An alternative is local communities be in charge of this themselves. The money spent on policing could be better used to build up services to avoid crime originating, for mental health services, for armed community defense, etc. Local communities don’t need to buy sonic weapons, apcs, and fit out riot squds.
As it stands police do very little to prevent crime, and rarely bother to solve a crime after it has been reported. What they do, do is a ridiculous amount of abuse towards innocent people.
We cannot get to that stage without first removing the barrier that is public perception that police prevent crime and keep us safe. Getting rid of them will allow organic means of defending a community to grow. The Black Panther are an excellent historic contemporary example of this in the media today, but they have to operate in constant opposition to the police which hinders them greatly.
Likewise we can see community defense in action in Rovaja and Zapatista’s - but that’s much harder to put into a meme compared to ‘police bad’ which most people understand.
Yeah, I’m at least personally aware of alternatives, but I’m more commenting on the particular messaging of having the primary focus be on negating action. While it certainly is correct in stating the problem is the police as it exists along with the way the justice systems operates, my problem with the message isn’t “everyone knows, bro” or even the silly “it isn’t nuanced enough, bro”, but more along the lines of "the solution should be baked into the message ". Sure, the message could be police bad, acab, defend the police, etc, but even if we get everyone to hear and accept that message, how can they just not continue to feel helpless when no primary solution is proposed. Agreed there are plenty of solutions out there, but if the primary messaging out there is to say it’s bad, all those solutions are the priority. When everything is a priority, nothing is. I think this is the primary problem in leftist spaces that really muddies the waters as to what we want to do and why things implode under the sheer weight of numerous issues to solve.
A simple solution is to lead with the solution. Community policing is pretty easy to package well to make it fairly bipartisan. If you lead with community policing, you’re already giving an actionable step that helps people see an actual goal that solves an actual problem. The problem of police brutality is secondary in the messaging because that’s the problem we’re trying to solve. When providing the solution as the platform, the problem is apparent, and even highlighted. All the “nuance” is already practically implied. So yes, public perception is important in approaching these issues, but it’s inadequate with out a solution. You can get into the whole debate about why police as they exist is bad, or you could demonstrate the problem by showing why whatever proposed solution you have is a better option.
An alternative is local communities be in charge of this themselves. The money spent on policing could be better used to build up services to avoid crime originating, for mental health services, for armed community defense, etc. Local communities don’t need to buy sonic weapons, apcs, and fit out riot squds.
As it stands police do very little to prevent crime, and rarely bother to solve a crime after it has been reported. What they do, do is a ridiculous amount of abuse towards innocent people.
We cannot get to that stage without first removing the barrier that is public perception that police prevent crime and keep us safe. Getting rid of them will allow organic means of defending a community to grow. The Black Panther are an excellent historic contemporary example of this in the media today, but they have to operate in constant opposition to the police which hinders them greatly.
Likewise we can see community defense in action in Rovaja and Zapatista’s - but that’s much harder to put into a meme compared to ‘police bad’ which most people understand.
You think that’s gonna be a reliably good model? To me that sounds like another hellscape waiting to happen.
Yeah, welcome back to sundown towns.
Agreed. Pretty sure Texas would implement the purge.
Yeah, I’m at least personally aware of alternatives, but I’m more commenting on the particular messaging of having the primary focus be on negating action. While it certainly is correct in stating the problem is the police as it exists along with the way the justice systems operates, my problem with the message isn’t “everyone knows, bro” or even the silly “it isn’t nuanced enough, bro”, but more along the lines of "the solution should be baked into the message ". Sure, the message could be police bad, acab, defend the police, etc, but even if we get everyone to hear and accept that message, how can they just not continue to feel helpless when no primary solution is proposed. Agreed there are plenty of solutions out there, but if the primary messaging out there is to say it’s bad, all those solutions are the priority. When everything is a priority, nothing is. I think this is the primary problem in leftist spaces that really muddies the waters as to what we want to do and why things implode under the sheer weight of numerous issues to solve.
A simple solution is to lead with the solution. Community policing is pretty easy to package well to make it fairly bipartisan. If you lead with community policing, you’re already giving an actionable step that helps people see an actual goal that solves an actual problem. The problem of police brutality is secondary in the messaging because that’s the problem we’re trying to solve. When providing the solution as the platform, the problem is apparent, and even highlighted. All the “nuance” is already practically implied. So yes, public perception is important in approaching these issues, but it’s inadequate with out a solution. You can get into the whole debate about why police as they exist is bad, or you could demonstrate the problem by showing why whatever proposed solution you have is a better option.