June 2020, United States: The Unfolding

[JackRiddler]

.

Q. What does an America with a defunded police look like to you?'

The good news is that it actually doesn't take a ton of imagination. It looks like a suburb.

Affluent white communities already live in a world where they choose to fund youth, health, housing, etc. more than they fund police. These communities have lower crime rates not because they have more police, but because they have more resources to support healthy society in a way that reduces crime.

When a teenager or preteen does something harmful in a suburb (I say teen because this is often where lifelong carceral cycles begin for Black and Brown communities), White communities bend over backwards to find alternatives to incarceration for their loved ones to "protect their future," like community service or rehab or restorative measures. Why don't we treat Black and Brown people the same way? Why doesn't the criminal system care about Black teens' futures? Why doesn't the news use Black people's graduation or family photos in stories the way they do when they cover White people (eg. Brock Turner) who commit harmful crimes? Affluent White suburbs also design their own lives so that they walk through the world without having much interruption or interaction with police at all, aside from community events and speeding tickets (and many of these communities try to reduce those, too!)

Just starting THERE would be a dramatically and radically different world than what we are experiencing now.

.

[Sounder]

Wombat wrote...

Alternate take: Hypocrisy was never the issue because Presidential Agency is a secular myth.

Talking about "Trump's Libya policy" is the same cynical joke as examining "Obama's Libya policy" -- there was none in either case. National Security and Foreign Policy is set by an unelected permanent establishment and dictated to the President. (This is such a controversial conspiracy theory that a Tufts University professor wrote a whole book explaining how this came to be and got it published by Oxford University Press.)

The value of Trump's administration is how much it illuminates, not how little it accomplishes.

Thanks

[JackRiddler]

Luckily was able to save the text:

This is so luscious, I love it.

For someone who claims to not be a racist

I don't claim to not be a racist, and leave that to preening guilt infested narcissists. For example, the recent semi-celeb collage called; I Take Responsibility where a bunch of Whites unconsciously imply that Black people should live in cribs and let the fine White people take 'responsibility'. How odd. they claim to not be racists, but to me they seem to be just that.

you sure post a lot of far-right, racist dog-whistles. Your posting history would fit right in at breitbart. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

When you can't deal with content, ad-homs work well. Isn't breitbart a Zionist operation?

The depressing thing is you can't even see it yourself, even when people point it out to you.


I like the (constant) 'Your mask is slipping' dismissal. This coming from someone who wears their mask so well. You do look divine darling.

My position is clear and has little to do with ideology and politics. It's more about warning people in regard to the effects and potential spread of malignant narcissism.

[JackRiddler]

What does @TheDamaniFelder think about Trump's Libya policy?

Hypocrisy was never an obstacle. Anyway, some people still seem to think Trump's an anti-imperialist who's going to drain the swamp and (if they're even aware of the following) Trump-Pence-GOP regime only has escalated the same-old military interventions, initiated new ones, driven record military budgets and implemented new legal exceptions for natsec because of pressure from #Obamagate or 7-dimensional-Pizzagate chess or something.

Alternate take: Hypocrisy was never the issue because Presidential Agency is a secular myth.

Talking about "Trump's Libya policy" is the same cynical joke as examining "Obama's Libya policy" -- there was none in either case. National Security and Foreign Policy is set by an unelected permanent establishment and dictated to the President. (This is such a controversial conspiracy theory that a Tufts University professor wrote a whole book explaining how this came to be and got it published by Oxford University Press.)

The value of Trump's administration is how much it illuminates, not how little it accomplishes.

How is that an alternate take? You're saying something quite similar to what I wrote, that there is a continuity of imperialist policy, but look at the context of the exchange. A video was posted of some relentlessly pro-Trump youtuber (whose audience presumably is mostly dopey white i'm-not-a-racists wanking off at the alt-wokeness of seeing a black guy for Trump). The character he plays is obviously dedicated to selectively demonizing the Democrats and suppressing the black vote on behalf of the Trump reelection. In the video he was attacking "Obama" for the butchery and enslavement of Libya (righteously so but which, as you say, was hardly just "Obama" -- that was a joint imperialist effort politically led by Europe, but most Americaine tend to miss these nuances).

This being a message board, the challenge was posed in response, to expose this character's hypocrisy: "What does @TheDamaniFelder think about Trump's Libya policy?"

My answer and your answer are both broadly correct.

The two answers may differ about the extent to which immanent factors and short-term trends are taken to significantly shape policy as it is made year on year, month on month; or how far the branding and composition and personnel of each new "elected" regime is one of these factors; or the relative importance (you seem to assign none), in mediated ways, of the evolution of mass politics. Even if any and all electoral effects are always short-circuited and managed, clienteles large and small high and low often need to be served, however much the service is a con or haphazard. These things take work. Trump's genuine work, or that of his framing group and core Following (the "base"), is to lead a genuine push toward a popular fascism (whatever his adderoll-addled personal motivations may be, and given variations in whatever it is most of the MAGA types think they're doing). It's been impressive, although debatably it's not working as well as, oh, Nixon's earlier management of the popular reaction did. That was stellar.

But I think we definitely do not differ on this: "The value of Trump's administration is how much it illuminates, not how little it accomplishes."

Indeed it illuminates a great deal, and believe me, I've been very appreciative of it. Unfortunately it has also accomplished a lot more than Obama's (besides "undoing" anything vaguely good the latter did). The GOP does have a function in this pendular machine: it breaks more furniture, and the D regimes legalize that. Most of the "Trump" achievements have been through executive actions and playing the tribune, but the most essential legislative goals were also enacted: a couple of trillion to the billionaires, hundreds of young El Fanatico judges, total corporate unleashing from any law or code, prevention of a New Deal program when the Depression comes (originally scheduled for 2021-22, it happened prematurely with the Covid Crisis), cultivating new frontiers in imperialism and world war, boosting the budget of course, setting up new hybrid war ops, and, oh yeah, at least another six to 20 trillion to the billionaires delivered in the last couple of months. That much was all along a downhill slope but not guaranteed, there are always contingent elements.

.

[0_0]

A video was posted of some relentlessly pro-Trump youtuber (whose audience presumably is mostly dopey white i'm-not-a-racists wanking off at the alt-wokeness of seeing a black guy for Trump). The character he plays is obviously dedicated to selectively demonizing the Democrats and suppressing the black vote on behalf of the Trump reelection.

Oh, so leaving aside your racist generalizations, it is okay to deny individuals "agency" when you don't agree with them? How deliciously ironic!

[JackRiddler]

.

Even as some Democrats work to coopt the uprising, Sounder talks mostly of enemies and degenerates among those who are trying to challenge the system of physical repression, an attitude that aids division and confusion.

This fits with the imprecision of this language (below), the failure to specify just who "the enemy" is, to distinguish interests among powers that be, to see anything other than "globalists" or "trans-humanists," foreign and strange elements out to (as it was in another post) destroy America, the precious delineable homeland.

The only thing that always sounds clear in these vagaries is the anti-intellectualism, the hatred and otherization of a broad set of classes that includes indispensable servants to the powerful but also those who -- even worse, I think -- might have a better understanding of how things work than Sounder. Fucking eggheads!

Trump is a globalist same as the Democrats, on the side of plutocrats, trans-humanists and multinational corporations and against the well being and individual expressions of what they consider to be their subjects.

But hey, at least both may get their wish to destroy the US. Fuck the suffering to be caused, the system must be brought down. Pompous self righteous eggheads.

[0_0]

Sounder talks mostly of enemies and degenerates among those who are trying to challenge the system of physical repression, an attitude that aids division and confusion.

You on the other hand are clearly a uniter and not a divider. You prove it more with every comment you make.

This fits with the imprecision of this language (below), the failure to specify just who "the enemy" is, to distinguish interests among powers that be, to see anything other than "globalists" or "trans-humanists," foreign and strange elements out to (as it was in another post) destroy America, the precious delineable homeland.

Let's never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories! Just to be sure though and to make sure we are all on the same side here, can you specify exactly who the enemy is one more time please?

[JackRiddler]

0_0, I'm not here to unite with you, or rather, whom you appear to be based on your posts (which is all of you I've seen). You're not interested and I'm done being trolled in the name of a tolerance you abuse. Take any further flamewar to Chekhov!, or better yet, to your new blog. Not here. Thank you.

[DrEvil]

Luckily was able to save the text:

This is so luscious, I love it.

For someone who claims to not be a racist

I don't claim to not be a racist, and leave that to preening guilt infested narcissists. For example, the recent semi-celeb collage called; I Take Responsibility where a bunch of Whites unconsciously imply that Black people should live in cribs and let the fine White people take 'responsibility'. How odd. they claim to not be racists, but to me they seem to be just that

They were doing exactly what you are doing, carrying water for the racists. They unconsciously imply things, you outright state that the protests are mostly burning and looting, completely ignoring the tens of thousands of people who did no such thing, and in so doing labeling everyone involved as looters and arsonists.

I'm sure there's been a pedophile somewhere who also played the fiddle. How would you feel if I used that to label all fiddlers as pedophiles? That's what you're doing.

you sure post a lot of far-right, racist dog-whistles. Your posting history would fit right in at breitbart. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

When you can't deal with content, ad-homs work well. Isn't breitbart a Zionist operation?.

What content? No idea about Breitbart, maybe they are. Take your pick of other right-wing sites, you would fit in on most of them. And it's not an ad hominem if it's true. You have repeatedly posted on the side of the racists while dismissing the left and those protesting police violence.

You're the one ranting about cultural marxists, posting angry screeds by white truck drivers inconvenienced by refugees at Calais, anti-antifa propaganda and right-wing disinfo videos from UKIP, Project Veritas and random QAnon shitheads, to name a few.

You do it all the fucking time and have been for years, and judging by this reply you're completely oblivious to what you're doing.

The depressing thing is you can't even see it yourself, even when people point it out to you.


I like the (constant) 'Your mask is slipping' dismissal. This coming from someone who wears their mask so well. You do look divine darling..

I've been pretty upfront about my beliefs (hint: I fucking hate racists), you on the other hand have on several occasions outright refused to say what you mean because you thought it wouldn't go over well here. I'm not the one pretending to be something I'm not.

My position is clear and has little to do with ideology and politics. It's more about warning people in regard to the effects and potential spread of malignant narcissism.

Of course, it's not about racial equality, it's about malignant narcissism. Jesus H. Christ.

[Sounder]

Fucking eggheads!

Ah, but you left out the self righteous. Which is what turns the intellectual into an egg head.

The left has walked away from and even despises the working class (as do your masters), don't be surprised that the favor gets returned.

[Sounder]

You're the one ranting about cultural marxists, posting angry screeds by white truck drivers inconvenienced by refugees at Calais, anti-antifa propaganda and right-wing disinfo videos from UKIP, Project Veritas and random QAnon shitheads, to name a few.

post examples then, and we can have a look together. Also though, most exposing comes from the other side and if it contains valid or true material, then where it comes from is secondary and the valid observation cannot be denied by simply brushing off the source. Well you can, but you lose because you cannot engage on merits.

[JackRiddler]

Fucking eggheads!

Ah, but you left out the self righteous. Which is what turns the intellectual into an egg head.

The left has walked away from and even despises the working class (as do your masters), don't be surprised that the favor gets returned.

Who are my masters?

[stickdog99]

I keep hearing complaints from a large swath of people about the framing of "DEFUND THE POLICE," and I actually agree that the slogan is not optimally framed. But on the other hand, the exact same framing arguments were made about "LEGALIZE IT" and "GAY MARRIAGE NOW" and even "BLACK LIVES MATTER."

So maybe we should not be so quick to roundly dismiss a clearly good idea because some activists did not frame it perfectly in our "how this will play with other whites" estimation? I mean, would you have expected even 3 years ago that giant US corporations would be adding "Black Lives Matter" to their taglines over the last three weeks?

While I agree 100% that the framing is not optimal, when you consider what Camden did and what the Minneapolis City Council is planning to do, isn't all the knee-jerk carping about the "Defund the Police" motto sort of like telling the French Revolutionaries that their calls for "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity" would be more popular if they called it a "resolution" rather than a "revolution"?

And in some ways "Defund the Police" is the best possible frame because it puts the cards on the table. What makes this slogan so startling is that we live in police state in which cops are constantly lionized for "doing a tough and thankless job." But after I thought past my initial emotional response ("this sounds so radical that it ensures self-defeat"), I began to see the appeal of the slogan. Society funds police departments ostensibly to protect, serve, and enforce certain laws. Everything else in our cities has been defunded already. But like military funding in the USA, increased funding for police is never questioned by either party whether crime rates and/or police brutality rates go up or down. Why not?

And as every other service our cities provide is cut to the bone, the police are called upon to deal with every perceived social ill. Kids tagging buildings? Call the cops. Homeless people or unlicensed vendors outside your shop? Call the cops. Schizophrenic person exhibiting severe positive symptoms? Call the cops. Junkie passed out cold on the sidewalk? Call the cops. Fender bender? Call the cops. Neighbors making noise? Call the cops. Someone drinking a beer or smoking a joint outside? Call the cops. Wild animal lose on the streets? Call the cops. City sewer backing up? Call the cops. Power line down? Call the cops. Teens sitting in a parked car across the street? Call the cops. Unattended children? Call the cops. Nail salon seeing a client open during a pandemic? Call the cops. Somebody not social distancing? Call the cops. Black man asks you to put your dog on a leash? Call the cops. Black or brown person not in uniform in your neighborhood? Call the cops.

Why do we dispatch armed, trigger-happy people with full licenses to kill anybody who disagrees with them or does not immediately follow every single order they issue to handle every one of these situations?

To make a trenchant comparison, Medicare for All is awesome framing, but Americans in favor of it aren't going to get it until we too get our asses out in the streets demanding it.

[Sounder]

stickdog99 wrote...

And as every other service our cities provide is cut to the bone, the police are called upon to deal with every perceived social ill. Kids tagging buildings? Call the cops. Homeless people or unlicensed vendors outside your shop? Call the cops. Schizophrenic person exhibiting severe positive symptoms? Call the cops. Junkie passed out cold on the sidewalk? Call the cops. Fender bender? Call the cops. Neighbors making noise? Call the cops. Someone drinking a beer or smoking a joint outside? Call the cops. Wild animal lose on the streets? Call the cops. City sewer backing up? Call the cops. Power line down? Call the cops. Teens sitting in a parked car across the street? Call the cops. Unattended children? Call the cops. Nail salon seeing a client open during a pandemic? Call the cops. Somebody not social distancing? Call the cops. Black man asks you to put your dog on a leash? Call the cops. Black or brown person not in uniform in your neighborhood? Call the cops.

Why do we dispatch armed, trigger-happy people with full licenses to kill anybody who disagrees with them or does not follow every single order they issue to handle every one of these issues?

Good points, Cops are overused, still unarmed social workers will be anxious of risk in many new situations they may be called to preform. Better to take money from the military than the police. One, they have a lot more and they kill a lot more people of color with much more focused attention.

Whether they do the job well or not, cops at least have a remit to protect the community, and our problems come from above the cops anyway. We need to fix that rather than taking a symptom as being the cause.

As a quick counterexample, yesterday at a protest an eleven month old kid stopped breathing and the panicked mother ran to a cop who quickly whacked the kid on the back and dislodged a swallowed coin. Like it or not, and for good and for bad, cops see more shit than the average citizen and can often respond better than the average person put on the spot. They need better training, but not from Israel.

Jack wrote...

Who are my masters?

Same as my masters, the faceless directors of large foundations and the extended support staff. In the Norman Dodd vid he recounted a story of visiting the Ford foundation folk, where the head guy told him that they were working under (govt.) direction just like he was and their job was to prepare the US and the USSR for integration. Eh, no big deal.

[JackRiddler]

(Ok, who's going to break the news to this guy about the USSR? And what actually happened in the 1990s? Be gentle!)