![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
From New York to Los Angeles, from Seattle to Miami, in freezing cold Minneapolis and nice sunny Austin, the young and the old, black and white, rich and poor, are demanding that the police stop killing black people over trivial things.
So far the message has been that the killers of Michael Brown and Eric Garner need to be prosecuted for murder. Even if one disagrees on the facts of Michael Brown — the lack of video and unreliability of witness accounts certainly allow for this — there is no such confusion with Eric Garner. The video evidence is clear. The prosecution of Mr. Garner's killers is necessary for justice. It is not sufficient. To be sufficient, there need to be real changes that mean fewer people dying at the hands of the police.
"Changes like what?" Changes that have been shown to cut down on use of force incidents. Body cameras might have helped in the Michael Brown case, but the Eric Garner case demonstrates that they don't stop excessive use of force. Departments can train officers in better de-escalation and diffusion techniques, which have been shown to cut down on use of force by police, at least where I live in Portland.
Ultimately, though, what matters is the result, not so much how they got there. The community would do just fine to demand a 40% reduction in use of force incidents, an 75% reduction in deadly encounters, and evidence of solid plans (complete with goals, actionable milestones, and timelines) to achieve these outcomes within four years. Let the brass, the union, and the elected officials work out the details. And let them know there will be consequences if these demands aren't met.
"Consequences like what?" Like firing the people in charge. Including the Mayor. Including the Governor.
"You'd give Ferguson Mayor James Knowles and Missouri Governor Jay Nixon four years to clean up their act?" Absolutely not. They were in charge not only during Michael Brown's death, but during the entire response to the protests, and they fucked up beyond redemption. They deserve to be fired.
"You know Jay Nixon's a Democrat, right?" Yep. And he's as incompetent as was Rod Blagoyevich. He needs to enjoy his retirement.
"Consequences like riots?" You know what? Maybe.
In general rioting is stupid and counterproductive. In particular, riots alienate people who might otherwise sympathize with your position. Once riots start, Joe Six-Pack doesn't give a shit about your cause, and is more likely than not to respond to riots by camping out in front of the mini-mall with his buddies, some AR-15s, and a few thousand rounds of ammo. I've also seen the long-term economic effects of rioting, on Chicago's South and West sides. It's not pretty, and they last for generations.
But my generation learned the power of peaceful protests with huge numbers — we marched to try to stop the senseless Iraq War, and both the Democrats and the Republicans ignored the protests and voted enthusiastically for the fiasco. Peaceful protest is meaningless unless you're willing to enforce consequences later. If the threat of a breakdown of law and order is what it takes to make the police and politicians clean up their act, then I'll keep my high horse in the stable.
"What would you suggest instead of rioting?" Target the system with a scalpel. Consider for example shutting down the courts.
"Isn't racism, you know, over?" People are calling this the beginning of a new Civil Rights Movement. It's an apt description, because it highlights the ways in which the first Civil Rights Movement failed. In 1954, minorities and women were locked out of elite institutions. In 2014, minorities and women have the doors to the elite institutions open to them. Today the President of the United States is a Harvard-educated African American man; his likely successor is a Yale-educated woman. This is progress, sure. But the vast majority of minorities, particularly African Americans, and women, have been left behind. African American unemployment is twice that of whites, incomes are lower, and live expectancies are shorter. Women still earn less than men, even in the same jobs. We ignore rape when the rapist has power and influence. Nor is the failure limited to how women and minorities are treated. Every time we try, as a society, to have an adult conversation about how Patriarchy hurts boys, those same boys defend Patriarchy with all their might, as if seized by Stockholm syndrome. And of course, wealth inequality, the disparity between rich and poor, is worse now than at any time since the 1930s.
All of that is just the tip of the iceberg. There's a hell of a lot of work left to be done, and most of this nation has been asleep since the Nixon administration. It's time to get back on track.
"So we should vote for Democrats?" Unless they get on board? Nope, not necessarily. And I would be very surprised if Hillary Clinton got on board. She has no reason to do so, given the polling and her need to defend her husband's center-right legacy.
"So we should join the local Democratic Party and push them left?" That worked for a little while between 2004 and 2008, when Howard Dean was in charge of the DNC. Then Washington DC reasserted itself. It could work again, but this time it's the Party that's going to have to come to the Left, not the other way around. The youth aren't buying their shit anymore.
"So we should vote for Greens?" When they make a serious push to take over any state legislature, just one, I'll stop treating them as the GOP puppets they appear to be.
"So we should vote for Republicans?" Let's ignore all the other horrible shit the GOP has supported in the last couple of decades. There's evidence that the KKK was instrumental in the rise of the GOP in the South. Why, then, would the GOP work against white supremacy now, knowing the electoral consequences?
So far the message has been that the killers of Michael Brown and Eric Garner need to be prosecuted for murder. Even if one disagrees on the facts of Michael Brown — the lack of video and unreliability of witness accounts certainly allow for this — there is no such confusion with Eric Garner. The video evidence is clear. The prosecution of Mr. Garner's killers is necessary for justice. It is not sufficient. To be sufficient, there need to be real changes that mean fewer people dying at the hands of the police.
"Changes like what?" Changes that have been shown to cut down on use of force incidents. Body cameras might have helped in the Michael Brown case, but the Eric Garner case demonstrates that they don't stop excessive use of force. Departments can train officers in better de-escalation and diffusion techniques, which have been shown to cut down on use of force by police, at least where I live in Portland.
Ultimately, though, what matters is the result, not so much how they got there. The community would do just fine to demand a 40% reduction in use of force incidents, an 75% reduction in deadly encounters, and evidence of solid plans (complete with goals, actionable milestones, and timelines) to achieve these outcomes within four years. Let the brass, the union, and the elected officials work out the details. And let them know there will be consequences if these demands aren't met.
"Consequences like what?" Like firing the people in charge. Including the Mayor. Including the Governor.
"You'd give Ferguson Mayor James Knowles and Missouri Governor Jay Nixon four years to clean up their act?" Absolutely not. They were in charge not only during Michael Brown's death, but during the entire response to the protests, and they fucked up beyond redemption. They deserve to be fired.
"You know Jay Nixon's a Democrat, right?" Yep. And he's as incompetent as was Rod Blagoyevich. He needs to enjoy his retirement.
"Consequences like riots?" You know what? Maybe.
In general rioting is stupid and counterproductive. In particular, riots alienate people who might otherwise sympathize with your position. Once riots start, Joe Six-Pack doesn't give a shit about your cause, and is more likely than not to respond to riots by camping out in front of the mini-mall with his buddies, some AR-15s, and a few thousand rounds of ammo. I've also seen the long-term economic effects of rioting, on Chicago's South and West sides. It's not pretty, and they last for generations.
But my generation learned the power of peaceful protests with huge numbers — we marched to try to stop the senseless Iraq War, and both the Democrats and the Republicans ignored the protests and voted enthusiastically for the fiasco. Peaceful protest is meaningless unless you're willing to enforce consequences later. If the threat of a breakdown of law and order is what it takes to make the police and politicians clean up their act, then I'll keep my high horse in the stable.
"What would you suggest instead of rioting?" Target the system with a scalpel. Consider for example shutting down the courts.
"Isn't racism, you know, over?" People are calling this the beginning of a new Civil Rights Movement. It's an apt description, because it highlights the ways in which the first Civil Rights Movement failed. In 1954, minorities and women were locked out of elite institutions. In 2014, minorities and women have the doors to the elite institutions open to them. Today the President of the United States is a Harvard-educated African American man; his likely successor is a Yale-educated woman. This is progress, sure. But the vast majority of minorities, particularly African Americans, and women, have been left behind. African American unemployment is twice that of whites, incomes are lower, and live expectancies are shorter. Women still earn less than men, even in the same jobs. We ignore rape when the rapist has power and influence. Nor is the failure limited to how women and minorities are treated. Every time we try, as a society, to have an adult conversation about how Patriarchy hurts boys, those same boys defend Patriarchy with all their might, as if seized by Stockholm syndrome. And of course, wealth inequality, the disparity between rich and poor, is worse now than at any time since the 1930s.
All of that is just the tip of the iceberg. There's a hell of a lot of work left to be done, and most of this nation has been asleep since the Nixon administration. It's time to get back on track.
"So we should vote for Democrats?" Unless they get on board? Nope, not necessarily. And I would be very surprised if Hillary Clinton got on board. She has no reason to do so, given the polling and her need to defend her husband's center-right legacy.
"So we should join the local Democratic Party and push them left?" That worked for a little while between 2004 and 2008, when Howard Dean was in charge of the DNC. Then Washington DC reasserted itself. It could work again, but this time it's the Party that's going to have to come to the Left, not the other way around. The youth aren't buying their shit anymore.
"So we should vote for Greens?" When they make a serious push to take over any state legislature, just one, I'll stop treating them as the GOP puppets they appear to be.
"So we should vote for Republicans?" Let's ignore all the other horrible shit the GOP has supported in the last couple of decades. There's evidence that the KKK was instrumental in the rise of the GOP in the South. Why, then, would the GOP work against white supremacy now, knowing the electoral consequences?
