By now, you’ve probably all heard about the arrest of prominent black academic Henry Louis Gates, Jr. in his home by a Cambridge police officer. If you haven’t, or even if you have, I suggest reading the police report. The short version is that a neighbor called the police after witnessing Gates and his driver attempting to force open the front door of Gates’ home, which was apparently jammed. A police officer responded to a possible break-in, and, seeing Gates, demanded that he step outside. Gates refused, saying something to the effect of, “This is what happens to black men in America.” Some more bluster followed from both sides, and eventually Gates explained the situation but was arrested anyway for disorderly conduct.
Naturally, Gates and the officer tell slightly different stories, but the general consensus seems to be that both overreacted. Gates, understandably upset by being accused of breaking into his own home, called the officer a racist and, to some extent, refused to cooperate. In all likelihood, simply stepping outside and explaining the situation would have prevented any escalation.
The officer could have ignored the comments and left after identifying Gates as the legitimate occupant of the home. Instead, he chose to escalate the situation by arresting him for “disorderly conduct”
The incident offers fuel to both sides of the racial divide. To some, it looks like blatant racial profiling, an upstanding black citizen treated like a common criminal by a racist white cop. To others, Gates is an overeducated black liberal playing the race card, looking for racist motives behind a simple misunderstanding.
Admittedly, I’m more inclined to one of those camps than the other. Also, Gates is an honorary member of Board of the National Association for Urban Debate Leagues, a cause which is near and dear to my heart. So I can’t claim total objectivity here.
That said, I’ve thought a lot about the incident, and I do think I have an interesting take on it. Just as a poker hand can sometimes look different when considered in the larger context of a match between two players, with all of the metagame considerations that that entails, I saw the Gates arrest in a different light when considering it strategically and as one among many encounters between a police officer and a black man (or actually any citizen, though I do think race gives such an interaction a particular context). I know it sounds weird, but bear with me.
My work in public education has given me the opportunity both to learn from young black men who have experienced racial profiling and police brutality and also to offer advice to other young black men about how they ought to respond to such situations. My understanding is that platitudes like “know your rights” are at best worthless and at worst dangerous. I once saw a class presentation by several young men, Hispanic in this case, about your rights when dealing with police. They’d done their homework and gave a nice little explanation of probable cause, consensual searches, and the like.
Afterwards, I asked one of them whether either had actually had the opportunity to assert his rights in a real-life situation. His face darkened and he looked away from me. When pressed, he told me he was once stopped by two white police officers based on what he believed was racial profiling. He cooperated and answered their questions, and they were about to leave without writing him a ticket or searching his car. Then he asked for their names and badge numbers, at which point they escorted him into a nearby alley and roughed him up.
My point is that although there are supposed to be limits on police power and checks against abuses of this power, many of those who interact with the police are not actually in a position to assert their rights. Naturally, the police as a whole have an interest in maintaining their power and discouraging tactics that challenge it or that would limit their options. Thus, individual police officers engage in acts of retaliation not only because they are individually racist or on a power trip but as part of a larger strategy to intimidate would-be challengers. Among many young black men, even those who have not directly experienced police brutality themselves, there is a belief that if one attempts to assert one’s rights during an encounter with the police, he risks provoking a violent response.
What does all of this have to do with poker? It reminds me of situations where I have all the power. Say I raise UTG, the BB calls, and the flop comes AK9. Regardless of my hand, it’s pretty likely that I’m going to win the pot. I have position, I have the betting impetus, and I have by far the stronger range on this flop. My cards are probably best, but even if they aren’t, I’ll usually bluff my way through.
There are two ways my opponent can try to combat this. He can make some thin call downs, though that will often end up being painful for him, or he can slowplay some big hands and occasionally show up with unexpected strength in a situation where I’m using to having the power.
Any time the police interact with a suspect, particularly a minority one, they are accustomed to having the power. They have plenty of legitimate authority, and, when they need it, they’ve got intimidation and brute force on their side as well. The average suspect can attempt to assert his rights, but he plays a dangerous game in doing so.
What I’m saying is that among black men encountering the police, Henry Louis Gates, Jr. is the pocket Aces, the rare citizen who actually has the upper hand in a confrontation with the police. Unlike the majority of black men who find themselves questioned by a police officer, he is wealthy, well-connected, and well-respected. He pointed out the racism inherent in the situation (more in that in a moment), and when the officer knowingly arrested him in his home, it drew national headlines. The police department quickly dropped the charges, the Mayor of Cambridge condemned the arrest, and even the President chimed in to say that the officer “acted stupidly.” Imagine the shitstorm that would have fallen on the officer had he decided to rough Gates up and accuse him of resisting arrest.
I do think Gates was mistaken to label the individual officer a racist, though. Like Gates’ own, the officer’s actions and reactions were largely determined for him. The whole situation was set into motion by a neighbor who called the police after seeing two black men attempting to force open the door of an expensive home in a largely white neighborhood. It’s hard to say for sure, but I wonder whether the call would have been made had Gates and his driver been white. Sadly, it may actually be a sign of progress that the white women did not recognize her neighbor. Forty years ago, it’s hard to imagine a black man living in an affluent white neighborhood without the whole town being well aware of it.
In any event, the officer had no choice but to respond to the report of a break-in, and, upon responding, to speak with the individual inside of the home. I don’t believe he would have turned around and left had he seen a white man inside instead.
Still, whether the officer himself was influenced by race, the situation as a whole clearly was. It is unfortunate that such situations as arise, but as President Obama also noted, it is not uncommon. The vast majority of the time, it is the police who have the upper hand. My advice to my students is always to cooperate and be respectful to the police officer, no matter how clearly they feel they have been targeted because of their race. I take no joy in counseling them to swallow their price and do nothing to combat racism, but at least during the encounter, I believe there is very little that they can safely do.
Gates, on the other hand, is the rare black man who can speak up. The officer is unlikely to retaliate severely against him, and if he does, it will provoke outrage nationwide. Imagine the shitstorm that would have rained down on him had he decided to rough Gates up and accuse him of resisting arrest. The officer, executing his authority in a seemingly routine situation, ran into the nuts.
Both Gates and the officer acted brashly and in ways that did not clearly benefit either of them individually. I think it’s a mistake to say that either overreacted though. On the officer’s part, the arrest was part of a larger strategy to protect police authority and discourage those who attempt to limit it by asserting their rights. On Gates’ part, it was part of a larger strategy to discourage police harassment. Even if their actions don’t appear optimal when considered in a vacuum, they take on new significance as part of a larger strategy. Gates’ “overreaction” may have created some hassle for him personally that could have been avoided, but it also brought national attention to an issue that, even in the “Age of Obama”, still merits discussion.
Nice analysis…Gates is a great mind and if Lawrence Summers hadn’t been such a tool, Harvard would still have the African-American studies dream team together. *Sigh*
Very cogent analysis and analogy. The general liberal line of thought treats the equality of mankind as a natural given and inequalities as unnatural and unjust. On the contrary, the general equality of mankind is rather a modern ideal than anything observable in history. It’s an ideal I very much share, but to ignore the historical divisions and struggles among men is a kind of closing the eyes, and that is no way to work toward a goal.
I was one of the white college volunteers who went to Mississippi in the summer of 1964 as part of the “Mississippi Summer,” a broad range civil rights effort in that deepest of the deep south states. At the very start of that summer, three workers — James Chaney, a local Mississippi black, Mickey Schwerner, a Northern white volunteer who’d been in the state awhile, and Andy Goodman, one of the fresh volunteers from NYC, disappeared in Neshoba County. Some time later, the Neshoba County sheriff, his deputy, and some others were arrested for the abduction and murder of the three. During the training camp for volunteers I remember overhearing three black guys, Mississippi movement veterans, talking among themselves about the volunteers they were training. “They ask me, ‘When you’re in the middle of a crowd of angry crackers, how can you remain nonviolent?’ Shit, man, what else can you be?”
Interesting analysis. I think you’re basically right, but don’t forget that the police are also playing a “game” against legitimate criminals, and it isn’t always obvious to them which “type” they are dealing with (criminal or upstanding citizen). Of course both types have rights that shouldn’t be abused, but in terms of portraying an overall image of intimidation, it seems like that would be useful in deterring and punishing crime. I have very little experience with or knowledge of crime enforcement tactics, so I’m not an expert, just making a suggestion.
Thanks for the comment, brue, and very good point as usual. I’m sure my overall tone was unfair to the police. I do recognize that they have a difficult and often legitimate job to do. I’m no expert myself, but I imagine that intimidation is often a legitimate and essential tactic in their work.
That said, in the absence of legal consequences and public criticism, they have considerable incentive to maximize their intimidation factor. There is considerable empirical evidence to suggest that this is in fact what will happen when rights are not vigorously upheld.
What I mean to say here is that formal legal rights are far from being absolute protections. They are themselves only one tool in a back-and-forth between police and policed, one whose realization is far from automatic. There is every reason to expect that police offers will continue to push the envelope, and thus it is imperative that those few who are in a position to push back do so. Despite the alarmist cries of the far right, we are far from the point where legitimate police tactics are deterred for fear of public outrage or legal consequences.
That’s a great story, Bob! Illustrates the point quite well.
And hat’s off to you for risking life and limb for such an important cause. I imagine that activism on the part of white volunteers such as yourself was important for similar reasons to Gates’ own. I know there were those among you who experienced the most severe consequences, but I would guess there were also times when the presence of white college students deterred actions that, sad to say, might not have been so controversial were they to have been inflicted only upon blacks?
Also I think it’s kind of an open question whether this is good or bad for civil rights overall. On the whole, I’d say it’s bad. You might say that running into the nuts this once will make police think twice about intimidating people. But it’s not too hard to “read” this hand and figure out that Gates, living in a nice neighborhood and probably dressed well, was not some hoodlum. Basically it tells police that once you figure out that you’re talking to a college professor, then back off. If not, then continue as planned.
Second is the effect of public perception of racial profiling and intimidation by police. At least a large share of people will look at this incident and say, “THIS is racial profiling? A guy gets seen breaking into a house, the police come to ask questions, and he starts yelling at the police? Seems fair that the police would react to being yelled at when they’re just trying to ascertain the facts of the situation, which on their face clearly warrant investigation. If this is what passes for police brutality, then there must not be a real problem.” That is, the publicization of THIS incident, which is in the opinion of many people, including me, is not egregious behavior on the part of the police, obscures all the instances of true police misconduct that occur on an everyday basis.
Also, after reading the police report, the officer at least claims that he attempted to leave BEFORE arresting Gates for disorderly conduct, but was pursued by Gates, who continued to yell at him. It sounds like there were a number of witnesses who could potentially corroborate this claim. The more I learn about this, the more I think that Gates is a little bit of a nut job, who could have realized the possibility of a publicity stunt the moment the officer showed up and didn’t want to pass up the opportunity. If his experience becomes the focus of a documentary about police abuse in America, as has been reported, I might throw up in my mouth a little bit.