No, if you mean the recent one called "Police" you are mistaken. At about 5:00 in he spends 6+ minutes talking about the decisions that put police in this posit

No, if you mean the recent one called "Police" you are mistaken. At about 5:00 in he spends 6+ minutes talking about the decisions that put police in this position. * "Look, clearly, the police are just one part of a larger system of inequality, and for tonight we're going to focus primarily on them" * Then spends the next few sentences talking about how TV and film have painted an extremely unrealistic picture of police in the US * The history of policing and the policies we created it based on (slave patrol) * The Jim Crow laws & segregation that drove policing * Racist voters that tried to keet regions white * The media's whitewashing of the civil rights movement * Nixon & Regan's drug war + broken window policing * Stop & frisk policy and how more than 3/4 were black / hispanic * Then the big bomb at 9:05: "And let's be clear here, Democrats were very much involved in that, from big city mayors all the way up to this guy [shows a supercut of Bill Clinton in '93 promising 100k more police on the streets in various speeches, then "another 50k more in high crime neighborhoods"]" * This all came hand in hand with cutting every social service possible and pushing all of the extra work onto police * "So, while we should absolutely be angry at the police right now, let's also be angry at the series of choices that left them as essentially the only public resource in some communities" So he spent around 15-20% of the total time making it incredibly clear that while this is a police problem not a police only problem. What I'm more interested in knowing is, are his facts wrong? Or maybe is he leaving out an entirely separate side of things that point to the real issue? That's what I always wonder in the back of my mind.