Thursday, June 11, 2020

Down With Slogans!



Make America Great Again! 
-- Donald Trump, 2016 campaign slogan and policy statement

I said a thing. 
It didn't go well. 
Or, on second thought, maybe it did. Days later, I'm still not sure one way or the other. 
It began, as it usually does these days, on Twitter:


Hang on. 

Just wait. Don't start screaming yet. 

If you let me explain, I'll probably give you even more reason to be mad and outraged. Won't that be nice? 

So, anyway, that's what I said. 
We don't want to defund the police.
We want to fund police training, de-escalation, community outreach, oversight, and especially police ACCOUNTABILITY.
What we want is to defund police brutality, abuse, racism, escalation, and militarization.
Fund protect and serve EVERYONE.

Outrageous, right? 

In my defense, Twitter is a lousy platform for political commentary. Tweets are limited to just under 300 characters, which doesn't allow for much in the way of detail or nuance. And sure, you can thread tweets, i.e. link them together into a longer message -- and I do that, a lot, and am in fact somewhat notorious for it -- but the truth of the matter is that not very many people read beyond the first tweet in the thread anyway.

And frankly, I thought this mostly a throwaway comment. 

I posted that at 8:35AM on a Monday morning. First tweet of the week, while I had my first cup of coffee and settled in to get a feel for what was happening in an America on fire, burning from both ends and right down the middle. 

But this was a Monday morning after two weeks of protests following the murder of yet another black man at the hands of police. 

This was Monday after a weekend of the president throwing gasoline on the fire from the safety of his bunker, under a fortress, behind a wall, surrounded by a brand new fence, guarded by an army. 

This was the day after police across the nation declared war on American citizens, a weekend of dogs, escalation, gas, tanks, and bullets -- some rubber, some not -- and yet more murders, more racism, more abuse by those who should be protecting Americans instead of killing them. 

I want to say this Monday was unusual, but, you know, it's starting to feel like it's not. 

Maybe that's where I went wrong -- if indeed I did. 

Rage has become the norm of American existence and this just seemed like more of the same.

Because it is


And that's the problem. 


See, on that Monday, my various social media timelines were full, tens of thousands deep, with people shouting "Defund the Police!"

Defund The Police?

That's the message we've settled on, I guess. The shouted slogan, the unifying narrative that has emerged in the wake of the protests, the riots, the rhetoric, the war on American citizens waged by those sworn to protect and serve and openly led and encouraged by those supposedly elected to support and defend the Constitution for all. 

Defund the police!

There were thousands of requests, demands, entreaties, for me to use my platform to push that message: Defund the Police! Come on, Jim! Join us! Use your voice to get others to join us! Defund the police! 

Sure, but ... defund the police? 

Defund?

What does that mean? 

The day before I saw a handful of people shouting this. Now? Monday morning it was thousands. Tens of thousands. 

So, anyway, I...

What? 

What's that? 

Oh. I see. 

You're mad. It was way before Monday morning, you say. You've been shouting it for years. Well, you know, maybe it was being shouted long before Monday. But maybe we don't all have the same view, the same input, the same shared experience -- and we're going to come back to that. So, for me, it was Monday when I really noticed the slogan "Defund the Police," when I realized it had become some sort of national movement, when people began demanding that I join up. 

You? Your mileage may vary. 

As I way saying: You want me to join you? You want me to push the message? 

I might, but I'm going to need more than a slogan.

Defund the police? 

What does that mean? Get rid of the police? Abolish the police? Or just ... don't pay the police anymore? What are we talking about here? 

I looked at what my readers were saying, over half a cup of cooling coffee at 7AM. 

I looked at the thousands of comments and messages, and I  listened to what people were shouting in the street, and it seemed to me they were saying they didn't really want to get rid of the police. 

Instead, again it seemed to me, they wanted to reduce the things which lead to institutional bias (such as, you know, racism, for example), abuse of power (like kneeling on a man's throat until he dies, for example), unnecessary use and/or escalation of force (like tear gas and rubber bullets used on peaceful protesters outside the White House), militarization, lack of accountability, etc. 

That sounds good. 

I can certainly support that, and in fact, I have been shouting that very message myself for more than a decade right here. 

And, again it seemed to me, they wanted to reward, fund, and/or increase the things which lead to better policing. Such as: community outreach to help cops and citizens see each other as people and not enemies, i.e. make policing local, community based and less like an invading army; programs which move some of the burden for non-policing matters (such as mental health intervention) away from law enforcement; increased oversight of police departments by community, state, and federal entities; significantly increased accountability of police officers and departments, training (which can be everything from de-escalation to civil rights to sexual harassment), etc.

That also sounds good to me. At least as a starting point. 

Again, since it seems I might need to repeat myself on this, I've been preaching exactly that message for more than a decade now, right here on this blog, and on my various social media feeds -- and I haven't been exactly shy about it recently either. 

I think "defund" might not be the best choice of words here, but you go to into revolution with the slogans you have and so I boiled what I was seeing down into a single summary small enough to fit into a tweet. 

Monday morning and a throwaway tweet of agreement and, even now, this doesn't seem like a controversial statement to me. 


But it only seems that way.


As it turns out, that's not what everybody meant. 

See, some people really did mean "abolish" the police. 

A lot of people, as it turns out. 










 


















There are thousands more. 

Three days later, it's still going on. 

You can take a look at my Twitter feed if you don't want to take my word for it. And tens of thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands, of similar comments on Twitter outside of my feed, and on Facebook, TikTok, YouTube, Instagram, etc. 

Fuck you, defund the police. 

Fuck you, abolish the police. 

Fuck you, eliminate the police. 

Fuck you, defund means defund. 

Well, okay. Fuck me. Whatever. Not exactly the first time Lefty social media has told me to go fuck myself. I try not to take it personally. But about the hundredth "fuck you" from people who I'm supposed to be sharing a side with, well, like the man said, it kinda feels personal. 

Maybe I had it wrong. 

It happens.

I was once -- allegedly -- trained to hold a full cup of coffee, while standing in a canoe, in the middle a hurricane, without spilling a drop. Something about attention to detail and focus, or so Navy Chiefs would have you believe. But, this? This makes a hurricane at sea in a canoe look pretty good. There are one hell of a lot of moving parts lately. Lot of people yelling. Lot of rage. Lot of hate filling my feeds. We're still in the midst of a pandemic, record numbers of new cases, record number of people dying -- and here in Florida, I'm right in the middle of it. Meanwhile, there's an economic crisis, a looming recession, a collapsing energy sector, a trade war, an election. Right now, half my social media is lit up with very angry people yelling about the Harry Potter lady...

So, maybe somewhere in that tempest, I missed something. 

Unlike Trump, I don't claim every word I speak to be perfection. Maybe I got it wrong. Maybe I needed to apologize. 

So I went to look. 








And there thousands of comments that say the same thing, nearly word for word. 

And huh? 

Defund the police doesn't mean eliminate the police, see? It means reduce the size of police budgets and use the resulting savings to fund community services, mental health, drug rehab, and so on. 

Again, you don't have to take my word for it, you can go look at the responses for yourself. Look at what protesters are saying, in the street and online. 

Which, not that I'm taking this personally, says pretty much what I said in the original post wasn't it?

So, who's right? 

Who owns "Defund the Police?" The Fuck You, Abolish The Pigs side or the Fuck You, Reform the Police side? 

I dunno. 

But I did notice that n
early every response I got from the Keep The Police camp talked about mental illness. 

They said Defund the Police is about reallocating money from the police budget to fund community services. The implication, it seems, being that if help gets to the mentally ill before the cops do, there will be less cops murdering mentally ill people. And that's likely valid, so far as it goes, but I'm not sure how it would have saved George Floyd -- who was murdered by the police for the alleged crime of passing a counterfeit $20 bill. I don't see how it would have saved Trayvon Martin. Or Tamir Rice. Or Eric Garner. Or made police arrest Ahmaud Aubrey's killers on the spot. Or... Well, again, it seemed as if I might be missing something.

It seemed to me this isn't about mental illness, or the homeless, or those with medical problems, or even overclocked police departments.

It seems that I recall this being about racism

And I can't see how reallocation of police funding addresses that fundamental issue right there. 

Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not arguing the idea. 

I'm not. 

I'm really not. I spent the better part of my adult life in the military. I can't talk about my job, but ultimately it was about killing people. That's what war is. Killing people. One at a time and in great big batches. Men, women, children, those who were our enemies and those who just happened to get in the way. That's what war is, killing people. It's terrible and there is no morality in it even when the cause might be just, but there it is just the same. That was my job. And I was good at it. 

You know what I wasn't good at? 

Peace. 

I wasn't a peacekeeper. It wasn't my job. It's not the job of the military to build nations, to synthesize democracy from the ashes of war, to grow a rational civilization and a functioning society. I don't know how to do that. I know how to kill people. But the part that comes after? That's not my job -- or it wasn't then. 

Yet, the military gets ordered to do that job all of the time. 

And we suck at it. We're not equipped for it. We're not trained for it. We don't have the right mentality for it. Human beings generally aren't killers -- as least not those who aren't psychopaths. You have to train them to kill people, you have to see the other side as less than human, a threat, the enemy. That's how wars are fought. Nation Building? That requires exactly the opposite mentality. How do you go from enemy to friend without some sort of transition? The human brain doesn't work that way. You go mad if you try -- and plenty of us in the military have. 

So, I get it. 

Believe me, I do. I get it. Cops aren't mental health experts. They're not doctors or social workers or animal control agents or childcare providers or any of the thousand things we demand of them. And when an increasingly militarized cop is forced into those roles, well, they suck at it. Because they can't shift from enemy to friend, from threat to nation builders. 

And people die. 

And we end up ... here.

So, I'm not arguing the idea that maybe we should remove those functions from the police and put them into the hands of people who are experts. 

That said, I think it's a lot more complicated than that -- speaking as somebody who's been sent to destroy countries and build nations more than once, and as somebody who trained with cops. 

I think the problems are bigger, and smaller, than just moving some money around. 

And I think it's about a lot more than just mental illness -- or any of the things we ask police to deal with. 

You don't become a racist because you had to deal with some homeless guy who needs mental healthcare. 

You don't kneel on a man's neck until he's dead, ignoring his cries for help, because a black man was selling loose cigarettes.

You don't shoot a black kid sitting on a playground because you had to get a kitten out of a tree.

You don't give a pass to vigilanties who gunned down a black man jogging on a public road because you didn't get a discount at the donut shop. 

You do these things because you're a fucking monster. 

And I think it's going to cost a lot more than just defunding some of the police budget. And I think it's going to require significant restructuring of entrenched mindsets in federal, state, and local governments, in the police force itself, and more than anything in the public -- cops end up doing jobs they're not qualified for because in a lot of cases the public calls 911 and asks them to. 


So, I asked my readers: What do you mean by Defund The Police. 


No. No. Not what does Stephen Colbert mean. 

Not what does the Minneapolis City Council mean. 

What do you mean? What do you think you mean when you say "defund the police?" 

Because it seems maybe we're making some assumptions here about what we all might believe this movement to be about. Because, if you can't explain "defund the police to ME" -- when I'm supposedly on your side -- how the hell are you going to explain it to somebody who hates Trump but will vote for him anyway because "liberals want to get rid of the police?"

Didn't you tell me we needed those people? Or some of them anyway? 

So, I asked. 

It didn't go well. 










Again, there are hundreds, thousands, more responses. 

Again, you can go look for yourself. 

Do your own research. Fuck you. This isn't your movement. Moron. Stupid. I shouldn't have to explain! And it's funny, the similarities of these responses to those when I asked Trump supporters to explain what "Make America Great Again" means to them. 

Then again:


Maybe the details aren't important right now. 

That said, I'm reflexively opposed to mobs. 

I'm cautious of movements based on slogans. 


The current government of America is a pretty good example of what happens when you don't demand the details up front. 


I sat there trying to make sense of two diametrically opposed interpretations of this movement:

Defund the Police means defund the police, abolish the cops, get rid of them, which part of this are you not understanding? 

Defund the Police means defund the police, keep the cops, but cut their budgets and use the money elsewhere, which part of this are you not getting? 

It seems to me that maybe Defund the Police means different things to different people -- even those who claim to be on the same side and part of the same movement and marching in the same protest and shouting the same slogan. 

And commenting on my Twitter feed. 

I don't know which one is right, maybe both, maybe neither.

I can, however, tell you who isn't confused about what Defund the Police means: 

This guy: 




And this guy:  



|And this guy: 




This is where I live, Milton, Florida, a backwater hick town in the Deep South of the Florida Panhandle. 

There are no riots here. 
No civil unrest. 

No much in the way of protests.

But, Defund the Police? White people here are scared shitless.


My god! Buy guns! Learn how to use them! The government can't help you! Black people are rioting. Liberals want to get rid of the police! Socialism! Communists! Antifa! They're coming for us! They going to burn our town and rape our women and loot our stuff and murder us!

That's not hyperbole. That's not exaggeration, that's the local politicians.


You loot, we'll shoot.

There hasn't be been a single case of looting anywhere in this or neighboring counties -- well, other than toothless white rednecks robbing each other's shitty trailers for money to buy meth. But, here's James Calkins, running for office on that very fear.

And it's likely going to get him elected.

Before the protests, before Trump started telling Americans how "Antifa" and "protesters, agitators, anarchists," and "others" (you know who he's talking about, you know), before Defund the Police, nobody knew who this guy was, James Calkins, Republican for District 3 County Commissioner. Now? The signs for his campaign are everywhere in Santa Rosa county.

Right next to brand new ones for Trump.

Defund the Police plays right to their racist, paranoid base.

If you don't live in a place like this, you don't really understand what it's like. The pervasive racism, the entrenched religious fanaticism, the lack of education, and the endless conspiracies pushed by preachers, politicians, and poltroons.

These people really do believe Hillary Clinton murdered four Americans in Benghazi and that she really was running a globe-spanning pedophile ring out of a pizza parlor basement in Washington D.C. They really do. And they believe Trump is a good Christian man. But, these people, these white Southern Conservatives here where I live, the pandemic showed them for the first time Trump's incompetence. This is one of the hardest hit states for the coronavirus. People they knew, people they cared about, those people died, some of them, are dying. It wasn't just black people, or Muslims, or "the gays," or liberals in some Northern city, for the first time, Trump's failure affected them personally. They lost their jobs. The stores they shopped at were closed. They couldn't get toilet paper or medications. Suddenly, conservative political pundits were turning against Trump and these people didn't know what to think.

Maybe Trump wasn't making America so great after all.
Does that mean they would have voted for Joe Biden?

No.

They'd never vote for a baby-murderin' demonrat in a million years.

But, they might not have voted for Donald Trump again either.

They might have stayed home.

Now? Now, they're firmly convinced that hordes of "Antifa" are on the way to pillage this shitty little backwater hick Southern town. COVID-19 might kill grandma, but Defund the Police means looters and rapists and rioters, you loot, we'll shoot, and God Bless Donald Trump! There are new Trump 2020 signs sprouting in yards across the Panhandle. The line outside the local gun store is twenty deep.

And they'll be at the polls come voting day, you better believe it.


So, what am I saying?


Don't protest? Don't demand a better nation? Better policing? Better communities? A better government? 

No, of course not. 

I'm not telling you how to protest. 

I'm not telling you to shut up because you're making white people afraid. 

I'm not telling you that your experience is invalid. I'm not telling you that you're wrong. Abolish the police, reform the police, whatever your position is, I'm not telling you anything. 

I don't know what the right answer is -- other than it's not Trump. 

I don't have a snappy wrap-up here, or some pithy observation. 

I'm trying damn hard not to take any of this personally -- not even that one person who called me a White Supremacist. I'm trying hard to listen. Hell, I went silent for a week to do just that. 

But I'm not listening to just you, my supposed allies, I'm listening to the opposition too. 

And I'm hearing what Trump is saying. And Mitch McConnell. And the local gun-waving politicians cashing in on white fear. 

This is politics and the message matters. Appearances matter. 

FEAR matters. 

Slogans matter and if you can't explain exactly what you mean when you say "defund the police" then somebody else will

Somebody like Donald Trump. 


104 comments:

  1. The person who said “A slogan shouldn’t have to be explained” seems to be agreeing with you, although she probably wouldn’t see it that way.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Granted she's only partially correct. A GOOD slogan shouldn't have to be explained. A majority of us seem to think it does need explanation, which means it isn't a good slogan.

      Delete
  2. I want to say, calm down, everyone. Think about what you are saying. Think about what you mean, what it takes to create a civil, just, livable community. But the rage and anger are winning, right now.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Well said, Chief. Not all of your followers are idiots.

    ReplyDelete
  4. My thoroughly undeveloped thought on the matter is that we could fire the bottom 50% and double the pay and training of the top 50% of officers and we'd all be safer.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am with you JC. I am sure that there are some police officers who feel a calling to serve but for others it is the only job they can get that pays more than stocking at WalMart. If we paid better salaries perhaps we could replace the latter with a better quality of officers.

      Delete
  5. To whoever came up with “Defund the Police” and to those who use it, it is a terrible slogan! I would never support such a ridiculous idea. Oh, you need 5 minutes to explain to me what it “really” means? (which I DO support). Spare us the GOP-style, 1984-esque doublespeak of trying to convince us that the words we see with our own eyes don’t really mean what they say. Most of America isn’t going to sit down and listen to semantic discourse about what the phrase is “supposed” to mean They will take the words at face value. Can’t blame them. Come up with something that SAYS what you mean. Like “Reform the Police” for example.

    ReplyDelete
  6. “Defund The Police” is SUCH a failure of messaging that I wonder how much of it is *intentional.*

    Like how many of those who jumped your timeline on Twitter are real, actual, American, *humans?*

    Ask most any sane, rational adult and they want to #DemilitarizeThePolice; and they want #JusticeInPolicing... but I wonder how many of these numpties are actually working towards Trumpian ends.

    I’ve never been a conspiracy theorist, but man, 2020 is testing my resolve...

    ReplyDelete
  7. I've been thrown into FB jail for posting a pic of A KKK person pulling upnthe sheet to show a policeman underneath sonthis is the only place I can comment. And I've been asking the same questions you brought up here. And I'm not getting any better answers. Your answers make far more sense.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Stupidest slogan I've heard in awhile. It is not a good idea to hand your adversary ammunition.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I prefer the term de-militarize the police. This would involve de-funding their budget for military style tactical gear.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, an excellent point. Still, those pesky police union contracts need to be dealt with. And when I say “ dealt with,” I mean replaced.

      Delete
  10. Hoo, boy, great essay as usual, and since I haven’t seen my viewpoint reflected in those tweets, may I add it here? My idea ( should anyone ask ��) is to deconconstruct existing police departments that are bound hand and foot by insufferable police union contracts and reconstruct a new department requiring all police to re-apply for a job. ( cf Camden, NJ did just that.). Because police racism is allowed to go rampant under those contracts that prevent proper oversight, hide the “ bad apples”, and make Appropriate discipline way too difficult—let alone bringing criminal charges against criminal behavior. And yes, move money into proven community programs that promote safety: mental health and addiction services; housing; education; alternative response teams ( cf Cahoots in Eugene, OR). Well, you get the idea. But number 1 priority is to dissolve let those oppressive union contracts and bring policing into the sunlight. (Note: I was the managing administrator for a prosecutor’s office and a trial court administrator. I have experience negotiating union contracts. These are my thoughts based on education and experience).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I live just over the Camden border. The old force was so corrupt they dissolved it bringing in State Troopers to keep the peace until they could rebuild it. Basically no more complaints of excessive force, crime down, peaceful protests this week with cops supporting the protests, unlike Philly burning 10 minutes across the river.
      'Defund' is the term used for any other discipline when deep restructuring is needed...it is not a new term but new to many of us...it isn't the term I would use either. On the other hand, it is so broad in meaning that it may encompass many supporters. the actual way we use it, I suspect will differ community by community depending on what is required. Some communities, like Camden, already have it right, some may need massive changes, and maybe benefit from dissolving and restarting.

      Delete
  11. One of my best friends is an ardent Trump supporter. She says she watches lots of different news outlets, but when I was visiting one day, she had the TV tuned to Fox News and wasn't even watching it. When I commented on it, she said she turns it on first thing in the morning and leaves it on all day. She's being brainwashed and doesn't even know it.

    As such, she can't or won't see that Trump's tactics have ALWAYS been fear-mongering. Fear of terrorists, fear of minorities, fear of the unknown, fear of anyone who isn't a white, Jesus-loving, conservative Republican. When I say she's afraid of "X" she says it's not fear; she's merely "very, very concerned" by "X."

    Fear disguised as concern is still fear in my book.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I confess to bafflement over the string of tweets that wanted to abolish the police, and also seemed to be hurling 'liberal' as an epithet. I wonder who they identify as?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anarchists. Despite a lot of seeming overlap with liberals, they hate them.

      Delete
  13. Somebody posted "Abolish the police!" I asked. "Then who do you call when your security alarm goes off. Who do you call when somebody snatches your kid from the front yard?" Well, apparently I'm the stupid one for thinking "abolish the police" means to get rid of them. Apparently, "abolish" now means "reform."
    I wonder if anyone notified Merriam-Webster?

    ReplyDelete
  14. Long but necessaily so. I, too, live in a shitty little backwater in E OR, and it is really no different here. And for some of us with broader life experiences, not much different from your observations of our countrymen on social media. I don't know what road folks will choose, but I am pretty sure it will be a path of least pain, least involvement, and peddled by persons of questionable political and moral motives. At this point in our history and given who currently runs this country, I, and a great many others I see in responses around this country, are wary of just more of the same, even in this hopeful and auspiciuos hour of hope and change. We, too, want to believe, but we remain skeptical of the hucksters, the agendists, and the politically corrupt. And what is to me even sadder, of each other. And not without cause provided by our supposed leadership in all areas.

    I wish us all good luck and happy serendipitous results, because frankly that is how I see this coming about, if we get to a better day for all.

    ReplyDelete
  15. You’re not wrong. Words matter. Explain yourself or someone else like Donald Trump will, but here’s the kicker. Even explaining or defining what you mean will not alter Chump’s view and explanation of what you mean. He’s been co-opting and defining the left’s intentions by his parameters all along. We have one solution ahead and that’s vote him out, slogans not withstanding. I always look your essays. Thanks!

    ReplyDelete
  16. When having much the same questions I was sent to this site: https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/lorenzo-kom-boa-ervin-anarchism-and-the-black-revolution?fbclid=IwAR31HOL-Obv4e95tMwbtCWFWr9e6dAuNuTf4rZF5vmAO6dK2DK_ya6D2zrw to read about the point of view on abolishing the police. It was more than I could read in detail at the time, but the FUNCTIONS of police to prevent harm by those who would use force DOES seem to be supported - only with a completely different structure and (logically, given that it is an anarchist perspective) completely separated from the monolithic State. In other words, one uses most of the funds to support experts in various fields to be sent on calls and reserves a new community-controlled force for those situations where force is needed. I could have a very deep discussion about individual community units with no unifying oversight could wind up just as bad in places as what we have now, but that isn't germane to this response.

    Tl;dr almost exactly what you said except for the terminology.

    Therefore, I have come to the conclusion that it is the WORD "police" that has become corrupted, and through that any organization CLAIMING to be "police" is seen as the worst part. Thence comes the idea of abolishing the "police," even when there is the seemingly contradictory idea that some function of law enforcement would still remain.

    I am still confused as to how to respond when getting attacked by the right over this, but ultimately I think the basic ideas of the 8 Can't Wait will have to be the practical solution.

    ReplyDelete
  17. You are right, slogans suck at nuance. Here in Virginia, a guy got elected governor by saying "Abolish the car tax!" and all he ended up doing was make it smaller while costing the cities more...

    ReplyDelete
  18. Spelling fix, not for publication.

    "You don't give a pass to vigilanties who gunned down a black man jogging on a public road because you didn't get a discount at the donut shop."

    You can spell doughnut that way if you want, but "vigilantes" needs a fix. ;)

    ReplyDelete
  19. Thank you for this essay. I have been struggling with the same thoughts since this slogan first appeared. If we can’t explain it, someone will use it against us. Politicians are Very Good at redefining messages and slogans; it’s what their campaign strategists live for.

    I would like to challenge the conservatives on their own ground and go back to the good ol’ days ( you know, the ones that don’t exist) when we had neighborhood policemen who knew everyone on their beat. They didn’t really, but the image is good. I do think police should be more decentralized. Decentralize the Police!

    I also think police should be much better trained for their job and have a clear understanding of where their job begins and where it ends. A friend - a chief RN of 40 years has been telling me of the head butting battles she has had with police officers trying to tell her how to do her job. She thinks they should have to go through the same educational rigors as she did. Educate the Police!

    I think there are a lot of monsters who get off on the ability to treat people as victims. Maybe they watched too many cheap S&M flicks. I really would like to see more vetting of police candidates. There need to be more programs designed to weed out the unsuitable before they can put on the badge. Vet the Police!

    Finally, I really, really wish that I could walk down h the street or sit in a park with my nonwhite wife in America and not flinch when a police officer looks our way and saunters over. Because, above all, I want to live in a safe peaceful land where I can respect the police.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I really appreciate your clarity and level headedness. Thank you, Craig.

      Delete
  20. Defund the police, what a great slogan to play right into the baby hands of that Dumpster Fire's campaign. At least with that slogan they won't get nailed for violation of copyright. And it gets to inspire that visceral reaction in one way or another that the Right Taliban loves. But I absolutely love your point.

    ReplyDelete
  21. I'll post here just in case you missed my tweet. I am FIRMLY in the #AbolishThePolice camp and this is why:

    The police, as we now have them, are like a lemon car. No amount of maintenance, no shiny new parts, no careful driving, can change the fact that the car is a lemon. The best possible thing you can do is junk the lemon and get a new car.

    What does that look like? Well, if you are totally broke, it might look like riding the bus a while. But it most likely looks like doing the research to get a NEW car that is not a lemon. Checking industry stats, listening to other folks, doing your best to make an informed decision. We can do this, but only when we admit what made our car a lemon in the first place. In America, policing is rotten to the core because the two founding pillars are mob protectionism and slave patrols. We need to find a model that is not racist and extortionist in the foundations.

    Finally, to your concern re: the rise of white supremacist aholes: local police are OFTEN what stops the FBI from shutting these groups down. We also need to examine that interplay between Sherriff's offices, Police, the Prison Industrial complex and white supremacy. The only way we can root out all this is to get rid of the lemon.

    So for me, defund the police would be to move money towards buying the new car with an eye to junking the lemon at the first opportunity.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Any analysis is only as informing as the accuracy and extent of the data that was presented. I think you're spot-on with this one. Thanks, Jim.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Well said. "Defund the police". Worst. slogan. ever. Red meat for the conservatives as you so eloquently point out, takes fucking paragraphs to explain to everyone else. You can always count on the left to fuck themselves in the behind.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Two of your statements hit directly at home with me:
    "That said, I'm reflexively opposed to mobs."
    "I'm cautious of movements based on slogans."

    That's good, since it often seems that the intelligence of a mob is inversely-proportional to its size, and slogans (like Tweets) by their very nature are short, easy-to-memorize... and mean virtually nothing on their own.

    "Two legs bad, four legs good!"

    Uh-huh.

    I also swear, the Progressives have the ABSOLUTELY WORST ability at marketing... probably because everything is done at the grass-roots level, by amateurs.

    If this was a GOP slogan, you can bet it would be relatively tight, well-thought out, and the Right would be unified around its meaning.

    But progressives?

    Sorry, we're literally dealing with the rabble here, and as noted above... the rabble isn't necessarily the smartest thing.

    No solution offered, you've covered everything in better detail than I could.

    Signed, "Frustrated with the killing"

    ReplyDelete
  25. Thank you, Chief. I thought I was the only one who thought the slogan was inadequately worded. I've always thought "Black Lives Matter, Too" was a better slogan. But we seem to have been addicted to slogans for a long time. Remember the Alamo, 54/40 or Fight, My Country, Right or Wrong, Ban the Bomb, Bomb Hanoi, Jesus Saves.
    My submission for the nest one, Act Like Adults.

    ReplyDelete
  26. you're so right. I've been trying not to listen too much because I need to stay sane, so I didn't see how Negative 1 (46-1) has responded to the calls to de-fund the police. He's taking it as an opportunity to continue with the only thing he's good at, which is dividing American citizens and turning them against each other.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Maybe I'm commenting here because, as you said, the problems are so deeply entrenched, and the solutions aren't simple.
    I grew up in a NY suburb that was marketed for white flight. The racism was a feature, not a bug.
    Looking at the head of the police union with all those white guys standing behind him- how many had fathers, grandfathers, uncles, cousins, siblings who were law enforcement?
    I don't think people understand how much law enforcement is a family business, unless you were ever part of that life. How do you fix policing when you have attitudes that have literally been ingrained for generations?

    ReplyDelete
  28. People on the right understand “defund the police” to have exactly the same meaning as “defund Planned Parenthood.” No thinking involved. I’m thinking that the people who came up with defund the police had the same intent in mind. And to my thinking, that’s not necessarily a bad thing. The city of Minneapolis came to the conclusion that their police department was so corrupt, so rife with bad attitudes and actors, that the only reasonable means to rectify that situation was to start over with an entirely new department, but also with a mind for better community services in the hope of reducing the role of police as social workers. Seems a laudable plan to me, and I wish them the very best of good luck.

    ReplyDelete
  29. I am approximately 0.004 seconds from giving up completely.
    I cannot explain exactly what I mean by that, although I can explain MY vision of "defund the police" (the DUMBEST FUCKING SLOGAN GOD EVER SAW, btw, for exactly the reasons you point out) explicitly.
    Fuck. I dunno.

    ReplyDelete
  30. After reading your entire blog post (see! I read it all before commenting!), I would hazard a guess that the underlying tenet would be to stop racism in the police departments. Reallocating funding to other programs is important but the overarching idea is for all these things to come together to eradicate racism in PD's. Training obviously would go a long way. So would taking Camden as a model and make the police reapply for their jobs when they've met certain criteria. Perhaps the fed government could issue bare minimum standards much like the ACA did for healthcare. A,B,C must be met or WE will step in and make it happen. How you get all that on a bumper sticker or into 280 characters I have no idea. Keep up the good fight, Jim. Even with the angry hoards nipping at your heals.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Hard not to take it personally when peeps be doing their damndest to make it personal. Sometimes I don't understand how people talk to each other at all anymore.

    In the best, most favorable light, it's a mediocre rallying cry and a better one could probably be found. ... Which seems pretty standard for Dems actually.

    Incidentally, after seeing the "defund" shitshow on your tweeter the other day and noticing the phrase all over the place myself, I went looking for more info too. I don't think the discussion at large is any clearer than what happened in your feed. There's a lot I could personally get behind, but there are also gaping holes in both ideas that could be easily exploited by anyone looking for an opportunity to grab on to and hold money/power. Transitional details are exceedingly scarce, for one (as usual). Not that protesters have to be policy wonks, but isn't that also kind of the point? We should be able to have thorough discussions about this kind of thing without being told to fuck off; it's how you get stronger, better ideas people can genuinely unite behind.

    ReplyDelete
  32. I always love how you manage to come back to the point that ALL of this is ultimately politics. If you can't win in the voting booth, you lose. Great lesson.

    ReplyDelete
  33. I afraid we are stuck with slogan memes; it's in our nature to make complex things simple.

    Perhaps RECONSTRUCT THE POLICE would be acceptable to most of US.

    The historical reference is certainly appropriate.

    I don't use social media, so it will be interesting to see if this emerges into the Twitterverse. I would smile if it did :-)

    ReplyDelete
  34. The problem with a slogan is that it never gets the nuances right.

    ReplyDelete
  35. By definition, "Defund the police" means anarchy. This makes as much sense as "all police are bastards' (a local slogan). We need regulated law enforcement to the same extent that we need regulated capitalism.

    ReplyDelete
  36. I could not agree with you more, Jim.

    What really concerns me is that Trump will lose, but that he will claim that he really would have won--except for the massive voter fraud. Nov to Jan, he will say "we're investigating the voter fraud".

    Then in Jan, he will say "Yep. Massive fraud. I'm the legitimate winner, so I'm not leaving the White House." Massive demonstrations follow--and he will sic the FBP riot police on them.

    Where will we go from there? I don't think the military would actively take action to remove him. It appears that some number of the federal police forces support him--or would not actively oppose him. It is a scary prospect.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Slogans are an eternal political maneuver. They are like roscharch blots, what you SEE is more a statement of your mental state that what the blot means. And what a slogan means allows the politicians wiggle room, " what we did is what the slogan said!" Even though what it MEANS is in dispute! You thought the masses want a definitive answer, what they want is a flag to follow. Sorry, I'm a historian, gives one a jaundiced view of the possibilities of human nature.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Keep at it. Sane, reasoned thinking is rare in this poison congested environment. Your voice is heard, no matter what a thousand or ten thousand idjits say. They will rail at God if he comes today in person to tell them what is right and what is wrong, those false positives will.They could make themselves useful by going out and being good human examples, as Christian, Muslim and Buddhist faith tells them they should. But railing on Twitter instead leaves them time to binge watch The Office.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Excellent as always, Chief. It seems to me that all political discourse has been narrowed down to what can be written on a bumper sticker.

    ReplyDelete
  40. How about we just blame the slogan of "defund the police" on the KKK ... or some other right wing group? This slogan is a gift to Trump.

    ReplyDelete
  41. All I want are words that all will comprehend and put us on even ground. For us to see each other as the humans we know ourselves to be. None of us has a clear 'side' but none of us are pure or above ugliness and enough of that has been demonstrated. I choose not to be ugly. I choose to treat you as I want to be treated. I want the peace and calm of knowing that when I say Good Morning to you, I mean that it is my wish for you. Nothing less.

    ReplyDelete
  42. I'm on the fence with this essay, Jim. I agree with you in premise, but it took a lot of reading for me to get there.

    I saw this on social media earlier regarding police brutality regarding African Americans, and it's important to make this a part of the conversation because people in this country literally think this way

    "
    Based on the data I've seen, I don't think there's a strong case for the theory that racism causes black men face a disproportionate threat of death at the hands of police on a national level, but when someone presents their argument in a reasonable manner, and offers support for it as you have, I'm much more inclined to listen. I think if this was the approach being taken across the country we'd make a lot more progress.
    "

    What data? What strong case?

    And also this bizarre deflection from the same person:

    "
    If the position is nearly impossible to support, why are you so confident it's correct?



    The problem with nearly all these arguments is that they're based purely on conjecture, cliches, and anecdotal evidence. That is the exact opposite of the scientific method.



    Hypotheticals are nothing more than conjecture supported by the speakers own bias. Anecdotes give no frame of reference for scale. They grossly over or underrepresent the phenomenon being depicted. Everyone understands this when Sean Hannity does it with illegal immigrants, but it's a different story when it fits the narrative. But



    This clearly unreliable method that is roundly rejected in all fields of study, is the foundation of "the most important issue facing our nation."



    Despite the glaring lack of supporting evidence, the mere suggestion that the perception of disparity may be an illusion sparks anger.



    The empirical evidence overwhelmingly suggests that any disparity that may exist is statistically negligible. I've scoured the internet for the last two weeks and have not seen one person attempt to support this conclusion with anything resembling the scientific method and empirical data.



    If you're not allowed to honestly question a theory it's usually because someone is afraid they don't have a good answer. Otherwise they'd welcome the question as an opportunity to explain their position instead of coming down on you with sanctimony and derision.



    Not everyone has the strength of character to honestly question and actively challenge their own core beliefs. It's much easier to demonize those who would challenge them for you.
    "

    That shit right there? Word salad, and by an undoubtedly white male who is probably also a racist but who doesn't want to be overt about it. What evidence does he need? FBI stats? He also has mistrust in the government.

    So, millions of people in this country live for catchphrases, and there are millions of red hats to prove it. I kind of wish that it was something along the lines of "reboot the police" but I'm glad that finally someone has gotten off the pot to address this issue, and that people are moved by something -- anything -- that hopefully leads us in the right direction.



    ReplyDelete
  43. I share your frustration. I applaud you.

    ReplyDelete
  44. MLK ran an entirely non-violent campaign against racism and segregation - literally told the activists not to fight back - and for this he was vilified, threatened, and ultimately assassinated.

    It doesn't matter what the slogan is. It doesn't matter how peaceful the movement. When white privilege is criticized, some of your neighbors will feel threatened and respond by endorsing violence. There is a bad cop vote, just as there is a rapist vote.

    So it's protest and risk the election, or let the bad cops keep killing African-Americans and let the racism of employers keep African-Americans in danger from COVID-19 and let the racism of the health care system let African-Americans die from COVID-19.

    ReplyDelete
  45. The other problem is that, well, basically the protesters are right. Police learn to protect each other over the public, even when the bad cops are people like Chauvin, who is apparently a multiple murderer. There's no fixing this, there's no reforming this. If we are to have a just democracy it has to be ended.

    But.

    Also, if we want a just democracy, we need a policing function. I've watched anarchism fail on social media multiple times. That is how we got Jack Dorsey, Mark Zuckerberg, and Jeff Bezos running the show. So something is needed and if we want to preserve democracy we need to get cracking on figuring out just what that something is.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Your time listening was well spent. In reading your post, as a very liberal North Central Floridian, I liked how you discussed the two sides of this coin and there are two sides of the coin. I spent time reading and listening to what the term “Defund the Police” means in regards to what is currently happening across the country. I had a chance to talk to a couple of my students and they believe it means just that, defund the police. Then my daughter sent me information from the Human Rights information from her University. Next I went to the people whom I enjoy their ideologies. It went from my very impoverished black students to people with PHD’s. For me it was upsetting understanding their understanding of the phrase. From all three cross sections it was somewhat different and in some ways similar.

    I have a hope, as a white woman, of privilege, not money, but I know when I head home I am not going to be stopped by the police simply because of being white. My students do not know this in anyway. They know they will be stopped just for walking home alone or in something police see as a gang, if they are stopped they could be hurt or hauled into the station because of the color of their skin.

    It’s a hard discussion and I think an important one we need to have in this country.

    Florida’s racial intolerance is ver high, especially outside the Metro areas like Miami and Orlando, of course out lying areas have high racial intolerance. Thus, the reason for Republican rule here in Florida.

    ReplyDelete
  47. How about "Re-Fund the Community"? Seems more accurate, and harder to smear by the right wing.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Thank you once again. I always feel more grounded and thoughtful after reading your essays and posts.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Interesting read. Strong elements of truth contained therein. I've had similar thoughts, not as well developed or supported.

    I'd add another aspect: there's decades-old research that fear causes unconscious swings to the right, politically. I've provided the link below. It's a chilling read in this context.

    I don't have the answers. But I think it's accurate to say there is truly great peril here.

    https://newrepublic.com/article/61936/death-grip

    ReplyDelete
  50. Spot on, Chief.

    "Defund (abolish) the Police" is liberals again snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. It's such a dumb slogan - divorced from reality.

    Besides, we need somebody to arrest the tRump Crime Family next year.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Frenchman here. I came upon your twitter page maybe a year ago, and it has now become my go-to URL whenever I look for a strong American voice to review whatever the hell is going on in your incomprehensible country. You sort of remind me of a Geoffrey Firmin, only you handle the booze better. But you do seem to have an eye for them hidden signs of impending doom. "Hell is my natural habitat" cried the consul, yet he didn't even have a twitter account.
    What social media is the natural habitat of is consternation, vindication, futile "bons mots" and empty slogans. While I am not directly affected by the Trump madness that is going on in the USA right now, I appreciate your insights very much.This world is too small for the USA to become a complete mess. When Americans take a virtuous stand, the world often follows. This has happened with the #MeToo movement, and even now the Black Lives Matter movement is forcing many countries including mine to face the issue of police brutality. So, to all you americans that still have a conscience, please keep up the fight.

    ReplyDelete
  52. It goes back to what you've said before: First, you have to win. You may be filled with rage, and based on videos I've seen lately, and stories of shit treatment for ages, rightly so. Winning requires being calculated and strategic to ensure you get the opportunity to do something with that rage once you've won.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Good grief, I don't know how you handle the stuff that shows up on your feed. I have been searching for a way to communicate my thoughts and position, and every time that I try, there are flames. There is no rational thought from either "side": Anger is in control.

    We (society) have cut funding for social programs, mental health, schools; lack of affordable housing and food insecurity are embarrassments in a country as rich as ours. What has happened is that money is more important than services, and as services dwindle, the one resource that is still there is law enforcement. While not identical in any way to military mission, the ultimate goal of law enforcement is to stand between evil and society. By training and temperament, cops are not equipped to handle homelessness, mentally disturbed people, trauma impacted children, and the like, and when your tools are force and jail, that is your solution to everything.

    What the police have become are the tools of the moneyed to keep the riff raff in order, and catch the occasional murderer or rapist (unless it is the moneyed folks, or other cops, then no catchee bad guy.

    I'm not saying this well. I am dismayed beyond belief at the drivel that is coming at me from all sides.

    ReplyDelete
  54. I get you, I've been trying to avoid that phrase BECAUSE it's not clear.
    What we need are more Sheriff Taylors, and less (better yet, eliminate) SWAT troops.

    ReplyDelete
  55. "FEAR matters."

    This. This is the point. This is where all racism and all "othering" of people comes from. Every one of us, whether you want to admit it or not, is dealing with some level of fear. When we go into fear, we immediately want relief from that fear. Screaming on twitter or facebook, yelling at the t.v., going up against supposed "allies" such as yourself, Jim, because your comments don't allay their fear enough; none of that actually helps people to let go of the fear, and so they push even harder against it.

    In my view, this is why the messaging has to be done in a way that, as you correctly put it, is fully understandable, makes sense, and doesn't send everyone over the edge into massive fear. That requires not being in fear in the first place. We get these "slogans" because of that fear, and people want change RIGHT GODDAMN NOW! and if they don't get it, the fear escalates.

    As a Counselor for the last 29 years, this is the main thing I help people with. Getting relief from their fears. The more that people understand exactly where all of this is coming from, the more positive steps can be taken to reduce the fear and the reaction, so that more can be done to help everyone. This means educating people. All of the people. That, however, is a slow process. It can be done, and it will require a large amount of funds to do it.

    Lastly, I would say to everyone this one thing. When someone else is in fear, it has nothing to do with you. That is that person's reaction. If you choose to join them in that fear, then the consequences are not going to be good for anyone. If you don't join in, then you are not going to have a negative consequence.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Thanks Jim. Excellent and thought provoking read as always

    ReplyDelete
  57. Thank you for another interesting and thought-provoking essay.

    In my view this slogan, along with other such slogans (“Make America Great Again” for instance), create an opportunity for sensemaking gone wild. This environment is further primed for chaos as we become increasingly isolated into smaller “tribes” in which social identity becomes immutable and immerse ourselves in social media designed to us aroused in order to better reap economic reward.

    Since sensemaking is grounded in identity construction and the sense being made of the slogan need only be plausible to the individual trying to construct the “story” of what they are observing, the same few words can take on wildly different meanings depending on the identity that one has constructed over time within the social group that he or she inhabits. That is why different people interpret “Defund the Police” as everything from “Fuck those pigs! Get rid of ‘em all!” to “Cops are good at some things, but we need to move budget to other organizations to better support the community” to “THE LIBERALS WANT TO ELIMINATE POLICE SO THEY CAN COME FOR OUR WOMENFOLK AND TAKE OUR GUNS!” All of these understandings of the slogan (as well as myriad more as you experienced in this Twitter shitstorm) are equally sensible to a given individual – they make perfect sense to the person (and maybe to their close associates).

    My fear is that such sloganeering will serve to 1) energize Trump’s base further resulting in their taking to the polls in droves in November and/or rampant voter suppression efforts and 2) to divide individuals and groups that should be strongly allied to soundly defeat Trump. I think that the corollary to your dictum, “Show your work,” namely, “What does that mean?” is a particularly important question to be asked in the face of these types of slogans.

    Anyway, thanks again for another great, long-form essay.

    ReplyDelete
  58. Ya' killed it once again brutha. Nice work

    ReplyDelete
  59. I think the sadder part of this is that an "organic" movement began, and was poorly defined before it even sparked into a "slogan", and people just went with it assuming everyone "on their side" was going to be on the same page as to what exactly the message meant. It was way to easy and "catchy" to latch onto without really focusing on what really needed to be said.

    The dumber part, and the Democratic Party in the US seems to do this all the time, someone in the party jumped on a bandwagon without for one second asking:

    "Can those bastards weaponize/demonize this message too easily."

    I mean, this current Republican Administration is ALWAYS going to try to weaponize and/or demonize the Democratic Party's message... why the flying fuck are they making it so easy for them?

    As much as I hate Advertising and Media companies, for Christ's sake, at least they have the experience to try to make a better message... the message is the medium, and all that crap! You'd think that before they start pushing a message, they'd at least consult some professionals to ask, is this what we really want to say to the "average Joe"? AND, how easy will it be for those bastards to weaponize/demonize the simple slogan?

    I'm Canadian, and we get the same nonsense from our Politicians. Our Democrats, the Liberal Party have this same messaging problem, usually mixed in with a whole lot of needless kumbaya to try and be relevant/hip/or-I'm-not-really-sure-what-it-is-but-it's-annoying-as-all-hell and makes it too easy to be mocked or ridiculed! Our Republicans, the Conservative Party spew the same simplistic fear-mongering bullshit all the time, making it all to easy to demonize the Liberal "edgy" message.

    Gawddammit, stop making it so fucking easy for these bastards to weaponize/demonize your message!

    Is that clear enough as a slogan?

    Rant over! Where's the Tylenol?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's it. Consider how much harder the Republican demonization effort would have been had the slogan been "Black Lives Matter, Too." The Republicans immediately took this and twisted to claim that the intent was to say that only black lives matter - an easy sell to folks thinking that only white lives matter.

      There's reasons corporations are so concerned with their slogans and messaging - it has a real effect on perceptions. I think even the police would prefer not to be expected to deal with mentally ill homeless folks without a supporting social worker.

      Putting everyone in jail is much more expensive than public housing, or mental health treatment. But, if the only tool one has for society's problems is to call the police, everything's going to look like a crime.

      Pity that the Democratic Party won't hire an ad agency to come up with a better slogan for having police concentrate on their core mission: law enforcement. If there's a fire, one calls the fire department - anyone stating that the police should be driving around in combined fire trucks and patrol cars would be laughed at. Why then expect police to provide all social services other than fire fighting?

      Imagine if the slogan for shifting funding from police officers to social programs was "Let Police be Police" - it'd be misinterpreted as "The Club - Police say use it!" If your slogan gets misinterpreted, that means it's a bad slogan. Don't blame the listeners for your own failure to communicate.

      Delete
  60. I'm only surprised you didn't notice a trend
    History repeating itself!
    and just a few years ago, too
    the Banking fiasco, and the One Percent protests
    the Sex Scandals, and the Me Too protests
    ... and how many others?
    Are we becoming a society of protests with no hope of Real Resolution?

    ReplyDelete
  61. "The Camden Model of Public safety"

    ReplyDelete
  62. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. Maybe this?
    https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=2983885628370176&id=100002463032398

    ReplyDelete
  63. "A good slogan doesn't need to be explained." Another way to put it is, "if you have to EXPLAIN the joke, it isn't funny."

    ReplyDelete
  64. Must confess Jim was a touch concerned at one of your tweets that must have been about mid storm from the tale. As always hearing the fuller version you laid it out bang on. Thanks for being you. Long time reader :)

    ReplyDelete
  65. What does "Make America Great Again" mean?

    What does "Be all that you can be" mean?

    Probably different things to everyone, but with a common theme running throughout. In that respect, how is "Defund the police" any different? Some people want to reallocate funds from the police department to alternative services. Some want to abolish the whole concept of policing. The common theme seems pretty obvious though. Seems to be captured pretty perfectly by the slogan, in fact, so I don't know that I see the same problem you identify.

    I wonder if asking for one exact definition crystallized in one perfect slogan that has one perfectly palatable meaning that all of the millions of us can agree on isn't a bit like withholding your vote unless you can cast it for a unicorn, and I seem to recall somebody or other pointing out how silly that is.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Further thoughts…

    It is gradually dawning on us, all of us, that some (many? most? all?) US cities are police states, and we don't know how to respond. (Except for the people who really like police states, as long as they think the cops are working for them.)

    AOC, as usual, has some good thoughts. You can read them at https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1266783358731931648?s=20. But I fear that all voices of reason are drowned now.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for the link, I will read her thoughts. However, most US cities are not full of Trump voters, and many small & medium towns have police departments that are funded, but just barely. In these departments the officers have to buy their own guns and other equipments and there is NO budget for riot gear and other military crap. And these are the areas where Trump is hammering home the idea that we want to take away what little funding these departments have. Once again, the urban/rural divide is showing and it's really sad.

      Delete
    2. Let's kill two birds with one stone, give the USPS the ability to provide internet access in underserved areas - principally, rural and have USPS charge a reasonable fee. Personally, I, as well as a boatload of other folks, will shed no tears as Verizon gets a sharp stick in the eye. This measure will show that Trump's State of the Union promise was hogwash and there might even be some rurals come home to the party that saved their bacon during the 30's and 40's.

      Delete
  67. You've written many good essays but this might be your best one yet. You wrote exactly what I've been thinking agout. I grew up in a small midwestern town over 50 years ago. There were no people of color there at all. Just White Anglo Saxon Protestants. Joined the military right out of high school and got an education. Met people from the South, East and California. Worked with everyone and we got the job done. But, some people are just assholes. It doesn't matter the color their skin. People in the midwest and south live in their little bubbles. I really think mandatory service like military or vista would help a lot. Get people out of their bubble and start to understand how other people live and their problems.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Universal national service would go a long way to re-establishing an American identity. Currently, there's no class mixing and little geographical exchange with the country. The only true movement seems to be a flight from rural areas - wait till robotization hits! This doesn't have to be a uniquely military deal either - education, medical, conservation, environmental along with others I'm not thinking of at the moment could use kid citizens as well.

      Delete
  68. Thank you, thank you, thank you!

    ReplyDelete
  69. Thank you for saying so clearly what I've been feeling, but unable to articulate. I understand THAT changes need to be made; I just don't know WHICH changes will lead to the results so many of us seem to want. And the anger and hate and fear and despair and rage are so thick right now, it makes it hard to think clearly.

    ReplyDelete
  70. Great essay!

    My only question though, out of all of those people that finally saw trumps incompetence, how many would step out of their fox news echo chamber & do anything, but vote for their dear leader & all white fear candidates down ballot?

    ReplyDelete
  71. Hey, your original post seemed perfectly cromulent to me. And slogans are a way to say something without thinking, and no side has a monopoly on those who don't want to have to think.

    ReplyDelete
  72. First post on this informative, lively and common sensical site. Keep safe, Jim, America needs your voice.

    I do wonder who came up with such a lame and fuzzy tag line. It will be co-opted by the really bad guys, made into a fear-mongering propaganda club to be used frequently throttling Democrats as gun-snatching anarcho-socio-commie terrorists. I'd go with a straightforward - Reform Everything,
    We Can Do Better.

    I thought we had the Republicans when it became apparent they weren't interested in Constitutional responsibility, then came the relentless Trumpian incompentance brought into the glaring spotlight of COVID19. But then there was the St. John's Church/Lafayette Park incident. So much ammunition only to have the gun spiked by an unclear slogan. Hoping the little old GOP ladies can remember they were looked upon as cannon fodder.

    And, another thing. The folks marching weren't just out there for BLM or No Justice, No Peace. They were out there for a host of other issues as well -generational economic stagnation, lousy wages, poor healthcare, poorer educational systems, women's rights, wealth inequality, student loan burdens and, last but not least, the existential threat of climate change which they will have to deal with. The millenials have not had much luck laying back. My hope is that they'll get involved, register themselves and others and vote.
    Keep the faith and march on.

    Also, everyone stay safe. COVID isn't leaving anytime soon.

    ReplyDelete
  73. We have a media system that, by design, divides us into tribes, then teaches us to hate all other tribes except our own. Then we get on social media which creates an echo chamber for each tribe.

    Matt Taibbi has a book called, Hate Inc. that's worth looking at.

    ReplyDelete
  74. When police are able to act in the same manner as Brazilian or Argentinian death squads, well, then the result will be fury. Unfortunately, we humans do need to be reigned in from time to time, so police are necessary. Reforming the entire Criminal Justice pipeline (police, prosecutors, attorneys, courts and prisons) are mandatory. Unfortunately, folks are calling for immediate action to an establishment that's been with us for 400 hundred years; so, there's a silly slogan selected. Republicans co-opt this and use it as a propaganda club to throttle Democrats while calling us gun snatchiing Anaracho-Socio-Unionist snowflakes. The only thing that's changed is they've added Anaracho.

    We've a great deal of ammunition, but fear is hard to combat. NLT, Republican abdication of Constitutional responsibility, the relentless Trumpian incompentence brought into the glaring spotlight of COVID19, the BLM issue and the Lafayette Park-St. John's Church fiasco are serious issues. Best sign I saw at the marches was, You've Awakened a Sleeping Giant

    ReplyDelete
  75. Hi,
    I just found out I am blocked from your Twitter account.
    I have been following you for years and agree with most things you say.
    It just happened today, I have not commented on your account for several days.
    Not sure what I did wrong, if anything.

    ReplyDelete
  76. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete

  77. This is exactly what I have been saying - it's been so confusing because it seems there is no consensus on what "Defund the Police" actually means so it is impossible to support the cause completely. I watched a group of people on The Daily Show discuss the topic and they absolutely meant the eventual elimination of the police departments. There is talk about community public safety and how it has been successful - where? Where has it been successful? Someplace that doesn't have police? Someplace that is urban that doesn't have police? There is absolutely no cookie cutter approach we can take to this - urban, suburban, rural, big city, little city, village, town, county, state, municipality - there are so many different types of scenarios and different types of law enforcement organizations. There is no one solution for all. Each one will have to determine what is the best level of reform, reorganization, restructure, or complete elimination is best for them.

    And I think regarding your statements on people don't don't become racists and do awful things because they had to deal with homeless people, or someone selling loose cigarettes, or didn't get a discount at the donut shop. Yes they definitely are monsters but the racism part is learned. As we have been told over and over, nobody is born a racist.

    Thank you so much for this. You always are so good at making sense of the world!!!

    ReplyDelete
  78. One concept I haven't seen anyone bring up (though I admit I am not on twitter), is the negotiating tactic of asking for more than you want, so you have room to bargain. Perhaps the only way to get real, substantial reform starts by a whole lot of us calling to abolish the police entirely.

    As for Republicans using this to stir up their base, liberals are frequently blamed for things the right wing was going to do anyway. We keep thinking there's some action we can take that would make them act less monstrously. There is not. If this slogan didn't exist, they would have invented something else to stir up the base. That is guaranteed. Do not act to appease them, because you will not.

    ReplyDelete
  79. This is a really interesting and thought-provoking essay. Thank you for sharing your thoughts. I feel about the same emotions ...

    ReplyDelete
  80. I live in a small town in Texas, and you are right. They are seeing Antifa and BLM behind every tree and are certain the democrats are sending them to their town. And you are also right that they believe every ridiculous tale told about the left.

    ReplyDelete
  81. Well said, and much more articulate than I can manage to convey these same thoughts. Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  82. I have been reading you for quite a while now, and I always appreciate your honesty...and directness...no bloviating, no hemming and hawing...just plain ol' truth...thanks...

    ReplyDelete
  83. I know you have a million other comments to read and may never get to this one, so if you don't I understand. I agree it is a bad slogan, unclear and with different meanings to different people. Having seen some good shows about the idea, where some communities have fired their entire Police Force and started over. Rehired some people but replaced those not suited to the job and who were problems. It also was a way to get rid of the Police Union that was a major part of the problems (as many seem to be). They reworked the entire force, made what the police did and did not respond to different and used money that was once only for Cops, for other community services. The evidence of those places that have done this, is it works! I don't know how to write a slogan that will say that, but it seems that is what some mean by defund...and it is what seems to be a good and logical way to fix things!

    ReplyDelete
  84. Two sites that may be interesting to anybody having an actual discussion or actually thinking about the problem
    (1) - This is from a Republican who gave up on the party
    https://www.politicalorphans.com/the-real-crisis-in-policing-collapsing-crime-rates/
    Today's crime rates are a fraction of their peak in the 90's - LESS police spending makes sense

    (2) - The reason for the peak and drop in crime rates
    https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2018/02/an-updated-lead-crime-roundup-for-2018/

    IMHO that background is needed
    A lot of us grew up when crime was INCREASING - and we have never updated our world pictures

    ReplyDelete
  85. No one is better at shooting themselves in the foot and waiting till gangrene sets in to work on it than the left in this nation. We cannot unite, we cannot internalize. We win almost by accident.

    ReplyDelete
  86. The irony is that these are the same people who hate police and the government. They're backing the police because they're afraid of the imaginary hordes of black rapists.

    ReplyDelete
  87. Once again you are the voice of reason, thank you for helping people to think about what's going on in this country so hopefully they can make better decisions. Keep up the good work, thank you again!

    ReplyDelete

Comments on this blog are moderated. Each will be reviewed before being allowed to post. This may take a while. I don't allow personal attacks, trolling, or obnoxious stupidity. If you post anonymously and hide behind an IP blocker, I'm a lot more likely to consider you a troll. Be sure to read the commenting rules before you start typing. Really.