I’ve heard this claimed definition of defunding over and over, and it just feels like gaslighting or a distraction tactic. I still think defunding is an unaccep

I’ve heard this claimed definition of defunding over and over, and it just feels like gaslighting or a distraction tactic. I still think defunding is an unacceptable concept for multiple reasons: 1. Minorities want police. Not social workers, police. Progressives want to play the role of a white savior, but they ignore what minorities want and need, which means this whole push for defunding amounts to exploitation of minorities for political goals. 2. I find the rhetoric around police response to be hyperbolic. Your use of the word “bloodbath” feels that way to me. Use of force is rare, and unjust use of force is incredibly rare. The entire notion of defunding is disrupting an effective system to address a near non-existent problem based on a few heavily popularized anecdotal incidents. 3. The defund movement and abolish movement are the same. First off this is true in the literal sense since to “defund” is to stop all funding. Second, activists regularly claim they truly do mean abolish - at best they are attempting incremental steps towards that dangerous goal. Third, both reduced funding and complete defunding of police go hand in hand with other dangerous ideas like restorative justice policies in places like SF, the goal of which is to not enforce the law in order to reduce consequences (like prison time) in search of “equity”. I would reject any reduced funding policy that is part of this collection of related policies, so the semantic debate doesn’t feel particularly useful (for me).