3 ms·

I don’t think the author understands what people mean when they say “defund the police”.

DiggyJohnson 4y ago
What do they mean? I’m guessing your answer is something like “reallocate police funds to other services”, but without your own explanation, this comment has little value other than signaling political belief.
- pydry 4y ago
  It means reallocating funds and responsibilities to social services. Or, firing entire police departments and building a new one from scratch with a different mandate - like the wildly successful Camden NJ experiment.
  - kbelder 4y ago
    It does mean that now, after a couple years of fervent back-tracking. That was not the initial implication nor inference.
    - ZeroGravitas 4y ago
      Do you have any evidence of that? I've always assumed it was just a snowclone of "Defund the IRS" and various other things that people wanted to show disapproval of. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snowclone https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snowclone
    - pydry 4y ago
      A lot of people have been trying to misdefine and mischaracterize it from the very start. Largely people who get angry at the idea that black lives might matter.
      - DiggyJohnson 4y ago
        > Largely people who get angry at the idea that black lives might matter. This is an incredibly disappointing thing to read. Just because you disagree with another on some policy or political notion or another does not justify the belief that they hold a differing view for the most despicable reason you can come up with. Does that make sense?
michaelt 4y ago
I read an interesting article blog post some time ago about "sanewashing" [1] Sanewashing is the process by which radical policies get watered down - as a political movement becomes more mainstream, every new member wants to be able to explain the movement to their parents, and so chooses a slightly less radical, easier to understand interpretation. This happens over and over again until you reach the point where the watered down beliefs are the majority, and the movement finds people with the original radical beliefs are an embarrassment to be silenced. "Defund The Police" isn't merely a confusing choice of name - the initial founders of the movement meant it literally, in the way an anarchist might. It's only as more people joined the movement that it's been sanewashed to mean "have more drug treatment, social workers and mental health crisis first responders, alongside the police" [1] https://tracingwoodgrains.medium.com/r-antiwork-a-tragedy-of-sanewashing-and-social-gentrification-56298af1c1a7 https://tracingwoodgrains.medium.com/r-antiwork-a-tragedy-of...
- josephcsible 4y ago
  I'd call it the motte-and-bailey fallacy. They really want the more radical version, but they pretend they mean the less radical version when people oppose them.

What do they mean? I’m guessing your answer is something like “reallocate police funds to other services”, but without your own explanation, this comment has little value other than signaling political belief.

pydry 4y ago
It means reallocating funds and responsibilities to social services. Or, firing entire police departments and building a new one from scratch with a different mandate - like the wildly successful Camden NJ experiment.
- kbelder 4y ago
  It does mean that now, after a couple years of fervent back-tracking. That was not the initial implication nor inference.
  - ZeroGravitas 4y ago
    Do you have any evidence of that? I've always assumed it was just a snowclone of "Defund the IRS" and various other things that people wanted to show disapproval of. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snowclone https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snowclone
  - pydry 4y ago
    A lot of people have been trying to misdefine and mischaracterize it from the very start. Largely people who get angry at the idea that black lives might matter.
    - DiggyJohnson 4y ago
      > Largely people who get angry at the idea that black lives might matter. This is an incredibly disappointing thing to read. Just because you disagree with another on some policy or political notion or another does not justify the belief that they hold a differing view for the most despicable reason you can come up with. Does that make sense?

michaelt 4y ago

I read an interesting article blog post some time ago about "sanewashing" [1] Sanewashing is the process by which radical policies get watered down - as a political movement becomes more mainstream, every new member wants to be able to explain the movement to their parents, and so chooses a slightly less radical, easier to understand interpretation. This happens over and over again until you reach the point where the watered down beliefs are the majority, and the movement finds people with the original radical beliefs are an embarrassment to be silenced. "Defund The Police" isn't merely a confusing choice of name - the initial founders of the movement meant it literally, in the way an anarchist might. It's only as more people joined the movement that it's been sanewashed to mean "have more drug treatment, social workers and mental health crisis first responders, alongside the police" [1] https://tracingwoodgrains.medium.com/r-antiwork-a-tragedy-of-sanewashing-and-social-gentrification-56298af1c1a7 https://tracingwoodgrains.medium.com/r-antiwork-a-tragedy-of...

josephcsible 4y ago
I'd call it the motte-and-bailey fallacy. They really want the more radical version, but they pretend they mean the less radical version when people oppose them.