So I have seen a bit of discussion on Defund the Police and Joe Biden. He doesn’t like the term. Some say he is out of touch because of this. But truthfully, neither do I. I don’t hate it, I just think it should be improved.
Now as background: I am a 59 year old middle-class white male. I am also very liberal and I totally understand my place of privilege in these United States. I observed this privilege first hand during my upbringing (We were poor with my single mother raising three boys. I spent two years--5th and 6th grade-- at Malcolm X Elementary School where I saw daily how I was treated differently than my black schoolmates. Not so much at school, but definitely outside of school. At 10 years old I knew my white skin made me much safer than my black friends skin. And this was Berkeley in the early 70’s, so you might think it was all liberal and kumbaya, but no).
But yes, I’m old and white. I was poor, but not anymore. Thanks to government programs my family qualified for food stamps that keep us fed, and my mother received hardship scholarships so she could go back to college in her 30’s. She earned her teaching degree and then she then took a job working with learning challenged High School students for over 20 years. (Back then they were “troubled, or problem” kids. Learning disabled (LD), Socially and Emotionally Maladjusted, and other labels were used back then.)
The government helped her, and us, and she gave back. It is a wonderful thing when the government works well to aid and actually helps it’s people. To me Socialism is Kindness personified.
Anyways back to DTP; like Biden I never really liked the phrase “Defund the Police.” I agree with the purpose, but the wording was off. Well not so much off, as easily twisted. We as democrats like to keep things simple and honest. But simple and honest can be used against you if your opposition has no plan to be honest or fair.
Defund the Police became to many to be Get Rid of All Police. And that was never the case. But a short phrase is easy and catchy compared to laying out all the steps and processes needed to get to the planned desired affect. Which is:
Police doing police work,
while social workers handled mental health and neglect issues,
while the government (of the people and for the people) expands healthcare,
and communities expand programs for kids, homeless, and others within the community.
So Defund the Police is really about, to repeat myself: Police doing police work, while community centers helped with homeless and job training, and the government helps it’s people through healthcare. Simple, but way too long for a chant during a march.
Police protect and serve while others do the work of helping their communities so there is less crime, so there is less need for police. Rinse and repeat till there is a stable community and some, but less, need for police.
Now the Republicans are really good (well not good, but fond) of naming their programs the opposite of what they do: The Clean Air Act made our air dirtier. No Child Left Behind left many children behind. They do it all the time because they don’t care if they are honest. They just want to get their programs passed.
Here is a prime example of how Republicans twist a good idea like DTP and make it something harmful and scary: Truthfully I’m surprised they didn’t use a POC in the comic…
And while that comic is horrible, and the people it is targeting are awful people, we should mimic some of what they do. Not so much name our programs the opposite, but name them “better.”
“Defund the Police” should be “To Protect and Serve”. It would do the same things: Police doing police work only; so fewer uniformed police needed. And then put money saved toward Social Worker, Community Centers, etc. For every 4 cops in a precinct, there should be a “Police” social worker who goes out on calls of potential self harm, family disputes, homeless issues, and any call regarding children. (Every time I see an 8 year old in handcuffs I want to puke. And we have seen that more than once in America, which is criminal.)
And it would be hard to fight against. If they argued “How is this To Protect and Serve helping the police in our community?” It’s easy: To Protect and Serve is getting Police back to what they do best: doing true police work. It also helps them as they are not suddenly faced with no-win situations they are not properly trained for. And they still will back up the social workers on these family and mental health related calls, but they won’t be front and center doing a job they are not fully trained to do.
Similar to DTP, To Protect and Serve will also be a multi-pronged approach. Police do police work, aided by Social Workers doing social worker work, aided by increase community support to aid with keeping kids off the street and giving the homeless more and better options.
DTP and TPAS can be the exact same program with the exact same goals, but it should be named in a way that is less easy to twist and pervert.
So basically we need to work on our slogans. It’s not that we can’t be honest about the objectives, but we have to understand that the other side will always try to misrepresent our words and objectives. Hell I’m a realist, I know they will want to warp “To Protect and Serve”, but if the republicans try and smear the Police’s favorite car quote, I’m not sure that will work well for them.
I found this while working on this post: It pretty much says what I just did, but much faster.
And truthfully this is my favorite cartoon/commentary on this discussion: It is Genius.
And I love the happy little dog cop on the bottom.
