In an era 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 color blindness advocates largely view them as an isolated problem. In The New Jim Crow, Michelle Alexander vigorously challenges this public consensus. By understanding the extremely surprising nature of his argument, and then supporting it with numerous effective evidence and 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 Should Not Be Banned”?Get Original Essay Since Alexander understands that her assertions run counter to the conventional wisdom of a post-racial society, she constructs her argument to please an immediately skeptical audience. . One of his most effective ways of understanding his reader's potential disbelief in his argument is through a personal anecdote. Alexander remembers considering a sign claiming that the War on Drugs was a reincarnation of Jim Crow as "an absurd comparison" just a few years before writing a book that made essentially the same claim (Alexander 3). This example highlights that even racially conscious people who are not involved in the criminal justice system tend to fail to see parallels between it and past forms of oppression, as incarcerated people do ( 4). Recognizing that even well-intentioned readers may not initially be receptive to an argument is essential to making an effective argument; in doing so, Alexander meets readers with their (perhaps misguided) viewpoints, allowing him to continue without putting off his audience. To help readers understand how a deeply discriminatory system can thrive in an ostensibly colorblind society, Alexander explains the historical context that allowed such imperfection. She notes that the “rules and reasons” used to defend 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, as Republican politicians in the 1970s and 1980s used the rhetoric of "law and "order" to enact strict anti-crime policies whose real goals were to appeal to Southern whites with racist language (41). The background information contextualizes Alexander's case in the readers' minds. Historical context and a personal anecdote allow Alexander to impress upon his reader the gist of his argument, making a seemingly ridiculous assertion at least plausible. Of course, simply understanding that the notion of a racial caste system exists may shock readers is not enough to convince them, which is why Alexander supports his assertion with mountains of various evidence before refuting the 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 failures in the criminal justice system, Alexander opens chapter 3 with the story of Erma Faye Stewart, an innocent woman whose life was upended by a guilty plea to a crime drug-related violence, forcing her to face discrimination in housing, employment and..