City of Portland set to re-fund the police

[mastermind]

Nothing saddens me, angers me, or damn near brings me to tears quite like the way I see my people get treated by American cops. I think because I myself have been a situation where I could've easily been killed by them on my way home from studying for school. I hate cops and I will hate them until the day I fukking die.

When I cop dies I couldn't not give less of a fukk. fukk them

I won't go that far because a lot of police officers are good people who ain't tryna be involved with that garbage.

The problem is all of this shyt needs to be reframed. When you have the police first being focused on protecting property instead of people, that is a problem. Police literally do not stop crime, yet its framed as if they are crime stoppers, that is a problem. When you give up on groups of people and think putting them in cages instead of setting up programs to help them, that is a problem.

 

[AquaCityBoy]

The whole Squad ran with the 'Defund the Police' slogan.

 

[MidwestD]

I think a pivot to a "Demilitarize the Police" slogan/campaign would be a good strategy,
I assume most non fascists could get behind that.

 

[CrimsonTider]

the ideas on which it was based - taking funding from police for non-police work to fund municipal social emergency response teams - made a lot of sense, tho it definitely isn't something that could happen overnight. only the slogan was stupid and huge misfire

this makes sense theoretically when you’re not residing in an area where police resources make an actual difference on day to day life

I still say this is a bunch of nothing

Once again I have remind everyone the crime has and will always be a grift.

that’s a lie

I think a pivot to a "Demilitarize the Police" slogan/campaign would be a good strategy,
I assume most non fascists could get behind that.

No one cares about police having old military gear until protest starts which happen on a rare occasion

the focus needs to be on better standards, qualifications and accountability

and none of that can happen without funds

 

[Godless Socialist CEO]

Fell for the grift^^^^

 

[storyteller]

Democratic Socialist is a terrible title.
Black Lives Matter confuses people.
Defund the Police is a bad slogan.

I feel like what happens with these things is people (politicians, journalists, and media-types in general) focus on the title in an obtuse manner to obscure the fact that they don't actually like the underlying ideas without admitting it. "I like the idea behind it, but..." and then they repeat it over and over until a bunch of people fall for. I've seen the same playbook enough times to think the titles or slogans aren't really the issue.

...Also, pinning issues with crime occurring during a global pandemic that has caused economic turmoil for people and forced everyone into lockdowns on a slogan was something police tried, media fermented, and enough people will fall for that I do think Defund the Police has now been damaged as a concept. Which really sucks, because it's still a great idea if you actually pay attention to what's being proposed under the label.

 

[Godless Socialist CEO]

The problem is people don’t actually care. They don’t want actual change in policing

Americans are bootlicking scum. Always will be too, Black Death is not only welcomed but encouraged even by black people

 

[get these nets]

Democratic Socialist is a terrible title.
Black Lives Matter confuses people.
Defund the Police is a bad slogan.

I feel like what happens with these things is people (politicians, journalists, and media-types in general) focus on the title in an obtuse manner to obscure the fact that they don't actually like the underlying ideas without admitting it. "I like the idea behind it, but..." and then they repeat it over and over until a bunch of people fall for. I've seen the same playbook enough times to think the titles or slogans aren't really the issue.

...Also, pinning issues with crime occurring during a global pandemic that has caused economic turmoil for people and forced everyone into lockdowns on a slogan was something police tried, media fermented, and enough people will fall for that I do think Defund the Police has now been damaged as a concept. Which really sucks, because it's still a great idea if you actually pay attention to what's being proposed under the label.

It wasn't the "slogan" that got defeated on the Minneapolis ballot on election day, or that lead to the Portland city council to restore funding to the police dept.

 

[storyteller]

It wasn't the "slogan" that got defeated on the Minneapolis ballot on election day, or that lead to the Portland city council to restore funding to the police dept.

I literally addressed this mindset at the end of my post, because I knew the stock response would be like this

From the article about Portland city council adding 5 million dollars to a budget that would have been 225 million dollars anyway...

Portland isn’t the only liberal city doing an about-face on police spending. From New York City to Los Angeles — in cities that had some of the largest Black Lives Matter protests, and some with an extensive history of police brutality — police departments are seeing their finances partially restored in response to rising homicides, an officer exodus and political pressures.

Here's what I said...

Democratic Socialist is a terrible title.
Black Lives Matter confuses people.
Defund the Police is a bad slogan.

I feel like what happens with these things is people (politicians, journalists, and media-types in general) focus on the title in an obtuse manner to obscure the fact that they don't actually like the underlying ideas without admitting it. "I like the idea behind it, but..." and then they repeat it over and over until a bunch of people fall for. I've seen the same playbook enough times to think the titles or slogans aren't really the issue.


...Also, pinning issues with crime occurring during a global pandemic that has caused economic turmoil for people and forced everyone into lockdowns on a slogan was something police tried, media fermented, and enough people will fall for that I do think Defund the Police has now been damaged as a concept. Which really sucks, because it's still a great idea if you actually pay attention to what's being proposed under the label.

So to make this a bit more clear. The "Slogan" is being attacked by media pundits, politicians, and police using upticks in homicide and threats of resignation. But upticks in homicide have zero to do with the slogan and everything to do with the global pandemic we're facing (and most other violent crime is down last I checked which oddly rarely gets mentioned). Voters making decisions based on bad faith messaging about the causes for an increase in homicides doesn't change or impact my point in any way, shape or form.

edit: It's also always good to stress the "partially restored" part as opposed to "fully" which seems implied when it's left out from posts like yours.

 

[get these nets]

I literally addressed this mindset at the end of my post, because I knew the stock response would be like this

From the article about Portland city council adding 5 million dollars to a budget that would have been 225 million dollars anyway...


Here's what I said...



So to make this a bit more clear. The "Slogan" is being attacked by media pundits, politicians, and police using upticks in homicide and threats of resignation. But upticks in homicide have zero to do with the slogan and everything to do with the global pandemic we're facing (and most other violent crime is down last I checked which oddly rarely gets mentioned). Voters making decisions based on bad faith messaging about the causes for an increase in homicides doesn't change or impact my point in any way, shape or form.

So, you know more about the facts on the ground in Minneapolis, than the "misguided" residents of that city? Their votes were based on "bad faith messaging"?
And the Portland city council members' votes were based on bad faith messaging also?

 

[PoorAndDangerous]

Defund the police was an activist slogan that the right wing, the media and Democratic moderates placed on the "crazy" progressives because they don't want to see any change in the criminal justice system.

It wasn't the best slogan, but its also been used to do nothing about police violence.

It also never meant “completely defund the police” it meant reduce their massive bloated military esque budgets and divert it to other things that would benefit the community. It was certainly a marketing blunder slogan wise.

 

[mastermind]

It also never meant “completely defund the police” it meant reduce their massive bloated military esque budgets and divert it to other things that would benefit the community. It was certainly a marketing blunder slogan wise.

I know, but that’s because activists aren’t marketers which is what I said last year.

I do know “reform the police” is an absolute nonsense slogan that has lead to nothing.

 

[storyteller]

So, you know more about the facts on the ground in Minneapolis, than the "misguided" residents of that city? Their votes were based on "bad faith messaging"?
And the city council members' votes were based on bad faith messaging also?

I'm saying that the article points directly at homicide increases as a reason that funding for police is being partially restored. That's a bad faith point when it neglects that we're in the middle of a pandemic and most violent crime is down.

And yes, voters make dumb decisions due to bad faith messaging all the damned time. Trump was president...I guess those voters just knew more about the situation on the ground

Anyway, I'm pointing directly to the slogan "Defund the Police" being obscured by police, politicians (including major Democrats connected to Minneapolis in that instance btw), and journalists. That takes good concepts and causes people to focus on the title instead of the underlying concept. If you don't like the concept, we can talk about that. But I'm focused on the impact of implementing these approaches, not electoral results when all of the messaging surrounding those approaches fail to mention what they would actually aim to do...

And here's an example: That Minneapolis amendment wasn't just aiming to remove police, but to create new roles to address some needs of the community. You'd still have police to address homicides, but for other societal needs, there would be new roles with more specialized training. Whether you like or dislike that idea doesn't matter much to me, I'm talking about the way this topic is discussed without getting to the whole "what would implementation mean"...something that even the AP article doesn't touch on at all. Here's the that amendment's goals as described by the DSA in Minneapolis...you know, people on the ground...

This amendment would remove the minimum required police officers and create a new Department of Public Safety, opening the scope of options Minneapolis has available. It will allow us to change the current police-only model of public safety required by the current City Charter, and instead combine public safety functions of the City of Minneapolis into a department with comprehensive public health approach with a range of capabilities. The city will be able to create a public safety service for residents which include mental health responders, substance abuse specialists, violence interrupters, and prevention specialists to fulfill the responsibilities of the Department of Public Safety.

Everything You Need To Know About Our 2021 Endorsements

 

[get these nets]

I'm saying that the article points directly at homicide increases as a reason that funding for police is being partially restored. That's a bad faith point when it neglects that we're in the middle of a pandemic and most violent crime is down.

And yes, voters make dumb decisions due to bad faith messaging all the damned time. Trump was president...I guess those voters just knew more about the situation on the ground

Anyway, I'm pointing directly to the slogan "Defund the Police" being obscured by police, politicians (including major Democrats connected to Minneapolis in that instance btw), and journalists. That takes good concepts and causes people to focus on the title instead of the underlying concept. If you don't like the concept, we can talk about that. But I'm focused on the impact of implementing these approaches, not electoral results when all of the messaging surrounding those approaches fail to mention what they would actually aim to do...

And here's an example: That Minneapolis amendment wasn't just aiming to remove police, but to create new roles to address some needs of the community. You'd still have police to address homicides, but for other societal needs, there would be new roles with more specialized training. Whether you like or dislike that idea doesn't matter much to me, I'm talking about the way this topic is discussed without getting to the whole "what would implementation mean"...something that even the AP article doesn't touch on at all. Here's the that amendment's goals as described by the DSA in Minneapolis...you know, people on the ground...

Created this thread ahead of the vote, and updated it when result was announced

Police Reform showdown on Minn. ballot 11/02/21- It FAILS

No need to recap.

 

[Pressure]

I guess the real question is, will they see tangible improvements by refunding and what will they look like.