3 ms·

FWIW, that’s a very politically loaded term. I would recommend avoiding it unless you intend to bait people into an unrelated conversation. I also think it’s n

FWIW, that’s a very politically loaded term. I would recommend avoiding it unless you intend to bait people into an unrelated conversation. I also think it’s not a very accurate analogy.

myself248 7y ago
What's inaccurate about it? My understanding is "Things looking bad allows people to assume that worse stuff will be tolerated". The way it was enforced seems to be where the political baggage comes in, but the fundamental theory shows up all over the place. If not identical, it at least seems closely adjacent. I'm curious to hear your perspective; what's wrong with the analogy?
cobbzilla 7y ago
It’s unfortunate that “broken window theory” has become synonymous with the awful and racist police tactics introduced in NYC. Broken window theory is real: imagine a random person in spotlessly clean city versus a city where there is trash everywhere. More people would litter in the latter city, I don’t think that is too controversial. Thus a run-down neighborhood with lots of broken windows will normalize behaviors that would be stigmatized elsewhere. The unfortunate part was when NY adopted “broken windows policing”, which is to go into those neighborhoods and make lots of arrests for petty crimes, as if replacing all the broken windows might somehow reduce crime. Of course this is pretty dumb, since entrenched normalization of deviance (decades of bad/discriminatory policy) can’t simply be fixed by zealous application of punitive measures.
- jlawson 7y ago
  >a run-down neighborhood with lots of broken windows will normalize behaviors that would be stigmatized elsewhere. Of course, but... >... as if replacing all the broken windows might somehow reduce crime. Of course this is pretty dumb Calling it dumb seems to contradict the first quote above... If broken windows normalize bad behaviors, less broken windows would seem to prevent normalizing those behaviors. >entrenched normalization of deviance (decades of bad/discriminatory policy) can’t simply be fixed by zealous application of punitive measures. Why not? Punishing deviance prevents the normalization of deviance. Curious, what would you think of broken windows policing as applied to high-crime white neighborhoods?
  - cobbzilla 7y ago
    Did you read TFA? Do we ensure airplane safety through aggressive punishment of all minor offenses? Why not? Perhaps any real solution involves something more thoughtful than attacking obviously visible symptoms of the problem.
  - Malician 7y ago
    No contradiction. You can have one system, one small part of that system being no broken windows, where windows are commonly broken. You can have another system with unbroken windows. Repairing the windows and punishing people for breaking them won't magically transform the first system into the second. In fact, it might actually make things worse, depending on how it is implemented. For example, if it's already common to break windows in an area for a wide range of reasons and you start fining broke people money they can't pay and throwing them in jail... you haven't saved the windows, just caused a lot of damage.
- lmm 7y ago
  > Broken window theory is real: imagine a random person in spotlessly clean city versus a city where there is trash everywhere. More people would litter in the latter city, I don’t think that is too controversial. Thus a run-down neighborhood with lots of broken windows will normalize behaviors that would be stigmatized elsewhere. Citation needed. There are plenty of counterintuitive things in sociology; the broken window theory sounds plausible but that in no way implies that it's true.
  - cobbzilla 7y ago
    Not citations but some empirical anecdata: visit SF, then visit Singapore. Or, notice how a relatively clean room in the house stays clean versus a somewhat messy room that degenerates into chaos.
    - michaelt 7y ago
      I think few people would dispute that places with more litter have more littering! But surely that's because littering causes litter?

FWIW, that’s a very politically loaded term. I would recommend avoiding it unless you intend to bait people into an unrelated conversation. I also think it’s not a very accurate analogy.

myself248 7y ago

What's inaccurate about it? My understanding is "Things looking bad allows people to assume that worse stuff will be tolerated". The way it was enforced seems to be where the political baggage comes in, but the fundamental theory shows up all over the place. If not identical, it at least seems closely adjacent. I'm curious to hear your perspective; what's wrong with the analogy?

cobbzilla 7y ago

It’s unfortunate that “broken window theory” has become synonymous with the awful and racist police tactics introduced in NYC. Broken window theory is real: imagine a random person in spotlessly clean city versus a city where there is trash everywhere. More people would litter in the latter city, I don’t think that is too controversial. Thus a run-down neighborhood with lots of broken windows will normalize behaviors that would be stigmatized elsewhere. The unfortunate part was when NY adopted “broken windows policing”, which is to go into those neighborhoods and make lots of arrests for petty crimes, as if replacing all the broken windows might somehow reduce crime. Of course this is pretty dumb, since entrenched normalization of deviance (decades of bad/discriminatory policy) can’t simply be fixed by zealous application of punitive measures.

jlawson 7y ago
>a run-down neighborhood with lots of broken windows will normalize behaviors that would be stigmatized elsewhere. Of course, but... >... as if replacing all the broken windows might somehow reduce crime. Of course this is pretty dumb Calling it dumb seems to contradict the first quote above... If broken windows normalize bad behaviors, less broken windows would seem to prevent normalizing those behaviors. >entrenched normalization of deviance (decades of bad/discriminatory policy) can’t simply be fixed by zealous application of punitive measures. Why not? Punishing deviance prevents the normalization of deviance. Curious, what would you think of broken windows policing as applied to high-crime white neighborhoods?
- cobbzilla 7y ago
  Did you read TFA? Do we ensure airplane safety through aggressive punishment of all minor offenses? Why not? Perhaps any real solution involves something more thoughtful than attacking obviously visible symptoms of the problem.
- Malician 7y ago
  No contradiction. You can have one system, one small part of that system being no broken windows, where windows are commonly broken. You can have another system with unbroken windows. Repairing the windows and punishing people for breaking them won't magically transform the first system into the second. In fact, it might actually make things worse, depending on how it is implemented. For example, if it's already common to break windows in an area for a wide range of reasons and you start fining broke people money they can't pay and throwing them in jail... you haven't saved the windows, just caused a lot of damage.
lmm 7y ago
> Broken window theory is real: imagine a random person in spotlessly clean city versus a city where there is trash everywhere. More people would litter in the latter city, I don’t think that is too controversial. Thus a run-down neighborhood with lots of broken windows will normalize behaviors that would be stigmatized elsewhere. Citation needed. There are plenty of counterintuitive things in sociology; the broken window theory sounds plausible but that in no way implies that it's true.
- cobbzilla 7y ago
  Not citations but some empirical anecdata: visit SF, then visit Singapore. Or, notice how a relatively clean room in the house stays clean versus a somewhat messy room that degenerates into chaos.
  - michaelt 7y ago
    I think few people would dispute that places with more litter have more littering! But surely that's because littering causes litter?