There are many forces working against them especially in those prison systems that are already filled with hate and bigotry against those people of color. There are political socio forces that keep them in check and treats them to a distinct disadvantage compared to the Whites and Mexican inside prisons.
Repeated racial unrest inside Arizona prisons have been brewing heavily since a new direction came about with the appointment of a new director in 2009. It is with reasonable suspicions that the reason for this racial unrest is because of environmental decision making by those in power to decide the fate of over 40,000 prisoners housed inside Arizona prisons.
This issue will cover three main areas of decision making influences that might apply to the recent behaviors by Afro American prisoners as well as Mexican Americans and Native American prisoners. The dynamics are fluid and much focus must be on these elements to carry out its purpose of how the decision making instruments play into these events and events of the past.
First thing we need to do is to look at the “geographical equity” where the racial composition of their executive hierarchy and decide whether or not it is culturally balanced or not. It is suggested that the “geographical equity” inside Arizona is much different than many other states including neighboring states such as New Mexico and California.
When compared to Louisiana, Georgia, Mississippi and Alabama you might see references to oppressive and harshness when it comes to treatment or ideology how these prisoners should be treated but nevertheless, the war is between classes and races fueled by those that feel they are supreme to all.
This racial and geographical influence has impacted community cultural thinking and behaviors negatively and is often in conflict with the minorities housed inside their local prisons.
There is no doubt this creates tension between staff and prisoners daily and will eventually create a level of resistance or rebellion in some form or another.
Look at the race of the director, the deputy directors, the regional directors and the wardens. You will see a definite pattern of white supremacy numbers versus the minority races living inside Arizona. These numbers will suggest an unequal racially impacted “environmental protection” from abuse or harmful behaviors and acts for those of color thereby it is reasonable they will be treated different than others. It’s a human trait to do so and Arizona has publicly announced their status on immigration and human [civil] rights.
Looking further into this disparity we find this lack of racial equality numbers has severely impacted the minority’s ability to balance what is known as the “procedural equity” process. This is a major influence in decision making from the top on down.
Going around the geographical locations where the prisons are located you will see the larger facilities are dominated by white administrators and thereby controlling the majority of the prison population and in a position of control or impose repeat and severe disciplinary actions that may result in higher custody scores, reject inmate grievances citing no basis for such findings, more frequently imposed placements in administrative segregation, job parity and general opportunities to work or program within the entire prison population.
Last but not least is what is called the “social equity” factor where there are conflicts with the sociological order related to race, ethnicity, class, culture, customs and traditions, lifestyles and political power in the geographical regions or the state. This influences decides who gets the safe jobs, better housing, exposures to hazards or bio chemical risks etc. and as government, in this case, the prison management team makes these decisions, those prisoners that are poor will be more at risk of abuse and neglect than those with stronger social or political ties within the state and the regions they are housed.
Therefore, when you put it all together you have formulated a decision making methodology for your own level of “environmental justice” that impacts each race in a different manner or level. This “environmental justice” impacts protection level, prevention of harm, the burden of proof, proof of intent and other factors that play into due process and equality in the manner justice is delivered.
Using this criterion to make decision on security, programs and educational benefits or programs, those of color are not in a position to attain the full benefit of all privileges and plans offered inside Arizona prisons. Still, even with federal discriminatory laws in place, Arizona prisons still houses their prisoners based on race, ethnicity or color. All you have to do is check the housing rosters and see how they pair up the races to balance the environment.
Blacks are and will always be discriminated against inside Arizona prisons. The sociopolitical