A window of opportunity opened, shortly after George Floyd’s death, to make some real and good changes in policing, changes that would not only improve relations with minority communities, but would benefit policing as well. I discussed some of those changes in this blog: ending policing-for-profit, reforming and curtailing qualified immunity, revoke nuisance laws that are more about revenue than public safety, and fix the “bad-cop blue-wall” problem by taking on the police unions.
That window was small: such reforms would be challenging. And, it was short: George Floyd was killed on May 25; by the second week of June, “Defund The Police” had displaced the reforms I mentioned and that many were talking about.
And, leadership was lacking. Trump was slow to respond, but this failure was secondary to the colossal abdications by mayors and governors. Much as partisans want to point fingers at the guy at the top, it remains that policing is a local matter, governed by state and local laws, and the changes that would have addressed the conditions that have led to unjust and unnecessary deaths land squarely on the desks of mayors, governors, city councils, and state legislatures.
That those mayors, governors, city councils, and state legislatures are overwhelmingly Democrat is a fact that the Democrats have no interest in promulgating. Indeed, the Democratic National Convention was virtually silent on their failure to do anything, both on the reform front and on the violence and destruction that many of them have tacitly encouraged. Instead, they’ve embraced Black Lives Matter. Not so much the principle (which I support), but the movement and organization that has been co-opted by neo-Marxists who are more interested in the chaos and destruction than in legitimate reforms.
The window closed. Rather, it was slammed shut. People quickly teamed up, chose sides, and drew lines. Suddenly, even the bad cops were being blanket-protected by the “blue lives matter” absolutists, and the good cops were vilified even as they were disempowered by the politicians who run the cities they’re hired and sworn to protect. Meanwhile, the peaceful protests were used as cover by anarchists and amoral opportunists who saw an opportunity to “get theirs” and abandon any precept of community in favor of (self-) destructive rage stoked by cynical rabble-rousers who themselves have no interest in the reforms I mention.
So, now, we have a stark divide, drawn on the usual political lines. The Biden campaign is trying a two-faced tactic, genuflecting mightily to the neo-Marxists (in multiple ways), while trying to, with the selection of Kamala Harris, appeal to the law-and-order suburban moms who are a crucial swing constituency. Biden finally offered a half-hearted and mealy-mouthed “needless violence won’t heal us” comment, as another police shooting in Kenosha, WI sparked its own wave of violence.
Trump has been handed a gift by these failures: He gets to easily stake out the “law and order” side of the matter, without having to climb the difficult political hill of police reform.
Four years ago, a string of unforced errors cost Hillary Clinton a presidential victory that she was cruising to. Four weeks ago, the gambling markets favored Biden over Trump 60% to 37%. That 23 point gap has narrowed to about 10 points, with Trump making daily gains with each night of the GOP convention, and with another night to go, I’d not be surprised that the gap narrows even further.
If Biden loses this election (and I recently flipped my opinion over to believing that Trump is going to win again), the failure to address the violence in multiple Democratically-controlled cities will be a big reason.
But, no matter who wins, I don’t expect any of the reforms that will benefit us all will to happen. That’s a tragedy. George Floyd will remain dead, and the opportunity to prevent future such deaths that outrage over his killing will have been washed away by the usual partisan effluvia.
Loading ...
The Black Live Matter Movement missed out because IMO they alienated Caucasian people.
When Caucasians responded to “black lives matter,” with “all lives matter,” BLM pushed back, tried to shut down that phrase. They should have agreed that all lives matter but that this could only be true when it was recognized that black lives matter, and that recent events seemed to say that black lives didn’t matter. Try to win people over not alienate them.
The other problem BLM had was that they wouldn’t accept that sometimes police shootings were justified. Micheal Brown while original reporting of “hands up don’t shoot” etc. seemed credible, it was later reveled the Officer Wilson was justified. While in this first case the error was understandable. BLM doesn’t seem to learn from their mistakes, and keeps repeating the error of all blacks are innocent.
Just as the Blue Wall needs to come down this Black Wall that BLM is erecting needs to come down.
As in the recent case in Kenosha, Wisconsin, we don’t know the full story (and may never know it) BLM should be pushing for the Truth, not jumping to their fixed narrative. in cases like this pressure will need to be applied to make sure the Blue Wall doesn’t hide evidence or fabricated it. But if we assume that every person in blue that is involved in one of these cases is guilty, isn’t that just as bad as assuming that every black person involved is guilty.
I think there are two elements at play. One is the effect of years of “grievance hierarchy” validation, where people need their tribe’s complaints to supersede other tribes’ complaints, and the other is the Cloward-Piven redux I recently blogged: that the BLM leaders don’t want things to get better.
My wife and I went to a U2 concert where Public Enemy was one of the opening acts. They did a little monologue over a child in a black neighborhood who was shot by the police. They basically said that the cops were out hunting for blacks.
I also used to tune into a African American Station’s talk program where they often said the same thing.
I have to believe that this is wide spread, and some people hear something enough they start to believe it. Especially if fact or selectively presented to back up the narrative.
I think that this is similar to the stopped for driving while black. My theory on this is that it is a self fulfilling narrative, I’m going to be stopped anyways might as well speed. how many African Americans resist arrest because they are convinced that the police will kill them.
Thing is, they are not entirely wrong. The stats don’t paint even remotely as dismal a picture as the advocates would have us believe, but the reforms I mention aren’t unjust or unjustified.
Policing for Profit isn’t up to the cops, but it puts the cops out in front, and the more confrontational encounters that happen, the more likely one will go wrong.
And, we all know there are bad cops out there. The current structures protect them, even though many good cops secretly wish they’d be ejected.