4 ms·
The slogan caters to both sides. When campaigning to extremists, it's a dog whistle and means exactly what the words mean (defund or "abolish" police by virtue
by zo1 5y ago
The slogan caters to both sides. When campaigning to extremists, it's a dog whistle and means exactly what the words mean (defund or "abolish" police by virtue of removing their funding). Simultaneously, it's also "oh it just means defund, not unfund" for the tame and middle-ground activists that see problems in over-funded policing as well as for the apologists that want to legitimize the extreme "unfund" part of the movement.
The problem at it's core is that politicians (including activists) and their platforms are not held accountable and their words are meaningless because they have no definition. Like just look at this thread. "Unfund" vs "Defund". How on earth are we supposed to infer that specific meaning and trust the other side to do so as well? It's like a recipe specifically designed for conflict and misunderstanding. Also a perfect recipe for back and forth definition debates like this one, instead of arguing about the core issues.
- amanaplanacanal 5y agoYeah, slogans are good for bumper stickers, or chanting at rallies, but but so good for reasoned debate. I suppose we could try to get rid of slogans entirely, but that doesn’t seem likely. I don’t know what a good alternative would look like.
- bluGill 5y agoIt is trivial for "the other side" to find a bad interpretation to any slogans. This is why slogan writers need to be very careful. In the case of "defund the police" the worst "other side" interpretation is easier to understand than what is intended. For other slogans "the other side" will make a point that looks contrived. It is possible for anyone to see that something is a bad slogan, and easy once you have hindsight. I have no idea how to write a good one.