The chapter is called Bargained. Marc Lamont Hill is trying to get us to look below the surface of tragic stories. Instead of just looking at a tragedy like Michael Brown's killing and allowing our implicit biases or pity to form our judgement, he is forcing us the examine the historical background of both the legal policies and the institutions that shaped the young man's life outcomes (housing, schooling, economic opportunities, policing practices, legal status, governmental policy, ect) in order to get a much fuller and complex picture of the person (like Mike Brown) or the social situation (like an urban riot or the water crisis in Flint). Focusing on the chapter you selected to read, evaluate the merit (or lack of merit) of this analysis? Does it enhance the reader's critical thinking and therefore enhance our ability to contribute to an effective solution?
