4 ms·

Thought about your reply a bit more. If the movement were "Demilitarize the police", then yes, that is absolutely something I could be in favor of. As it stan

Thought about your reply a bit more. If the movement were "Demilitarize the police", then yes, that is absolutely something I could be in favor of. As it stands, "Defund the police" is to me a weasel word version of "Abolish the police" and I honestly do think people are just being coy when they claim not to see that.

jjoonathan 6y ago
It's a weasel word if they want to get rid of the police. It's clickbait if they want to shift budgets. I honestly have no idea whether it's primarily one vs the other.
- shirakawasuna 6y ago
  It's not a PR campaign. It wasn't planned for maximum effect or focus grouped. It's just what caught on.
Zak 6y ago
Most people using the word "defund" mean to reduce the level of funding for police and spend more on other social services. One argument is that police are not well equipped to provide services to people who are having a mental health, relationship, or substance abuse crisis and not actively doing violence. A mental health nurse or social worker might be a more appropriate first responder in situations that are not primarily characterized by violence. There are a small but significant number of people in the current protests calling for policing as we know it to be abolished; they don't beat around the bush about it. The phrase "abolish the police" has 2.5 million google hits, a NYT op-ed, and a Wikipedia article.
- zaroth 6y ago
  Maybe they should carry signs that read “Fund social services” instead. The entire country has been through a traumatic event, coming at the heals of a massive opioid epidemic, I’m pretty sure it would be a unifying message that every American would support unequivocally. Notably these funds don’t need to come at the expense of police funding. We just dumped something like $5 trillion into a fire pit called COVID. There’s no lack of emergency funding for these programs if people demanded it.
- shirakawasuna 6y ago
  Defund also means balkanization of police duties. The police spend about 5% of their time on violent crime. They're also highly resistant to reforms and oversight. If we reduced police budgets by 80%, restricting their duties to those we consider necessary police work, they would be much smaller and easier to manage. The excess budget could go both to funding social services and to paying social workers, etc to do the other jobs that police currently do (and do badly).
diffeomorphism 6y ago
> If the movement were "Demilitarize the police", then yes, that is absolutely something I could be in favor of. It is. Great that you support it. > As it stands, "Defund the police" is to me a weasel word version of "Abolish the police" So you understood the phrase wrong and now you know better. TLDR: You support it but don't like the wording of the slogan.
- roenxi 6y ago
  There is a real risk in politics that people mean literally what they are saying. There is a situation where a group of people have together under the slogan "defund the police". There is a very high risk that if they get the power to do something they will, literally and only, defund the police. Not many people are reading policy documents. The point of unity in politics is usually the literal meaning of the words being used. Secret signals of "really we meant this other thing" tend not to work.
  - diffeomorphism 6y ago
    There is nothing "secret" or "other thing" about it. You seem to think that "defund" secretly means "abolish". It doesn't. It means defund.
    - roenxi 6y ago
      Defund can easily mean abolish; there isn't really a feasible way to run a police force if they can't pay salaries. It is a literal reading of the phrase and in line with what some (hopefully a tiny minority) of protesters have been asking for.
d0gbread 6y ago
Why fret so much over the language though, that's what I don't understand. I think most people, of any POV, would agree it's not the best phrase given that without explanation it means what a small minority wants. Move past it, to the issue.
- war1025 6y ago
  > Why fret so much over the language though Because impressions matter, and if you want to get buy-in from an already weary broader populace, you need to have clear messaging. Shouting "defund the police" in the middle of riots where innocent bystanders are attacked and businesses are looted is terrible messaging. BLM have overplayed their hand at this point and are on the cusp of real public backlash.
  - shirakawasuna 6y ago
    This is not a PR campaign and the protests and riots are not a public outreach effort. They are a demand coming from a position of pain and weariness.
    - war1025 6y ago
      > This is not a PR campaign and the protests and riots are not a public outreach effort Then they are utterly useless. The way you phrased it, the protests are nothing more than tantrums by oversized children. Tantrums should not be rewarded.
      - shirakawasuna 6y ago
        > Then they are utterly useless They've achieved many, though far from all, of their goals in various municipalities. Why do you believe that a PR campaign is the only protest of value? > The way you phrased it, the protests are nothing more than tantrums by oversized children. That is in no way implied from how I phrased it. Pain and weariness from racialized murders and intimidation by cops is not a childish tantrum and I hope you never have to endure that pain yourself. I do hope that you find the empathy to consider their position. > Tantrums should not be rewarded. Please treat them like people.

jjoonathan 6y ago

It's a weasel word if they want to get rid of the police. It's clickbait if they want to shift budgets. I honestly have no idea whether it's primarily one vs the other.

shirakawasuna 6y ago
It's not a PR campaign. It wasn't planned for maximum effect or focus grouped. It's just what caught on.

Zak 6y ago

Most people using the word "defund" mean to reduce the level of funding for police and spend more on other social services. One argument is that police are not well equipped to provide services to people who are having a mental health, relationship, or substance abuse crisis and not actively doing violence. A mental health nurse or social worker might be a more appropriate first responder in situations that are not primarily characterized by violence. There are a small but significant number of people in the current protests calling for policing as we know it to be abolished; they don't beat around the bush about it. The phrase "abolish the police" has 2.5 million google hits, a NYT op-ed, and a Wikipedia article.

zaroth 6y ago
Maybe they should carry signs that read “Fund social services” instead. The entire country has been through a traumatic event, coming at the heals of a massive opioid epidemic, I’m pretty sure it would be a unifying message that every American would support unequivocally. Notably these funds don’t need to come at the expense of police funding. We just dumped something like $5 trillion into a fire pit called COVID. There’s no lack of emergency funding for these programs if people demanded it.
shirakawasuna 6y ago
Defund also means balkanization of police duties. The police spend about 5% of their time on violent crime. They're also highly resistant to reforms and oversight. If we reduced police budgets by 80%, restricting their duties to those we consider necessary police work, they would be much smaller and easier to manage. The excess budget could go both to funding social services and to paying social workers, etc to do the other jobs that police currently do (and do badly).

diffeomorphism 6y ago

> If the movement were "Demilitarize the police", then yes, that is absolutely something I could be in favor of. It is. Great that you support it. > As it stands, "Defund the police" is to me a weasel word version of "Abolish the police" So you understood the phrase wrong and now you know better. TLDR: You support it but don't like the wording of the slogan.

roenxi 6y ago
There is a real risk in politics that people mean literally what they are saying. There is a situation where a group of people have together under the slogan "defund the police". There is a very high risk that if they get the power to do something they will, literally and only, defund the police. Not many people are reading policy documents. The point of unity in politics is usually the literal meaning of the words being used. Secret signals of "really we meant this other thing" tend not to work.
- diffeomorphism 6y ago
  There is nothing "secret" or "other thing" about it. You seem to think that "defund" secretly means "abolish". It doesn't. It means defund.
  - roenxi 6y ago
    Defund can easily mean abolish; there isn't really a feasible way to run a police force if they can't pay salaries. It is a literal reading of the phrase and in line with what some (hopefully a tiny minority) of protesters have been asking for.

d0gbread 6y ago

Why fret so much over the language though, that's what I don't understand. I think most people, of any POV, would agree it's not the best phrase given that without explanation it means what a small minority wants. Move past it, to the issue.

war1025 6y ago
> Why fret so much over the language though Because impressions matter, and if you want to get buy-in from an already weary broader populace, you need to have clear messaging. Shouting "defund the police" in the middle of riots where innocent bystanders are attacked and businesses are looted is terrible messaging. BLM have overplayed their hand at this point and are on the cusp of real public backlash.
- shirakawasuna 6y ago
  This is not a PR campaign and the protests and riots are not a public outreach effort. They are a demand coming from a position of pain and weariness.
  - war1025 6y ago
    > This is not a PR campaign and the protests and riots are not a public outreach effort Then they are utterly useless. The way you phrased it, the protests are nothing more than tantrums by oversized children. Tantrums should not be rewarded.
    - shirakawasuna 6y ago
      > Then they are utterly useless They've achieved many, though far from all, of their goals in various municipalities. Why do you believe that a PR campaign is the only protest of value? > The way you phrased it, the protests are nothing more than tantrums by oversized children. That is in no way implied from how I phrased it. Pain and weariness from racialized murders and intimidation by cops is not a childish tantrum and I hope you never have to endure that pain yourself. I do hope that you find the empathy to consider their position. > Tantrums should not be rewarded. Please treat them like people.