While it may be the middle of July, the JCI Scholars Program has not been as quiet as the website over the summer. Over on our current classes page you can now find links to brief descriptions of the courses being taught this summer, ranging from mindfulness to the environment and many points in between. Check it out, and I hope to have some reflections on the classes from our instructors and students to share here as well.
Author: Daniel
-
Don’t Call it a Comeback
It wasn’t too long ago that I was expecting not to teach for the Scholars Program anymore. Things don’t always work out as you expect! But, as of this past Wednesday, I was glad to find myself back in prison. Wait… well, you know what I mean.
There have been some changes since I was last inside. Our old “inside coordinator,” Vincent Greco, has since been released – great for him! But an adjustment for the program – fortunately, one of our long-term students has stepped up and seems to be doing a solid job of things. I’ve gotten letters from a couple of guys who had been in my classes with return addresses from other facilities, but I also saw some familiar faces on my way in.
Things are a little up in the air, so this summer I’m only teaching a short course – four sessions on non-violent resistance (to war) based around the War Resisters’ International Handbook for Non-Violent Campaigns. Since we hadn’t met before, we started class out with just some general discussion of what violence is, and why one might at least sometimes decline to use it in pursuit of a goal. I got to go over some of the Chenoweth and Stephan data on the success of non-violent campaigns in response to the entirely unsurprising view that some of the guys expressed that clearly, whichever side of a conflict was more willing to use violence (and more extreme violence) would win. I’m not sure they’re convinced – apparently they had a class last semester with a guy who taught a course on why violence is inevitable (I leave for a few semesters…).
Running the class itself brought me back to the familiar dynamic these classes often have. Unlike courses I’ve taught in “normal” university settings, the guys in the class are much less willing to let anything I say go unchallenged (itself a challenge when we can’t go to the internet on someone’s laptop to resolve a question), and they are much more eager to pull the class off into their own directions. Which sometimes leaves me feel like I’m just barely riding the wave rather than running a class, but comes from an interesting and good place, I think – we end up talking about whether Mormons count as secessionists because someone has noticed that I didn’t exactly define what counted as successful secession when I was discussing the data… so it represents people engaging with the material, even if often in a way that comes out of left field from the perspective at the front of the class. Oh, and of course, we had at least two conspiracy theories floated.
I’m looking forward to our next session.
-
Goodbye, Heart of Darkness
This has been a bit of a summer of upheavals for me, personally, so I hope you readers won’t mind a personal note to this post. After two years of having the privilege to work with the teachers and student scholars of the JCI Prison Scholars Program, I’ve finished my last class – at least for a long while. I had been planning on taking a break from teaching this Fall to focus on some other work (including some writing on criminal violence in the US that will eventually show up in the drafts available to patrons) already, but as it turns out I will not be living in Baltimore after that – I will be taking up a post with the Centre for Conflict Resolution in Cape Town, South Africa.
I walked out on my last day, somewhat anticlimactically, since a lot of folks had already left to not lose their place in the dinner line. But at the very least Mr. Greco, Jamaican Eddie, Mr. Epps, Craig Muhammed, Kelly, and Mr. Horton had hung around to chat, like they usually do. I told them I hoped that if I came back to Baltimore in four or five years, that the program would still be going and I could teach again – though I hoped I wouldn’t see any of them in my classes. And I tried, and failed, to master the “snap” one last time.
While my departure from JCIPSP was not really planned, I suppose it’s fitting that I’m leaving just after completing my summer course on the wars in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Ever since Conrad used the phrase “heart of darkness” to refer to the Congo, it’s been the lazy go-to label for any place where affluent, mostly white folks go to try to help the natives and have their faith in humanity tested, including prisons (though I see the tagline on the article profiling Mikita Brottman’s work has been changed, which is cool).
The thread that runs through my own work, and links studying the wars in Congo and teaching in prisons, is a resistance to that sort of thinking about the people who live in war zones (declared or not quite declared). First and foremost, people are people. Warlords and child soldiers, prisoners and guards, civilians and politicians, all make decisions for reasons that are ultimately understandable if we take the time to look at them. Back when I started studying African security issues seriously, I had lunch with an old mentor and was describing the situation in the DRC to him, and his response was “sounds like they need some adult supervision.”
We haven’t spoken since.
The reason I used Stearns’ book for this course (even though it’s a bit less systematic and detailed than the gold standard on the war, Prunier’s massive Africa’s World War) is precisely that it humanizes the conflict for people who are learning about it. Stearns builds his book around the narratives of people who were caught up in the war – some of them were leaders of brutal military units or equally brutal paramilitaries, some were businesspeople, some were child soldiers, or just civilians trying to get by. But throughout the book he makes a point of showcasing people’s stories of why they did what they did. Civilian members of a small religious sect that stayed near where their founder had set up worship. Kinyarwandan-speaking Congolese whose parents urged them to cross the border and become child soldiers. A Hutu police chief during the genocide who kept his position while their colleagues engaged in mass murder, but maintained his own clean hands – then went to war against the new Rwandan regime.
I did my best, with mixed success, to replicate that approach in the class itself. We talked a lot about the personal narratives in the book, and how it related to other kinds of violence. Some of the guys would bring up ways in which the situation of people in DRC reminded them of their own situation, as guys who had gotten involved in violence here in the US. My big regret from the class is that I never quite managed to dig deeply into those stories and connections – we very quickly tended to end up relating things from the DRC to other large-scale current events the guys saw parallels to – Gaza, Ukraine, Iraq, or Ferguson. It seemed sometimes that they were more comfortable talking about those sorts of “current events” – or perhaps deep down I was more comfortable talking about them. If I’ve learned anything from my time teaching at JCIPSP, it’s that really listening to your students is much tougher than it seems. I’d walk in every class intending to do it, and find at least three points at which I’d failed when I did my internal post-mortem on the drive home. I also tried to give them writing assignments that took a similar approach of bringing big ideas down to earth through relationship with relatable stories (a history-teaching technique imparted to me by my colleague Rachel Donaldson) – asking them, e.g., where they would go and what they would bring if war had broken out where they lived before coming to prison. Not everyone did the writing assignments, but I’ll post some of them as I transcribe them.
If there were two bits of the class that made me feel like I’d done some of my job correctly, here they are. First, there are a lot of African immigrants here in Maryland, many of whom left to avoid wars at home. A good number of them have become guards at JCI, it seems. Several times, guys in my class told me that a guard had seen them carrying a copy of the book, or heard them talking about DRC (or Liberia, which I discussed in a previous class) and expressed warm surprise that my students actually knew something about the guards’ homelands. And the students told me that – like most Americans – many of them hadn’t really known much about what was going on in Africa before taking classes with me, so it gave them a new understanding of the situations a number of the guards were coming from. I’m told that this has led to a number of good conversations. So, if I’ve helped some of my students and some of the guards improve the humanity of their relationships a little, that’s at least as important to me as if anyone remembers the difference between the RPF and the RCD a year from now.
Second, somewhat weirdly, I think I may have humanized some of the decision-makers in foreign policy a bit. One constant in our classes has been the prevalence of conspiracy theories. This is especially true when you’re talking about the DRC and its neighborhood, where Mobutu was in fact put into power by a CIA conspiracy (among other conspirators), and where one of the main players in the war, the Rwandan Patriotic Front, began its life as a conspiracy within the Ugandan military, backed by the US. So there’s a tendency for a lot of my students to want to find the way that the US created the war (or any other problem) in order to get money or kill non-whites. By the end, I think I managed to convince at least some of them that greed and racism are real drivers of stuff in the world, but it’s not always that simple – just as the people in Congo aren’t Conrad’s monstrous savages, the powerful actors involved are often venal or misguided or biased, but rarely vampires. If you go hunting for the monsters, you’ll miss the more systematic aspects of what goes wrong in places like Congo – or Baltimore or Ferguson, for that matter.
In the end, I am not sure how much I helped – and you’ll probably be better served by reading some of my students’ writing than this long and self-indulgent reflection. I’m always a little bit embarrassed by the kind words and certificates that are handed to me at the end of classes that I teach. This semester, knowing I was leaving, Mr. Greco also made up a sort of “lifetime achievement” certificate that honors me for “standing in the gap against international, national, and local crimes of police, armed forces and terroristic brutality; and for teaching those who society devalues.” I’m not sure I do any of that. I’m pretty sure I haven’t stopped any police violence or reformed any paramilitaries lately.
And I’m not sure even about the last part. We struggle, in this program, with the concept of “teaching.” It is very possible that we are fooling ourselves into thinking we have done real good, real pedagogical work in the deepest, most empowering sense of the term, when really all we have done is have intense experiences for ourselves. That’s the danger of the Heart of Darkness paradigm for liberals. There’s a more charitable read of Conrad’s work, where Congo isn’t the titular heart of darkness itself, but a place where the darkness at the heart of European colonialism is revealed, and destroys the world around it in the revelation. But if you read it that way, and congratulate yourself on your anti-racism, you risk missing the fact that even that reading turns the Congolese from savages into bit players in the white journey of self-actualization and improvement. I mean, it’s an upgrade, but, still… enh. We are all trying our best to make this project about more than our personal journeys, but we probably only intermittently succeed.
The other thing is the bit about society devaluing men in prison. This is sort of true, and sort of not. I have already talked a lot about the way in which the communities from which incarcerated men tend to come are profoundly disconnected from the community that I live in, and that many of you readers live in. I know many of the guys talk about being cut off from their families. I’m terrible to get on the phone, and I know that for people who can’t email me, that often makes my commitment look less than steadfast. I know these things matter for building those human relationships and I fail as often as anyone else, if not more so. But I also see folks waiting in the visiting room every time I go to teach. Incarceration has a profound effect on those communities I’m not a part of, and the loss of the value of the men in prison is keenly felt there. If “society” doesn’t value people in prison, we’re using “society” in a way that implicitly excludes a lot of people who live only a stone’s throw away from me here in Baltimore. And highlighting the way that the “society” I go home to when I’m done teaching in the prison is deeply and constantly involved in a process of exclusion and devaluation.
Hello, heart of darkness.
-
Crime, Race, and Class: Part I
Continuing with my long-overdue posting of student writing from last summer’s class, here is part I of Mr. Shabazz’ reflections on crime, race, and class (he was kind enough to break this up into two parts in his letter to me, so I will be posting part II soon). Mr. Shabazz and I had some lively discussions about the revolutionary potential (or lack thereof) of the lumpenproletariat; I found myself wishing that he were in the current Violence class, as some of the same issues have arisen in our discussion of the Black Panther Party. Anyway, without further ado (as always, with only minor spelling or grammar errors cleaned up – any notes from me are in square brackets):
-
Life: A Short Story
Today’s post comes with two apologies. First, to you readers – here at the Program, many of us have been experiencing end-of-semester crunch in our day jobs.
Second, this post comes with an apology to the student whose writing it is. Last summer, I taught a course titled Political Analysis and Political Narrative. Since the course focused on the way that James told the history of the Ste-Domingue (Haiti) revolution in such a way as to “argue” for his preferred Marxist understanding of politics, over the course of the class students were asked to write narratives of historical events – whether “public” history or the story of something that happened in their own lives – in a way that made a political or moral point.
-
On Charles Taylor
As part of my class on violence, we looked at the civil wars in Liberia as an example of civil conflict, and a springboard for talking about how civil conflicts develop and how acts of violence and atrocities come to be committed in them (we also watched the brutal but pretty solid documentary Liberia: an Uncivil War). The students were very interested in the conflict – in part because of the roots of modern Liberia in a US “back to Africa” movement, and also because many of the COs at Jessup are from Liberia. A few reported to me that they’d had interesting conversations with the staff about it, and Mr. Greco tells me that he’s been making copies of my Liberia materials (mostly the Wikipedia page for a general overview, plus an excerpt from Liberian Women Peacemakers).
Here are one of my student J.E.’s comments on Liberia’s war.
Liberia was Lord Captured!
Charles “President” Taylor – War Lord or Robin Hood?
Fear of rebels and government retribution keeps many of Liberia citizens in silence.
Getting the inside story on Liberia most feared and infamous war lord was no easy take because Charles Taylor did not give interviews and the people did not know who to trust.
Liberia is among the top 10 countries with the highest homicide rates in the world. This is a high violence society with a comparable murder rate to Colombia, Jamaica, and South Africa, mostly due to political violence and corruption.
The US-controlled media say that almost 80% of the murderous violence that goes on in Liberia is caused by the rebels, while the residents say that it is sometimes difficult to tell the difference between the US backed rebels and the government forces.
Why did the people of Monrovia willingly die for Charles Taylor?
Some describe Taylor as Liberia’s answer – a modern-day Robin Hood in a sense, whose benevolence in Monrovia afforded him absolute control and respect as a role model and President.
Charles Taylor’s popularity stemmed in part from his generosity toward the people of Monrovia – he gave money to those in need and provided them with a source of livelihood and also kept them safe in his own way from the Rebels (smile). Through his generosity, Taylor gained the loyalty of his people.
This loyalty did not end with his national people, but with neighboring revolutionaries supporting him.
A lot of Charles Taylor’s supporters believe he was tricked by the US government in the first place, while others feel he is guilty because they blame him for letting so many innocent people die.
-
City Paper Feature Article
Our founder Drew Leder and one of our faculty, Mikita Brottman, are featured in a City Paper feature article this week! Congrats to them, and check out the article!
(Though, to be fair, to get to our classrooms we actually cross a yard with quite a wide expanse of sky framed by razor wire!)
-
Monday Morning Statshot
Mr. Greco, the clerk to Ms. Schroeder, the JCI Librarian who organizes most of our logistics on the JCI side, has recently compiled some summary information on our program over the past few years, that I think is pretty impressive. In a nutshell, since 2010, folks involved with the JCI Scholars Program, and a number of the predecessor programs that we’ve built on, have taught 38 courses, and involved fifteen faculty. We don’t have good numbers on students, but we’re looking forward to having slots for about 160 students this summer, and we’ve been teaching similar numbers each semester for a while. Mr. Greco estimates that we’ve taught about 1,300 student slots (not that many students, as many students have been with the program many years and take a course almost every “semester”) and put in 2,112 volunteer hours.
In addition, a similar (but unaffiliated) program, Partners in Philosophy, has taught six courses involving grad students and a rotating roster of Washington College professors.
For those who want more detail, here’s Mr. Greco’s accounting of what we’ve taught (excluding the Partners in Philosophy numbers):
Courses
- Creating a Peaceful Soul (Leder)
- How We Decide (Leder)
- Awakening Joy (Leder)
- Awakening the Heroes Within (Leder)
- The Soul Knows No Bars (Leder)
- Tao Te Ching (Leder)
- Eckhart Tolle’s “A New Earth” (Leder)
- Eckhart Tolle’s “The Power of Now” (Leder)
- Soul Food (Leder)
- Law and Society (Brown)
- Business Law I (Brown)
- Business Law II (Brown)
- Issues in American Law (Brown)
- Literature (Lobo)
- Restorative Justice (Sabin/Lawrence)
- Introduction to Formal Reasoning (Brunson)
- Faith & Reason (Brunson)
- Epistemology (Brunson)
- Philosophy (Brunson)
- Thinking Between Past and Future (Miller)
- The Philosophers’ Handbook I (Miller)
- The Philosophers’ Handbook II (Miller)
- Game Theory and Game Design (Miller/Levine)
- Writing (Hall)
- Media Theory (Ball)
- Political Theory and Political Narrative (Levine)
- Violence (Levine/Miller)
- Touchstones (Brottman)
- Basic Writing (Brottman)
- Psychology (Brottman)
- Literature I (Brottman)
- Literature II (Brottman)
- Literature III (Brottman)
- The Stoics (Golden)
- Civil Rights (Donaldson)
- History of Economic Thought (Donaldson/Houston)
- Philosophy (Houston)
- Criminal Justice (Cantora)
Faculty
- Prof. Drew Leder (Loyola)
- Fr. Timothy Brown (Loyola)
- Prof. Mikita Brottman (MICA)
- Dr. Rachel Donaldson
- Dr. Joshua Houston
- Prof. Andrea Cantora (University of Baltimore)
- Dr. Joshua Miller
- Prof. Daniel Levine (University of Maryland)
- Dr. Daniel Brunson (Morgan State)
- Dr. Christian Golden (Georgetown)
- Prof. Ed Sabin (Loyola)
- Prof. Jared Ball (Morgan State)
- Mr. Joseph Hall
- Ms. Phyllis Lawrence (Loyola)
-
Violence (4/18/14)
So, the Violence class. I’ve wanted to teach a course like this for a while, for two reasons. First, it’s a matter of professional interest to me – especially to look at violence as a phenomenon that cross-cuts issues that are often academically stove-piped (e.g., war, psychology of trauma, domestic violence). Second, it’s an issue that I thought would be of particular interest to our students, and on which they might have some important insights to share.
This past Friday, our topic was sexual violence. We were reading (/should have read) some excerpts from Brison’s Aftermath, along with a USIP Special Report on the motivations of Mai Mai militia members who commit rapes in the Democratic Republic of Congo and Griffin’s “Rape: the All-American Crime.” We’d also just finished a session on “terror,” where we read Scarry’s chapter on torture – with the intent that there would be some links between her analysis of the silencing and identity-destroying effects of torture and those effects of sexual violence on women, particularly the way these effects impact women beyond the class of direct victims of overt sexual violence.
It was a tough class and highlighted some of the ways I feel like I haven’t been able to make this course in general the kind of class it should be.
It wasn’t tough in the sense that it led to hard, painful conversations. Quite the opposite, actually. The one topic that the guys really seemed interested in there was talking about the details of the war (that’s not unusual – my plan over the summer is to note this clear line of interest and teach a class on the Congo wars). For the rest of the time, it was hard to get anyone to talk.
I suspect – though I don’t know – that part of the problem is that this might be a bit too close to home, while at the same time not being close enough to home, for our students. On the one hand, a constant weird dynamic in the class is that I am a student of violence but my life has been largely untouched by it – this is, of course, not the case for a lot of the guys in the class. On the other, Josh and I made a conscious choice not to have a reading that was directly focused on something like prison rape, for fear that it would be too direct an approach for some of the men (we have at least one student we know to be in prison for rape, so that’s pretty direct, but prison rape is a present threat for at least some of them) – despite the fact that it’s a serious problem, with recent statistics indicating that the number of sexual assaults in prisons (mostly of men) is about even with the number of assaults in the entire nation outside of prisons (both are estimated to be on the order of 200,000 per year).
But, mostly, it was me trying to fill time by talking, and a bit of that professorial, “so, do you see Griffin’s argument? Does it make sense to you?” getting vague assent.
In addition, I worry that I have not used this class as a strong enough platform for engaging on the moral issues that are directly relevant. For example, two sessions ago when we talked about the way that militaries maintain themselves, one of the readings was about the idea that masculinity is a social construction intended to make militaries possible. One of our students basically pushed the – horrible – line that women can’t be allowed into the military because then it’s inevitable that men will rape them. Josh and I both tried to bring the student to understand that that was a pretty backwards way of looking at the problem, but given that more students seemed to be nodding along with him than with us, I fear we failed entirely.
I don’t want to remove blame from my teaching style (or from guys not doing all the readings, and so clamming up – perhaps a side effect of making the reading load a bit too heavy for this class). But our hesitancy to go directly after the issue of prison rape may also have been part of the problem. The most fruitful conversation I had was after class had officially ended, with two of the guys in the class who have been in prison longer-term (though, they are also guys with whom I have a longer and deeper relationship than many of their classmates, so that may be part of the equation).
In a nutshell, they told me two things. First, they said that the kind of rape that happens at least in their prison, has changed over the past decade or so. As they described it, it used to be that it was pretty common for sexual predators to straight-up roam the halls and just grab people who might be out of sight of the guards (as a side note, they focused entirely on rape of incarcerated men by other incarcerated men, though the stats I cited above indicate that a huge amount of abuse is by correctional officers). Now, they said, predators had to operate by “trickery,” and described a more common practice as a guy known to be a predator befriending a new guy and convincing him to transfer to share a cell.
Second, when I asked, “so what do you think changed?” their answer was that it was the beneficial effect of the programs that now exist in JCI, like the Alternatives to Violence Project, and the volunteer college courses that we teach. I can’t verify that! But, walking out of a class where I was feeling a bit of a failure as a teacher, it was a nice thought to have.
-
History of Economic Thought (4/18/14)
Rachel Donaldson writes:
In class we have been reading Robert Heilbroner’s The Worldly Philosophers and this week we read the chapter on Thorstein Veblen. We began by discussing how Veblen’s economic views intersected with earlier economic theorists like Smith, Ricardo, Malthus, and Marx.
Specifically, we examined how Veblen’s view that taking pride in work is a part of human nature shared similarities with Marx’s understanding of labor as the essence of humans’ species being. We then situated Veblen in his historical context, discussing how his views also reflected ideas embedded in the American Populist movement of the late 19th century, particularly the idea of producerism.
Much of the rest of class was spent discussing the idea of conspicuous consumption as it existed in Veblen’s era and how it is manifested today. Heilbroner referenced Robert and Helen Lynd’s Middletown in this chapter and I brought in a copy of this study, which we incorporated into our larger discussion. I also passed around a copy of Alan Trachtenberg’s The Incorporation of America to provide a historical perspective on Veblen’s era and a copy of Sinclair Lewis’s Babbitt as an example of a cultural commentary on consumption. The student-scholars’ interest in these books has led me to consider the possibility of creating a rotating library of books relevant to the class for my summer course—but I will have to see if this is possible.