Police Misconduct: Tracked

Politics and other such topical creams.
matedog
User avatar
Purveyor of Hoyistic Thought
Posts: 25804
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 4:07pm
Location: 1995

Re: Police Misconduct: Tracked

Post by matedog »

Dr. Medulla wrote:
30 Jan 2023, 11:52am
matedog wrote:
30 Jan 2023, 11:38am
WestwayKid wrote:
30 Jan 2023, 10:59am

The 2020 "Defund the Police" Summer has passed and become a dirty word.
"Defund the Police" was terrible branding. Just awful.
Agreed. It invited misinterpretation, intentional and not. Black Lives Matter also makes it easy for opponents to twist it into *only* Black Lives Matter, instead of its intent of Black Lives Matter, too. And the insane alphabet stew of covering non-conventional gender identities. I support the desire for inclusivity in naming, but LGBTQQIP2SAA (I think that's the current version) suggests more zeal than intent to persuade.
I actually hadn't heard of that full LGBT acronym. Apparently the last A stands for ally. Come on, straight people don't need to be included.
Look, you have to establish context for these things. And I maintain that unless you appreciate the Fall of Constantinople, the Great Fire of London, and Mickey Mantle's fatalist alcoholism, live Freddy makes no sense. If you want to half-ass it, fine, go call Simon Schama to do the appendix.

Flex
User avatar
Mechano-Man of the Future
Posts: 35802
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:50pm
Location: The Information Superhighway!

Re: Police Misconduct: Tracked

Post by Flex »

Wait, that's not made up? Last I'd heard was LGBTQIA+ (the a standing for asexual). Seems like the definition of performative, corporate friendly "inclusion" to just keep adding letters without discussing structural oppression.
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a bowl of soup
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a rolling hoop
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a ton of lead
Wiggle - you can raise the dead

Pex Lives!

matedog
User avatar
Purveyor of Hoyistic Thought
Posts: 25804
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 4:07pm
Location: 1995

Re: Police Misconduct: Tracked

Post by matedog »

Flex wrote:
30 Jan 2023, 12:25pm
matedog wrote:
30 Jan 2023, 11:38am
WestwayKid wrote:
30 Jan 2023, 10:59am

The 2020 "Defund the Police" Summer has passed and become a dirty word.
"Defund the Police" was terrible branding. Just awful.
I mean, that depends. I think it was weird, bad branding for people who wanted police reform but not abolition, but it's very accurate branding for actual police abolitionists. It's just a really, really unpopular position and it always struck me as totally delusional that a lot of abolitionists (at least ones I knew or followed) acted like it was a broadly popular position that wouldn't require absolutely mind boggling levels of outreach and persuasion.

I don't really understand people who didn't actually want to get rid of police using the term tho. Very counterproductive!
Then just say "abolish the police." I thought defund meant basically broad reform and reallocation of funding to services that are better suited to deal with things like mental health crises, etc.

I guess we are proving the point that the branding was bad if we still can't agree on what it means.
Look, you have to establish context for these things. And I maintain that unless you appreciate the Fall of Constantinople, the Great Fire of London, and Mickey Mantle's fatalist alcoholism, live Freddy makes no sense. If you want to half-ass it, fine, go call Simon Schama to do the appendix.

Dr. Medulla
User avatar
Atheistic Epileptic
Posts: 115989
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
Location: Straight Banana, Idaho

Re: Police Misconduct: Tracked

Post by Dr. Medulla »

matedog wrote:
30 Jan 2023, 12:52pm
Dr. Medulla wrote:
30 Jan 2023, 11:52am
matedog wrote:
30 Jan 2023, 11:38am
WestwayKid wrote:
30 Jan 2023, 10:59am

The 2020 "Defund the Police" Summer has passed and become a dirty word.
"Defund the Police" was terrible branding. Just awful.
Agreed. It invited misinterpretation, intentional and not. Black Lives Matter also makes it easy for opponents to twist it into *only* Black Lives Matter, instead of its intent of Black Lives Matter, too. And the insane alphabet stew of covering non-conventional gender identities. I support the desire for inclusivity in naming, but LGBTQQIP2SAA (I think that's the current version) suggests more zeal than intent to persuade.
I actually hadn't heard of that full LGBT acronym. Apparently the last A stands for ally. Come on, straight people don't need to be included.
But it's all about demonstrating inclusion. Everyone gets a letter in the acronym!

It reminds a bit of this Carlin rant:
"I never doubted myself for a minute for I knew that my monkey-strong bowels were girded with strength, like the loins of a dragon ribboned with fat and the opulence of buffalo dung." - Richard Nixon, Checkers Speech, abandoned early draft

Flex
User avatar
Mechano-Man of the Future
Posts: 35802
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:50pm
Location: The Information Superhighway!

Re: Police Misconduct: Tracked

Post by Flex »

matedog wrote:
30 Jan 2023, 12:58pm
Flex wrote:
30 Jan 2023, 12:25pm
matedog wrote:
30 Jan 2023, 11:38am
WestwayKid wrote:
30 Jan 2023, 10:59am

The 2020 "Defund the Police" Summer has passed and become a dirty word.
"Defund the Police" was terrible branding. Just awful.
I mean, that depends. I think it was weird, bad branding for people who wanted police reform but not abolition, but it's very accurate branding for actual police abolitionists. It's just a really, really unpopular position and it always struck me as totally delusional that a lot of abolitionists (at least ones I knew or followed) acted like it was a broadly popular position that wouldn't require absolutely mind boggling levels of outreach and persuasion.

I don't really understand people who didn't actually want to get rid of police using the term tho. Very counterproductive!
Then just say "abolish the police." I thought defund meant basically broad reform and reallocation of funding to services that are better suited to deal with things like mental health crises, etc.

I guess we are proving the point that the branding was bad if we still can't agree on what it means.
What happens when a police department has a budget of $0 (i.e. has been defunded)?

Addendum: yeah, we're not really disagreeing. I guess I just think the slogan is fine to mean what it says, it's when the pro-cop "reformists" decided it was a good expression for some reason that things got muddied.
Last edited by Flex on 30 Jan 2023, 1:11pm, edited 1 time in total.
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a bowl of soup
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a rolling hoop
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a ton of lead
Wiggle - you can raise the dead

Pex Lives!

Dr. Medulla
User avatar
Atheistic Epileptic
Posts: 115989
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
Location: Straight Banana, Idaho

Re: Police Misconduct: Tracked

Post by Dr. Medulla »

Flex wrote:
30 Jan 2023, 1:02pm
matedog wrote:
30 Jan 2023, 12:58pm
Flex wrote:
30 Jan 2023, 12:25pm
matedog wrote:
30 Jan 2023, 11:38am
WestwayKid wrote:
30 Jan 2023, 10:59am

The 2020 "Defund the Police" Summer has passed and become a dirty word.
"Defund the Police" was terrible branding. Just awful.
I mean, that depends. I think it was weird, bad branding for people who wanted police reform but not abolition, but it's very accurate branding for actual police abolitionists. It's just a really, really unpopular position and it always struck me as totally delusional that a lot of abolitionists (at least ones I knew or followed) acted like it was a broadly popular position that wouldn't require absolutely mind boggling levels of outreach and persuasion.

I don't really understand people who didn't actually want to get rid of police using the term tho. Very counterproductive!
Then just say "abolish the police." I thought defund meant basically broad reform and reallocation of funding to services that are better suited to deal with things like mental health crises, etc.

I guess we are proving the point that the branding was bad if we still can't agree on what it means.
What happens when a police department has a budget of $0 (i.e. has been defunded)?
It has to move in with its girlfriend?
"I never doubted myself for a minute for I knew that my monkey-strong bowels were girded with strength, like the loins of a dragon ribboned with fat and the opulence of buffalo dung." - Richard Nixon, Checkers Speech, abandoned early draft

matedog
User avatar
Purveyor of Hoyistic Thought
Posts: 25804
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 4:07pm
Location: 1995

Re: Police Misconduct: Tracked

Post by matedog »

Flex wrote:
30 Jan 2023, 1:02pm
matedog wrote:
30 Jan 2023, 12:58pm
Flex wrote:
30 Jan 2023, 12:25pm
matedog wrote:
30 Jan 2023, 11:38am
WestwayKid wrote:
30 Jan 2023, 10:59am

The 2020 "Defund the Police" Summer has passed and become a dirty word.
"Defund the Police" was terrible branding. Just awful.
I mean, that depends. I think it was weird, bad branding for people who wanted police reform but not abolition, but it's very accurate branding for actual police abolitionists. It's just a really, really unpopular position and it always struck me as totally delusional that a lot of abolitionists (at least ones I knew or followed) acted like it was a broadly popular position that wouldn't require absolutely mind boggling levels of outreach and persuasion.

I don't really understand people who didn't actually want to get rid of police using the term tho. Very counterproductive!
Then just say "abolish the police." I thought defund meant basically broad reform and reallocation of funding to services that are better suited to deal with things like mental health crises, etc.

I guess we are proving the point that the branding was bad if we still can't agree on what it means.
What happens when a police department has a budget of $0 (i.e. has been defunded)?
Well there is partial defunding and total defunding. Again, the slogan sucks.
Look, you have to establish context for these things. And I maintain that unless you appreciate the Fall of Constantinople, the Great Fire of London, and Mickey Mantle's fatalist alcoholism, live Freddy makes no sense. If you want to half-ass it, fine, go call Simon Schama to do the appendix.

Flex
User avatar
Mechano-Man of the Future
Posts: 35802
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:50pm
Location: The Information Superhighway!

Re: Police Misconduct: Tracked

Post by Flex »

matedog wrote:
30 Jan 2023, 1:11pm
Flex wrote:
30 Jan 2023, 1:02pm
matedog wrote:
30 Jan 2023, 12:58pm
Flex wrote:
30 Jan 2023, 12:25pm
matedog wrote:
30 Jan 2023, 11:38am


"Defund the Police" was terrible branding. Just awful.
I mean, that depends. I think it was weird, bad branding for people who wanted police reform but not abolition, but it's very accurate branding for actual police abolitionists. It's just a really, really unpopular position and it always struck me as totally delusional that a lot of abolitionists (at least ones I knew or followed) acted like it was a broadly popular position that wouldn't require absolutely mind boggling levels of outreach and persuasion.

I don't really understand people who didn't actually want to get rid of police using the term tho. Very counterproductive!
Then just say "abolish the police." I thought defund meant basically broad reform and reallocation of funding to services that are better suited to deal with things like mental health crises, etc.

I guess we are proving the point that the branding was bad if we still can't agree on what it means.
What happens when a police department has a budget of $0 (i.e. has been defunded)?
Well there is partial defunding and total defunding. Again, the slogan sucks.
If the "reformists" hadn't attached themselves to the slogan, would there really be any ambiguity about what it means? It's a fine slogan to mean 'get rid of the police" (it's actually the only logical reading of it! I mean, the word "partial" or any other conditional language is just read into it by people who want it to be something it doesn't imho), but yeah it's a bad slogan for the incremental reforms that most people are talking about (many of which INCREASE police budgets).

Addendum: I'm not arguing it's not a "bad" slogan. I'm just arguing it's bad because it actually HAS a pretty clear meaning: get rid of the police. Most regular people understand that - it's one of the reasons it's so incredibly unpopular! - and the liberal "reformists" hitching their wagon to such a radical slogan were incalculably idiotic.
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a bowl of soup
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a rolling hoop
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a ton of lead
Wiggle - you can raise the dead

Pex Lives!

Dr. Medulla
User avatar
Atheistic Epileptic
Posts: 115989
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
Location: Straight Banana, Idaho

Re: Police Misconduct: Tracked

Post by Dr. Medulla »

Flex wrote:
30 Jan 2023, 1:18pm
matedog wrote:
30 Jan 2023, 1:11pm
Flex wrote:
30 Jan 2023, 1:02pm
matedog wrote:
30 Jan 2023, 12:58pm
Flex wrote:
30 Jan 2023, 12:25pm


I mean, that depends. I think it was weird, bad branding for people who wanted police reform but not abolition, but it's very accurate branding for actual police abolitionists. It's just a really, really unpopular position and it always struck me as totally delusional that a lot of abolitionists (at least ones I knew or followed) acted like it was a broadly popular position that wouldn't require absolutely mind boggling levels of outreach and persuasion.

I don't really understand people who didn't actually want to get rid of police using the term tho. Very counterproductive!
Then just say "abolish the police." I thought defund meant basically broad reform and reallocation of funding to services that are better suited to deal with things like mental health crises, etc.

I guess we are proving the point that the branding was bad if we still can't agree on what it means.
What happens when a police department has a budget of $0 (i.e. has been defunded)?
Well there is partial defunding and total defunding. Again, the slogan sucks.
If the "reformists" hadn't attached themselves to the slogan, would there really be any ambiguity about what it means? It's a fine slogan to mean 'get rid of the police" (it's actually the only logical reading of it! I mean, the word "partial" or any other conditional language is just read into it by people who want it to be something it doesn't imho), but yeah it's a bad slogan for the incremental reforms that most people are talking about (many of which INCREASE police budgets).
If the aim is to abolish the police, there's your slogan—direct and demanding. Defund is both an ambiguous and weaselly word, describing process rather ambition.
"I never doubted myself for a minute for I knew that my monkey-strong bowels were girded with strength, like the loins of a dragon ribboned with fat and the opulence of buffalo dung." - Richard Nixon, Checkers Speech, abandoned early draft

Flex
User avatar
Mechano-Man of the Future
Posts: 35802
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:50pm
Location: The Information Superhighway!

Re: Police Misconduct: Tracked

Post by Flex »

I thought the problem was that too many people (correctly) believe defund the police means get rid of them. How is that too vague?
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a bowl of soup
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a rolling hoop
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a ton of lead
Wiggle - you can raise the dead

Pex Lives!

Dr. Medulla
User avatar
Atheistic Epileptic
Posts: 115989
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
Location: Straight Banana, Idaho

Re: Police Misconduct: Tracked

Post by Dr. Medulla »

Flex wrote:
30 Jan 2023, 1:29pm
I thought the problem was that too many people (correctly) believe defund the police means get rid of them. How is that too vague?
It's ambiguous because it invites others to seize it and say defund the police budget in areas they shouldn't handle (e.g., mental health crises). When the word choice describes a process, it invites competing ideas of the ends. "Ban the Bomb" or "Restrict Resources for Nuclear Weapons"?
"I never doubted myself for a minute for I knew that my monkey-strong bowels were girded with strength, like the loins of a dragon ribboned with fat and the opulence of buffalo dung." - Richard Nixon, Checkers Speech, abandoned early draft

matedog
User avatar
Purveyor of Hoyistic Thought
Posts: 25804
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 4:07pm
Location: 1995

Re: Police Misconduct: Tracked

Post by matedog »

Flex wrote:
30 Jan 2023, 1:29pm
I thought the problem was that too many people (correctly) believe defund the police means get rid of them. How is that too vague?
I'm not convinced that "Defund the Police" started out as synonymous with "Abolish the Police." Skimming the wikipedia entry (that's about the depth I can muster during work hours) seems to align with the general reform/not abolish take on the phrase that I understood. I also do remember a separate "abolish the police" slogan during 2020/2021 which further obfuscates the issue.
Look, you have to establish context for these things. And I maintain that unless you appreciate the Fall of Constantinople, the Great Fire of London, and Mickey Mantle's fatalist alcoholism, live Freddy makes no sense. If you want to half-ass it, fine, go call Simon Schama to do the appendix.

Flex
User avatar
Mechano-Man of the Future
Posts: 35802
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:50pm
Location: The Information Superhighway!

Re: Police Misconduct: Tracked

Post by Flex »

Dr. Medulla wrote:
30 Jan 2023, 1:38pm
Flex wrote:
30 Jan 2023, 1:29pm
I thought the problem was that too many people (correctly) believe defund the police means get rid of them. How is that too vague?
It's ambiguous because it invites others to seize it and say defund the police budget in areas they shouldn't handle (e.g., mental health crises). When the word choice describes a process, it invites competing ideas of the ends. "Ban the Bomb" or "Restrict Resources for Nuclear Weapons"?
Again, the proof seems to be I the pudding: America, correctly imho, believe defund the police means "get rid of the police." Nobody seems that confused. They just hate the idea of getting rid of the police!

Look, I don't even really disagree that the slogan could be better for the reasons you say I just don't think its massive unpopularity is because it's too vague. I think most people pretty much get it! And hate what it means! That's a huge hurdle that the movement needs to overcome and it worries me that the focus is just fiddling around with the slogan. Police abolitionism has a lot bigger hills to climb than just picking abolish vs defund for the t-shirts.
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a bowl of soup
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a rolling hoop
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a ton of lead
Wiggle - you can raise the dead

Pex Lives!

Flex
User avatar
Mechano-Man of the Future
Posts: 35802
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:50pm
Location: The Information Superhighway!

Re: Police Misconduct: Tracked

Post by Flex »

matedog wrote:
30 Jan 2023, 1:43pm
Flex wrote:
30 Jan 2023, 1:29pm
I thought the problem was that too many people (correctly) believe defund the police means get rid of them. How is that too vague?
I'm not convinced that "Defund the Police" started out as synonymous with "Abolish the Police." Skimming the wikipedia entry (that's about the depth I can muster during work hours) seems to align with the general reform/not abolish take on the phrase that I understood. I also do remember a separate "abolish the police" slogan during 2020/2021 which further obfuscates the issue.
They call themselves an abolitionist movement right on the website: https://defundthepolice.org/about/
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a bowl of soup
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a rolling hoop
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a ton of lead
Wiggle - you can raise the dead

Pex Lives!

Dr. Medulla
User avatar
Atheistic Epileptic
Posts: 115989
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
Location: Straight Banana, Idaho

Re: Police Misconduct: Tracked

Post by Dr. Medulla »

Flex wrote:
30 Jan 2023, 1:47pm
Dr. Medulla wrote:
30 Jan 2023, 1:38pm
Flex wrote:
30 Jan 2023, 1:29pm
I thought the problem was that too many people (correctly) believe defund the police means get rid of them. How is that too vague?
It's ambiguous because it invites others to seize it and say defund the police budget in areas they shouldn't handle (e.g., mental health crises). When the word choice describes a process, it invites competing ideas of the ends. "Ban the Bomb" or "Restrict Resources for Nuclear Weapons"?
Again, the proof seems to be I the pudding: America, correctly imho, believe defund the police means "get rid of the police." Nobody seems that confused. They just hate the idea of getting rid of the police!

Look, I don't even really disagree that the slogan could be better for the reasons you say I just don't think its massive unpopularity is because it's too vague. I think most people pretty much get it! And hate what it means! That's a huge hurdle that the movement needs to overcome and it worries me that the focus is just fiddling around with the slogan. Police abolitionism has a lot bigger hills to climb than just picking abolish vs defund for the t-shirts.
I think our difference is my focus on people who fall somewhere on the change side (my apologies for losing sight of this). The branding of the abolish movement is suitably vague that it invites reformists to claim the slogan for themselves and muddy the waters and make the whole thing seem ill-conceived.
"I never doubted myself for a minute for I knew that my monkey-strong bowels were girded with strength, like the loins of a dragon ribboned with fat and the opulence of buffalo dung." - Richard Nixon, Checkers Speech, abandoned early draft

Post Reply