I don't agree with the pillaging and mob mentality of attacking these statues. I'm also not sad to see a statue go. But I understand your points. The one thing I will disagree with is it being done through official channels. That's been attempted. For years. How long were people protesting against the Confederate flag? It took forever for it to be removed from certain places and it remains a thing in other places even until today. How many people have tried going through official channels to get the Redskins and Indians and other teams to change their names and logos? That's been a failure. I'm not saying those teams should change those things because that's a separate conversation but the going through official channels route doesn't always work and those are examples why. Maybe after the dust has settled on this it will be easier but I doubt it. Again...I'm not saying spray painting and forcibly removing the statues is the right thing to do...because I don't believe it is. But it's not like saying please take it down was gonna work.
I think we're a closer to a 'French Revolution' than you think. People saying 'Civil War 2.0' I think is a product of those looking at two extreme ends of the spectrum and assuming extremes, which are the minority--being the norm--which they're not. Its no secret throughout history that when the wealth gap between haves/have nots widens, conflict ensues. Americans (not the upper class) have figured out that opportunity and wealth are withering away and what's left of the middle class keeps dwindling. Obama was gonna fix it but he didn't. Trump was gonna fix it. Just like Bush was gonna fix it, like slick Bill Clinton was too. I see tons of people agreeing on solution from both left and right sides. Everybody wants term limits. Just above I mentioned McConnell being in Senate for almost 30 years. One of the senators in my state, Dick Durbin is running for his 5th 6-year term. So he's running to go for 30. We all agree that nobody should be a senator for 30 years, and public service shouldn't equate to getting a free ride for yourself and family on taxpayer dollars before corporate donations for a vote/absence of a vote. But we leave that in the hands of the people who keep running. That's utter madness. They were quick to change the rules for executive branch after FDR won 3 times. But notice how the Supreme Court being a lifetime nomination and congress/senate haven't had their terms changed. I mentioned in a long winded post above that we just need to let facts be facts. I think we put way too much emphasis on the extremes because turn on any television station and you'll see what they want, not the truth. Most everybody i know, from Trump nut-hugging friends who think he can do no wrong to the supremely tree hugging liberal friends, who have been threatened with bodily harm should they ever again try to tell me "being vegan is awesome" all agree that Chauvin (the cop who started this thread) is a bad fucking apple and the three clowns who watched him do it also are part of the problem. You bring up 'defunding the police' which is just asinine blue team talking point. They took the red team approach to 'defund planned parenthood' and just changed the target. Getting rid of the police isn't a smart option. That's how you get warlords. The DNC knows that--but doesn't care because they're still getting big corporate $$$. With that being said--I've said a few times already the role of police needs to be redefined. We've shit all over them in the past few decades, just piling up everything on their plates while most of these men/women don't ahve the type of Psychology degree/training to handle a mentally disabled individual not complying with them. Well we stopped funding mental health and mental health institutions (because they became corrupted/easy to cut from a budget) and just forced those who needed the help onto cops' plates so they can deal with it. Yes, I'd rather officers be chasing robbers, murderers, rapists, spousal/child abusers, and people they should be going after too. I'd love for them to be retrained to de-escalate situations, not show up prepared to take someone's life. Again two things can be true at the same time--cops can have situations where lethal force is necessary/unavoidable while still having the wherewithal to de-escalate other situations.
What's the solution? "Turn it upside down" sounds pretty radical but it also sounds pretty vague. It sounds a lot like what I hear from far left activists who are well-intentioned but their solutions don't go any deeper than the ridiculous slogans they shout. For the record, I agree the system is shot. But I also don't think a revolution needs to happen. Term limits would go a long way in ensuring congress actually gets shit down rather than playing to score political victories to their bases and ensuring reelection, as Patg has pointed out. But that's just one thing. A lot does need to happen, but it can happen within the framework of the constitution, rather than ripping that and the Bill of Rights up, as many clearly want.
Do you think it could be as simple as changing the training that the police departments offer by including courses on psychology and situational de-escalation Pat?
The question isn't how many people have tried to go through official channels, it's does the majority of people support these initiatives? If the majority of people, including Native Americans, don't give a shit about the Redskins name, it's going to be hard to force a change. With the Confederate flag, sadly it's the same. Do the majority of people in the South want those flags taken down? I haven't seen any polling on it but my guess would be no. A few loud vocal people, even if they happen to be on the right side of history, won't get the change they want if the majority doesn't support it. That's just the nature of being in a democracy.
Elect leaders that support radical change. When I say radical....I mean 3rd and 4th party type options that believe we need to tear down and rebuild the law of the land. That's what I mean when I say turn it upside down. It doesn't need violence or riots...you can bring about change at the polls....if you fight back against the two party system. And we can do that. Stop electing leaders that have been in Congress 10+ years. Terms limits are needed. Now more than ever. Elect new leadership at the local level...preferably outside of the two parties. Ignore the extreme left progressives and the far right conservatives....they are both equally what's wrong with this country and contrary to popular belief they do not represent the majority. They are just the loudest voices in the room. This one is something that most people will balk at but I believe it's necessary for positive change. We need to move away from states rights on some issues (education, guns, drugs, and prison reform mostly but there are others) and hammer down laws that make sense and enact them federally. Gun laws should be the same everywhere. Coast to coast. There are several areas of the law I think the same should apply but gun laws are the one that really bother me greatly. Outlaw lobbies in government. Completely. Remove special interests. Seems like something completely absurd and undoable but I don't actually believe it is. It would be hard...but it's possible. You don't need to piss on the Constitution or rip of the Bill of Rights to accomplish any of that. The architects of the Constitution purposely allowed for change. We just refuse to take advantage of it as the people it was written for.
I think the first, fundamental change starts with training. I'll look for the clip, but on some primetime network interview regarding Navy Seals, the Seal they interviewed said he spends 40% of his time training. To those unaware of what a Navy Seal is, he/she is a special forces unit in the American Navy. It is a selective process that truly tests one's body/wits and a sliver of those who try to be one make it. Now, Navy Seals are not used for law enforcement purposes, and that is a fine line that needs to be defined--military use in protection of American interests abroad and local community policing. I think a super easy, feasible change is to make officers spend at least 20% of their time constantly training. And no, I don't mean on the gun range. Practice/simulations of de-escalation situations (drunk people like the guy who died in Atlanta in the Wendy's parking lot, mentally disabled, psychotic people, etc) as well as community/trust building. For new officers in other first world countries, they go through 2 years of training/academy before they're given their title and a probationary period that can last from 6 months to 2 years (in short, some places need 4 years total to be an officer). In America, they get 2-3 months of a police academy followed by 6 months to a year of probation. 20% would be my starting point with rigorous testing and retesting. Tons of other jobs have to renew licenses (my fiance is a nurse, and she has to do so yearly). Cops dont. I would change that too. That's a fast (and cheap) way to root out some bad apples. The next thing you do is you take away their military equipment. I live in the city of Chicago, but I'll use the example of one of our local suburbs--Lincolnshire. They used part of the LESO bill from 2013 to put humvees in their patrol unit. They don't use them anymore, as now they're decoration the last time I was up that way. Why the fuck does one of the richest suburbs in Northeastern Illinois with a TOTAL crime rate of 3 per 1000 (mind you with a population of 7700) need military vehicles? They don't. Marseilles IL as of December 2019 was trying to sell their humvees because low and behold--a town with a population of 4900 and slightly higher crime rate than lincolnshire didn't fucking need them either. If you want to take it a step further, make cops take out malpractice insurance just like doctors and make the penalty hurt every time they fuck up. Because its quite tedious knowing taxpayers are on the hook for the families of the victims of really fucking stupid cops. LaQuan McDonald's parents got over 5 million dollars almost immediately from the city of Chicago a few years back. Philando Castille's family got something like 4 million. I'm quite certain Floyd's family is getting a pretty penny or two. Now on top of all of this, consolidate and define the police's responsibilities, meaning take a lot off their plate so they can focus on what they're needed to do. This would have to include spending on mental health/mental health institutions, treating addiction (alcohol, pain killers, drugs) as a health issue and not a criminal one, and other local community resources/necessities. This takes the unnecessary bullshit they shouldn't be dealing with off their plates. Also, us citizens need to do our part. Trust is a two way street, and we need to start by stop glorifying shit like every fucking cop show/movie on TV does. Listen to a police scanner for 5 minutes and you'll figure out real quick every day actually isn't the local badass with sunglasses and a badge stopping complex terrorist cells.
Another crux of the money problem in America. People don't care because they have to work 2 jobs to support their entire families. The cost of living keeps going up. Good paying jobs are disappearing due to outsourcing or automation. Health insurance keeps getting shittier and shittier. They're so fucking stressed out trying to take care of their own houses that another lying jackass politician who talks tough is good enough for them. The present predicament we're in was very well planned by those who seek to stay in power--the long, slow game. I've suggested more extreme measures in this thread--but again--like the police, we're letting politicians police themselves and wait for them to "do the right thing." Guess what, they're not doing that because who's going to stop them? Citizens United/dark money in politics is the first thing that needs to go. To do it peacefully, you have to put the fear of god into these politicians to turn away the hand that feeds. You have to make them fear taking the money. Now its too easy. Deposit funds into shitbag congressperson's account, they vote as told/don't show up because they're fundraising for more money. That is the hardest to get rid of though.
When it came to the addressing the police issue Colin's protest was turned into something it wasn't, and addressing the issue on one side will never address the family breakdown that is at the core of it on the other. They suggest that you pick up yourself up by the bootstraps whatever the fuck that means and get an education, but when you're trying to keep yourself afloat working two jobs making ends meet and even if you somehow came up the money for that education, there are not enough hours in the day pursue it. Then throw into the mix many of these families are single parent households, and in spite of their best intentions without the ability to be there, their kids get swallowed up by the streets. When you consider the last tax break they threw at us 90% went to the people that needed it the least. It did nothing to address the big picture, the wealth inequality continues to compound the problem. It's a start but it will never be that easy. There needs to be a culture shift. Everything is amplified to the extreme and because of that one side will continue to argue with the other over it. Where defund the police equates to eliminating all the police, Reasonable gun laws equates to a total gun grab, or the greatest exaggeration universal healthcare equates to turning the country into Venezuela, and round and round we go. patg you articulated these issues very well, and it's not as simple as plugging something in but having to rebuild everything you're plugging into.
Ev mentioned earlier in the thread about going too far with the tearing down of statues. Now it appears that protesters in DC want to tear down the Emancipation Statue of Abraham Lincoln. They've scheduled it to come down Thursday evening. https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/...otest/65-33bb9f8a-ee02-4b0e-a244-f45fe8aab2bb Interesting to note: the monument was paid for by donations from emancipated African Americans in 1876. Frederick Douglass himself spoke at the unveiling.
That's really interesting. If the statue was of Abraham Lincoln standing shoulder-to-shoulder with a black man, I wonder if the reaction of the crowd would be different. The fact that the man is kneeling submissively beside Lincoln tells a whole different story in my opinion.
But he also spoke about his displeasure with the statue. While the former enslaved people that paid for it it had NO input in it's creation (imagine that) they have a solid argument.
Fair points Baby and Tuna. Again, if people want this brought down, I would hope it could be done civilly rather than with a mob.
It can only if you have enough Nukes in your arsenal, just ask Japan. To be honest I wasn't familiar with the statue blang and when you posted that and my initial thought WTF why Lincoln? Then after seeing the depiction and reading to historical sentiment towards it I can understand. Thursday could be a watershed moment for the movement, how it goes is anyone's guess.
