Calculating the Souls of Black Folk

J. K. Abdurahman
{"title":"Calculating the Souls of Black Folk","authors":"J. K. Abdurahman","doi":"10.52214/CJRL.V11I4.8741","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In 1995, there were nearly 50,000 children removed from their families into the New York City Administration for Children’s Services’ (ACS) foster care system.1 The NYC ACS’ forcible transfer of children from a protected group into another group may amount to genocide under Article 2(e) of the Genocide Convention if formal review can demonstrate an “intent to destroy” the group “as such” or at least “in part.” Rather than pursuing a citizen’s tribunal, or truth and reconciliation committee to assess the historic transfer of Black children to other groups during this period by the child welfare system, ACS has focused on collecting data from currently targeted populations in order to “predict who needs prevention” services. This paper examines the Family First Prevention Act’s legislative mandate to calculate the “souls of Black folks” and the geographies of predictive analytics developed to serve this aim. Using an abolitionist lens grounded in the epistemology offered by W. E. B. Du Bois’ Souls of Black Folks, this argument moves beyond the Fairness, Accountability and Transparency (FAT) framework to propose strategies for dismantling the “new modes of surveillance and social control” manifested in NYC ACS’ preventive turn. I propose a Get Out mathematics drawing from Katherine McKittrick’s proposal to “count it out different” as the fugitive’s alternative to state sanctioned datafication.","PeriodicalId":212657,"journal":{"name":"Columbia Journal of Race and Law","volume":"24 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"12","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Columbia Journal of Race and Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52214/CJRL.V11I4.8741","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

Abstract

In 1995, there were nearly 50,000 children removed from their families into the New York City Administration for Children’s Services’ (ACS) foster care system.1 The NYC ACS’ forcible transfer of children from a protected group into another group may amount to genocide under Article 2(e) of the Genocide Convention if formal review can demonstrate an “intent to destroy” the group “as such” or at least “in part.” Rather than pursuing a citizen’s tribunal, or truth and reconciliation committee to assess the historic transfer of Black children to other groups during this period by the child welfare system, ACS has focused on collecting data from currently targeted populations in order to “predict who needs prevention” services. This paper examines the Family First Prevention Act’s legislative mandate to calculate the “souls of Black folks” and the geographies of predictive analytics developed to serve this aim. Using an abolitionist lens grounded in the epistemology offered by W. E. B. Du Bois’ Souls of Black Folks, this argument moves beyond the Fairness, Accountability and Transparency (FAT) framework to propose strategies for dismantling the “new modes of surveillance and social control” manifested in NYC ACS’ preventive turn. I propose a Get Out mathematics drawing from Katherine McKittrick’s proposal to “count it out different” as the fugitive’s alternative to state sanctioned datafication.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
计算黑人的灵魂
1995年,有近5万名儿童从他们的家庭转移到纽约市儿童服务管理局(ACS)的寄养系统根据《种族灭绝公约》第2条(e)项,如果正式审查能够证明“意图摧毁”该群体“本身”或至少“部分”,纽约市儿童保护协会将儿童从一个受保护群体强行转移到另一个群体可能构成种族灭绝。与寻求公民法庭或真相与和解委员会来评估儿童福利系统在此期间将黑人儿童转移到其他群体的历史不同,美国儿童福利协会专注于从当前目标人群中收集数据,以“预测谁需要预防”服务。本文考察了《家庭第一预防法案》的立法授权,即计算“黑人的灵魂”,以及为实现这一目标而开发的预测分析的地理位置。本文以杜波依斯的《黑人之魂》(Souls of Black Folks)提供的认识论为基础,运用废奴主义的视角,超越了公平、问责和透明(FAT)框架,提出了拆除“监视和社会控制的新模式”的策略,这些模式体现在纽约黑人协会的预防性转向中。我建议从凯瑟琳·麦基特里克(Katherine McKittrick)“以不同的方式计算”(count it Out different)的建议中得出一个Get Out数学图,作为逃亡者对国家批准的数据化的替代方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
PRISON LABOR AND THE FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT: RESOLVING THE CIRCUIT SPLIT ON WHETHER INCARCERATED WORKERS ARE ENTITLED TO THE FEDERAL MINIMUM WAGE AREN’T I A WOMAN DESERVING OF JUSTICE? RESTRUCTURING VAWA’S FUNDING STRUCTURE TO CREATE RACIAL AND GENDER EQUITY Reconstruction's Lessons Black Boarding Academies as a Prudential Reparation Building a Guaranteed Income to End the "Child Welfare" System
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1