3 ms·

I get that some vocal proponents mean “defund” in a very literal sense, but isn’t this always the case with these things? There is always a group on the fringe

I get that some vocal proponents mean “defund” in a very literal sense, but isn’t this always the case with these things? There is always a group on the fringe, regardless of political faction, that wants the most extreme version of a policy. The existence of such groups doesn’t mean that serious policy makers are actually on board with that extreme, nor do the majority of folks who support a more nuanced application of the policy (e.g. change how police are funded vs “defund”). So I hear you, and yes, those people exist, but giving too much credence to the extremist position and wielding it as a scary straw man against the movement is also problematic.

zepto 5y ago
It’s a position definitely represented by real policy makers, and that actual cities have attempted to implement. It’s not accurate to call it a straw man. The converse of your complaint is true - people pretending the extremes don’t have any power, and using the benign version of the phrase as cover. Who wouldn’t agree with channeling funds to more appropriate professionals to deal with non-criminal situations that the police are currently drawn into? The problem is not with this reasonable sounding policy objective. It’s that there are real policy makers who do mean abolish. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/opinion/sunday/floyd-abolish-defund-police.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/opinion/sunday/floyd-abol... The New York Times is not known for publishing ‘extremism’. It publishes mainstream opinions.
rayiner 5y ago
Even viewing the situation charitably, the ostensible reformers here jumped behind a slogan that literally sounds like “eliminate police funding.” It’s like getting behind a “shut down immigration” slogan then claiming you really mean to shut down family based immigration in favor of a point system. It’s not just bad messaging. Police reformers got behind an inflammatory and extreme slogan and realized after the fact that they had overplayed their hand and overestimated support for the extreme position.

zepto 5y ago

It’s a position definitely represented by real policy makers, and that actual cities have attempted to implement. It’s not accurate to call it a straw man. The converse of your complaint is true - people pretending the extremes don’t have any power, and using the benign version of the phrase as cover. Who wouldn’t agree with channeling funds to more appropriate professionals to deal with non-criminal situations that the police are currently drawn into? The problem is not with this reasonable sounding policy objective. It’s that there are real policy makers who do mean abolish. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/opinion/sunday/floyd-abolish-defund-police.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/opinion/sunday/floyd-abol... The New York Times is not known for publishing ‘extremism’. It publishes mainstream opinions.

rayiner 5y ago

Even viewing the situation charitably, the ostensible reformers here jumped behind a slogan that literally sounds like “eliminate police funding.” It’s like getting behind a “shut down immigration” slogan then claiming you really mean to shut down family based immigration in favor of a point system. It’s not just bad messaging. Police reformers got behind an inflammatory and extreme slogan and realized after the fact that they had overplayed their hand and overestimated support for the extreme position.