I am not expecting this diary to make the rec list or to be particularly popular on here. I am sure it will generate a lot of controversy and animosity, but hopefully, through it all, it will be a discussion we can all learn from that challenges our thinking and leads us to new ideas.
I would also like to say that I fully understand that our criminal justice system is flawed, that it is full of racial bias--both against the accused and against victims. I realize that our drug laws promote a culture of gangs and incarceration for poor people but are largely unenforced on upper-middle-class people of privilege, who buy, sell, and use with impunity at the same rate as everyone else, sometimes blatantly and out in the open. It is a mind-boggling injustice that this still goes on in this country--a country that claims it prides itself on "liberty" and "freedom."
I understand that our economic system is particularly brutal with respect to giving disproportionately poor racial minorities an opportunity to succeed--whereas people with already comfortable lives can coast into success with a level of effort that would leave most poor people broken and homeless. Thus has always been the nature of life in any society where wealth dominates over civil rights.
There are a multitude of injustices to fight with regard to equal access to liberty, justice, and economic opportunity for progressives. But Michael Brown is not a particularly good fight upon which to stand our ground. And neither is launching blanket attacks against the police.
Why?
Because we just don't know what happened in the Michael Brown shooting. It's possible he could have been executed by an officer that completely lost his cool. But it's also possible that Brown did, in fact, go for Officer Wilson's gun--in which case, if we knew this for a fact, I think Brown would gather very little support from either side.
I am not saying I know for sure which version of events actually occurred. It remains true that Brown was shot multiple times while being unarmed. But it's also still possible that he physically assaulted Officer Wilson and went for his gun. The evidence is not conclusive.
The bottom line is that we don't know what happened yet. And yet we've already chosen sides. That makes us ideologues, similar to those on the right who seem to be uncritically lionizing Officer Wilson, even though what he did was at best a deeply regrettable necessity (and of course, at worst, murder).
The fact is, police officers have every reason to include themselves in the progressive wing of the polity. They are blue-collar workers. They are highly unionized. They are government workers who suffer from conservative attacks on public pensions and municipal budgets. They risk their lives to keep law-abiding members of crime-ridden communities safe. They do get shot at in the course of their jobs. They do get killed. They do have families that pray that they come home safe at the end of their shift. They are not just there to "repress the man." They are there to help liberate us from oppressive criminal behavior that erodes neighborhoods, costs lives, and destroys property values in neighborhoods where minorities and people of all kinds tend to own property. One of the biggest obstacles to black Americans succeeding financially is the difficulty of maintaining equity in their home. This is partially due to racism and white flight, but neighborhood crime will play a factor. Police officers need to be allowed to fight this crime.
Now, of course not all are perfect. Positions of authority naturally attract those who relish in abusing that authority. You can certainly find examples of racist cops, corrupt cops, or examples of systemic racism in entire police forces. But that doesn't mean that any time the police automatically arrest someone that they are out of line. Or that every time they defend themselves with lethal force that they are out of line.
We do need to follow rules and respect the civil rights and lives of others. Criminals are put in jail because THEY violate other citizens' civil rights. Not the police. Sometimes it's a very tedious and difficult job to balance privacy and constitutional protections with keeping a community safe--and keeping your own life safe. We should at least respect that.
There are legitimate scholarly and legal questions as to whether programs such as Stop and Frisk go too far. But we must look at the other side of this argument as well and arrive at a more balanced conclusion. Keeping communities safe ENHANCES liberty and freedom for the law-abiding residents in these communities. It helps poor children grow up in an environment where they are less likely to be targeted or recruited by gangs, or fall into the despair of drug use. Many poor residents want MORE police presence.
This is one of those issues where the left has become disjointed from reality in America. If you've ever truly lived in a low-income, crime-ridden, urban neighborhood plagued with gang activity, you would quickly realize that the police aren't just there to break up frat parties and stop people from jaywalking. They are there doing a life-threatening job to protect you.
As it relates to Michael Brown, there is still a legitimate question as to whether he was executed by an officer that lost his composure, or whether he tried to fight the officer and went for his gun. I do not claim to know what exactly happened. Because I don't. And neither do you. We do know that Brown reacted violently to a store clerk shortly before the shooting. That is a plain and simple fact. We don't know why, and that certainly doesn't justify him being dead. But shoving a store clerk is nothing I've ever done in my life. It appears as if Brown let his temper get the better of him.
The bottom line is this: If you are going to demonize an officer before you know all the facts, you alienate all other people who have yet to come to a conclusion on this matter. And that includes segments of the population that should fall under the progressive umbrella.
It's reactions like ours to Michael Brown that leave people to wonder: Where is all the uproar when a police officer is killed in the line of duty while protecting people of color? Even though it is still real, not everything is a sign of racial oppression.
Why is there only uproar on one case with hazy facts? Why did the left chose this ground to make their stand when there are plenty of other clear examples of injustice towards minorities and assaults on their liberties?
I support racially-neutral law enforcement, and abhor both the intentional and unintentional discrimination that causes minorities to be treated unfairly within our justice system. But it's still not clear that the Michael Brown incident is a good example of that.