In a time when a black man lives in the White House, most Americans believe their nation has overcome racial oppression. Police shootings may still make headlines, but colorblind advocates largely see them as an isolated problem. In The New Jim Crow, Michelle Alexander vigorously challenges this public consensus. Understanding the extremely surprising nature of his argument, then buttressing it with abundant evidence and effective counterarguments, Alexander establishes that mass incarceration amounts to a racial caste system almost as unjust as Jim Crow or slavery. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay Because Alexander understands that his claim goes against the conventional wisdom of a post-racial society, he constructs his argument to appeal to an immediately skeptical audience. Among his most effective devices for dealing with the reader's potential disbelief in his argument is a personal anecdote. Alexander recalls considering a sign claiming that the War on Drugs is a reincarnation of Jim Crow as “an absurd comparison” only a few years before writing a book making essentially the same claim (Alexander 3). This example highlights that even racially conscious people who are not involved in the criminal justice system tend not to see the parallels between it and past forms of oppression, as do incarcerated people (4). Recognizing that even well-intentioned readers may not initially be receptive to an argument is critical to making an effective thesis; in doing so, Alexander meets readers according to their (perhaps erroneous) points of view, allowing her to continue without discouraging her audience. To help readers understand how a deeply discriminatory system can thrive in a seemingly color-blind society, Alexander proceeds to explain the historical context that allowed such a flaw. She notes that the “rules and reasons” used to support racism “evolve and change as they are challenged” (21). Just as slavery gave way to Jim Crow, the versatile nature of racism allowed it to persist even after the civil rights movement, when Republican politicians of the 1970s and 1980s used “law and order” rhetoric to implement harsh anti-crime policies whose real goals were to appeal to white Southerners through racially charged language (41). The background information contextualizes Alexander's case in the minds of readers. Historical context and a personal anecdote allow Alexander to ease the reader into much of his argument, making a seemingly ridiculous claim at least seem plausible. Of course, simply understanding that the concept of a racial caste system exists may shock readers isn't enough to convince them, so Alexander supports his claim with mountains of different evidence before refuting potential concerns. She mixes anecdotal evidence that allows her to appeal to pathos with statistical data that allows her to appeal to logos. For example, when discussing the toxic effects of the criminal justice system's shortcomings, Alexander opens chapter 3 with the story of Erma Faye Stewart, an innocent woman whose life was uprooted by a guilty plea to a nonviolent crime of drugs, forcing her to face discrimination in housing, employment, and public benefits (97). He goes on to cite a number of statistics from different sources that show the..