Dear Fellow Republicans,
Right now you are probably still quietly celebrating President-elect Trump's surprise victory (or maybe more accurately, Hilary's defeat) and the electoral wave that solidified our majority in Congress and in state houses around the nation. As someone who has participated in the Republican caucuses and primaries the last three cycles, knocked doors, and donated to the party, I can understand your joy; we won. And as someone who is excited for a possible future that includes a lower tax burden, safety from foreign threats, a Supreme Court Justice who will protect life in the womb, and a re-imagining of our healthcare policy, I can understand your elation. But the last couple of days I haven't been able to share with you in that joy and that's why we need to talk.
If you're reading this post, that surely means you've been on social media where things have gotten ugly the past few days. People have expressed their hurt, their fears, their anxieties and have lashed out at the world. No doubt that you've felt the sting of people leveling charges that the way you voted makes YOU a bad person. That your vote means that you're a bigot. Racist. Sexist. Xenophobic. I want to reassure you that they're probably wrong. I've seen the ways you've honored women, spent your time in soup kitchens, bought Christmas gifts for families that can't afford them, and opened your homes to foreigners. Having voted for Trump doesn't automatically make you a "deplorable" any more than voting for Hilary makes one morally enlightened. But as someone who has been deeply wary of Trump's ascension from the very beginning and did my best to try and deny his nomination, I want to implore you not to be dismissive of the concerns of liberal America.
Does wanting to curb illegal immigration racist? No. But it's estimated that as many as 40% of illegal aliens came here legally and overstayed their work or student visas. So when Donald Trump opens his campaign by vilifying illegal residents from Mexico as rapists and murders but not the illegal residents from Sweden or Australia, that's racist. Latinos both legal and illegal know the anxiety of whether they'll be safe when people tell them to "go back to their country" and shout them down with threats.
Is having trustworthy judges important? Yes. But when Donald Trump implied a judge couldn't be impartial because of his ethnicity, that's racist. People of color know how exhausting it is to have to defend their credibility at school or work because of their skin.
Is keeping our cities safe a priority? Yes. But when Donald Trump promotes "Stop And Frisk" policing despite the fact that it has been found to target minorities and violate their 4th amendment rights all without actually having a meaningful impact on public safety, that's racist. Young black men fear that any given encounter with law enforcement could be fatal and they have a right to be afraid of a president who wants to up their interactions.
When Donald Trump threw one of his own supporters out of one of his rallies because he was black and was presumed to be a protester, that's racist.
Is keeping our country safe from terrorist paramount? Of course. But when Trump said we should ban immigration from Muslim countries and deny even taking Syrian refugees who are women and children because they still might be dangerous, that's racist.
When Trump insinuated that Megyn Kelly's criticisms of him were overly harsh because she was on her period, that's sexist. Every women knows what it's like to have their emphatic opinion dismissed because people assume she's on her period.
When Trump implied a former Miss Universe's weight disqualified her from being taken seriously, that's sexist. Most all women know the struggle of society tying their self-worth up in their weight.
When Trump insinuated that Clinton was unqualified despite being a lawyer, a former first lady, a US Senator, and Secretary of State, that's sexist. Many women have felt the hurt of being passed up for a promotion in favor of a lesser qualified male colleague.
When Trump defended himself against the video in which he bragged about sexually harassing women by saying it was just "locker room talk", that's sexist. Most women deal with sexual harassment on a weekly basis and know the pain of having their experiences being dismissed as "boys being boys" or being chastised for not having thicker skin.
The list could go on, but you get the idea. My point is this, voting for Trump doesn't automatically mean you are sexist or racist, but it absolutely means you voted for a man who is. There are hundreds of thousands of people who gleefully voted for him BECAUSE of his racist and sexist rhetoric, but that's not what worries liberals. Those assholes have always existed and will continue to be assholes, Trump or not. What liberal America is worried about is that there are millions upon millions more people whose vote communicated a profound apathy or active dismissivism to his racist and bigoted ways. And the fear comes from that sinking feeling that when those sexist and racist individuals fling their vitriol and threats, that maybe good people like you and me won't stand up for them.
For the longest time I've put up with the uglier elements of our party because I still believed that the soul of our party was rooted in freedom, small government, and social/fiscal responsibility. But with the rise of President-elect Trump, I seriously question whether or not the gravitational center of our party has become white supremacy and racial resentment. If that day ever comes when the party has truly lost it's soul, I will renounce my membership in a heartbeat.
That is why we need some introspection. We need to stand against the uglier elements in our own party and denounce them more strongly than our leaders have. If we are not willing to stand up for women or people of color when our neighbors or the president threaten them, then we are forced to confront the truth that maybe liberal America is right. Maybe we are racist. Maybe we are sexist. Maybe we are the bigots we've been accused of being. So as you live your life today, tomorrow, and the day after, let's not just say they are wrong. Let's prove them wrong.
Friday, November 11, 2016
Wednesday, July 6, 2016
A Millennial Manifesto
The fun thing about election years is that they forces everyone, from the partisan junkies to the apathetic, to participate in the public discourse around politics. During those talks, I've found it fascinating in discussions with my peers that there is a surprising amount of agreement that transcends traditional partisan lines. But just as common is a sense of frustration and anger, because here's the kicker: the issues that us Millennials agree on the most are the ones least represented by our top two candidates for president. Now, it seems the vast majority of Americans are at best underwhelmed and at worse scared out of their living minds by the nominations of Trump and Clinton. But Millennials especially so, as they were most resistant to supporting either Trump or Clinton during the primary process. As Millenials, we comprised both the base of the Sanders campaign and were the foremost leaders of the #NeverTrump movement. And because our efforts failed, we Millennials are sure to win the award three times running for most likely to stay away from the polls this November.
This election threatens to further disengage a generation that already feels disenfranchised by the two established parties and candidates, but it doesn't have to be that way. Millennials could be a powerful voting bloc if either party were savvy enough to at least pretend to care about the things we care about. That said, I think we need to proliferate our ideas and our story. We need a manifesto of the things we believe and why we believe them. Because the world that we have experienced has led to us to care about drastically different political positions than our parents and grandparents. And we Millennials are sick of being the national punching bag, because the older generation has consistently treated our political beliefs as products of our assumed laziness, vanity, naivete, and entitlement. That dismissive attitude has led to disastrously tone-deaf characterizations like this:
So with the understanding that Millennials are not monolithic (at least 30% of Millenials would probably vehemently disagree with any of these positions) and I'm not the most qualified person to be writing this, here are the ideas that we tend to agree on. Let's call it "A Millennial Manifesto".
WHO are we?
While defining clear generational bounds is never an exact science, the best way I have to define Millenials is the generation that was in grade school (K-12) at the turn of the millennia. That means that when I refer to Millennials, I'm roughly talking about people who are now between the ages of 21 to 35.
Economically, many of us grew up in the light of 90's prosperity and in the shadows of 00's recessions after the bursting of the internet bubble, 9/11 (yeah, we remember 9/11), and the bursting of the housing bubble. This economic whiplash has given us this weird sense that free market capitalism is both the best system for prosperity but also one with dangerous and inherent flaws and painful side-effects.
Socially, we've grown up in the most diverse America... ever? We are the most likely of any generation before us to have friends and partners of a different race, nationality, sexual orientation or religious affiliation. And that has made us more than simply tolerant of people who don't look, sound, or think like us; it means that we care deeply for them and it turns our stomachs when politicians use policies to marginalize a minority group as wedge issues.
There's more to our story but I think it's best told in response to issues we care about. Here are those issues:
WAR: What is it good for?
Millennials tend to be the generation most skeptical of foreign military interventions since the Vietnam War and for good reason. Our country was at war in Iraq and Afghanistan for almost half of our entire lives with little fruits to show from it. And we're tired. We're fatigued. We learned the hard way that there is no amount of lives, time, and money that can be invested into a military campaign to completely eradicate terrorism. The post-9/11 military interventions didn't work as well as we'd hoped. You see the devastation in a failing and flailing Afghani government and in the rise of ISIS in Iraq and Syria. That makes us extremely skeptical when Clinton wants to continue the Korean and Vietnam era military strategy of "containment and deterrence". Clinton would also have us continue to arm rebel groups that have a precarious history of either turning on us or letting those arms fall into the hands of our enemies. And let's just say that we're horrified by Trump's suggestion that we ought to use our military not just to kill suspected terrorists but kill their wives and children, too.
We love having the best and most well-equipped military in the world and understand it's necessity. We know there are times that we need to use it. But you'll have to forgive us that we've only witnessed the limits of our military power as a hammer in a world that isn't made up of nails. We think it's a waste to continue to spend more and more money on a military that is already funded better than the next ten highest countries combined when we're running huge deficits and struggling to maintain the efficacy of programs that benefit our most vulnerable in our society.
So when we call for less military intervention, less spending, and more diplomacy, understand that we are not trying to torpedo our security. We are simply trying to be pragmatic knowing full-well the realities and limitations of even the strongest military in the current state of the world.
MONEY: Times have been tough and that's made us simultaneously fiscally conservative and revolutionary
We are the generation that felt the brunt of the Great Recession. Most of us were just cracking into the labor market after the housing bubble popped and sent waves throughout the world and essentially tanked the global economy. It meant that many of us faced conditions in which we were laid off from our first jobs or were forced to compete with people with more experience for entry-level pay. It meant that the privileged among us had to take unpaid internships to get our foot in the door. And for those of us that couldn't afford to not to get paid, we took jobs making coffee, delivering pizzas, or waiting tables even after getting a four year degree. But worse of all, for those of us that didn't go to or finish college, Millennials were often forced to compete for unskilled work with people who were way overqualified.
We tend to be more conservative with our money as it's often been tight for us. Thus, we tend to recoil at a government that overspends it's means and seeks to raise taxes on the lower and middle class. We're the best savers since our grandparents who grew up in the shadow of the Great Depression and expect as much from our government.
But conversely, many of us have a revolutionary spirit about the safeguards on our economy. We saw the greed and stupidity of Wall Street and money lenders tank our economy only to then watch those same banks and firms get bailed out because they were "too big to fail" while the rest of us got hung out to dry. As Michael Lewis noted in his book The Big Short after the 2008 collapse, sometimes it is difficult to tell with dangerous investing where the stupidity ends and the criminality begins. So instead of making excuses we're ready for policy that includes a more regulated Wall Street and banking industry.
We've seen the wealth in our nation rebound but are angry that this new wealth is not reflected in increased wages for the common people. The wealth of the top 1% of income earners has soared while those in the lowest quartile of our economy are poorer than the previous generation (see Occupy Wall Street movement). To be concise, "trickle down economics" was a bold faced lie that many of us that are conservative and still vote Republican refuse to believe anymore.
Even those of us that hate the thought of new taxes are not so ready to oppose raising taxes on the wealthy (or at the very least closing their multitude of tax breaks). Millenials have experienced a business culture in which people are compensated as minimally as possible and treated like assets and not compensated generously as family like many of our grandparents were. Too many large employers seek to squeeze water (profits) from stones (employees) and have forgotten the lesson of Henry Ford who raised wages for his factory employees knowing the duality we possess as producers and consumers.
We know communism doesn't work but our nation is forcing many of us to embrace some of the tenants of democratic socialism (see Bernie Sanders). We have learned the hard way through all these economic whiplashes that we will never share in their prosperity, but will always share in their misery.
EDUCATION: The tuition is too damn high!
That's not to say anything yet of the enormous amounts of debt it took many of us to get our educations. College tuition has risen at nearly triple the rate of inflation (but has suspiciously not been going to professors). So unlike our parents, it was nearly impossible to pay for college by working at the same time. The average Millennial graduated with anywhere from $15,000 to $30,000 in student loan debt. Most of us didn't buy into Bernie Sander's "free college" promise, but you better believe it resonated as a significant issue for many of us. As post-secondary education becomes as necessary in our economy today as finishing high school was for our parents generation, we're willing to talk about how we might increase investment in higher ed.
CLIMATE CHANGE: It's happening, okay?
We are a generation that loves science and respects scientists. We are a generation that grew up on Bill Nye and we follow Neil DeGrasse Tyson on Twitter. We're just as likely to have read Charles Darwin as Charles Dickens. That means we know what the Greenhouse Effect is and know that man-made carbon dioxide emissions are contributing factors. We know that every decade since the 60's has been warmer than the last and unless there is another major volcanic eruption that pores sulfur into the air, that trend will continue. We trust when 97% of climate scientists say: Yeah, it's a thing.
We do hate the hyperbolic ways in which the issue is debated on both sides, but that doesn't make it any less concerning. No, we don't believe Miami will be underwater by 2025. No, we don't all believe that every bad weather event is linked to climate change. Yes, Al Gore is an idiot. But it isn't helpful when our grandparents say, "So much for global warming, eh?" every time a snowflake hits the ground.
Here is what's real. The earth is warming on a decade by decade basis. Glaciers are disappearing. The ice caps are melting. Droughts are more frequent. Heat related deaths are on the rise in countries around the world.
So hopefully you understand our palpable frustration when coal, gas, and electric companies lobby politicians to thwart efforts to make renewable energy sources more accessible and prevalent. Most of us don't believe that we should instantly ban coal and gas, but coal mining and gas extraction techniques like fracking are doing irreparable harm to our environment. We don't think it is asking too much to see them curbed. And yes, we do believe those that contribute the most pollution should have to pay for it even if that means instituting a carbon tax.
We are open to a discussion on how to strike a balance between environmental regulations and pro-business policy options/economic trade-offs. But what we do know is that our current state does not reflect that balance.
SOCIAL JUSTICE: Immigration and Policing
Remember when I said we're the most likely generation to have friends and partners that don't look like us? Well, that's because 40% of us are non-white meaning that almost all of us have either experienced institutional racism at the hands of law enforcement or are friends with someone who has. That means we're turned off by the heavy-handed policies of ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) and we're generally in favor of greater accountability of our law enforcement when they shoot civilians
Over 70% of us believe that immigration is good for our economy and our society. We've met undocumented people and don't see them as any less American than we are. Don't get me wrong, we want people to come here legally. But we also understand that's not a likely reality for those who are not white or well-educated. The demand for people to come here for opportunity is magnitudes higher than the amount of people they let come here legally. Therefore, we can't blame people for trying to work around the system. We believe it's time for true immigration reform that allows more people to come and with lower barriers to entry. We also desperately favor a change in the rate in which our neighbors and friends are deported.
Suffice it to say, Trump's entire campaign is based on being the antithesis to these ideas. But at least he is transparent with his ideals. While Clinton's rhetoric has indicted she'd like to see a pathway to citizenship and keep even undocumented families that are here together, her record in public service has indicated the opposite. While she was Senator, she voted along with the majority for an expensive and ineffectual border fence (fence... wall... big difference, right?). And as Secretary of State, she used none of her influence in the administration to curb the increasing rate of non-criminal deportations.
As for our police force, everyone wants to feel safe, secure and protected. But the common occurrence of officers killing civilians (often unarmed) without consequences disturbs and enrages us. The names Trayvon Martin, John Crawford, Sandra Bland, Eric Garner, Freddy Gray, Walter Scott, Alton Sterling, Philando Castile, and Tamir Rice are burned into our hearts. We're still divided in our support for the Black Lives Matter movement, but we're more likely to support their policy recommendations including demilitarizing our police forces, changes to our judicial system such that police are not given carte blanche to use force, and seeing a necessity to have community oversight of precincts.
INTERNET: It's our lifeblood
We have been called the first generation of "digital natives". We have had greater access to computers at a younger age than any generation before us. For example, we were taught to look up books at the library on the computer and not on index cards. We grew up having to type out our papers on Microsoft Word and learning to source our English papers with web media. We learned to socialize on AOL instant messenger and Facebook (who doesn't remember this heavenly sound?). Many of our first jobs included titles such as "web designer" and "social media coordinator". We look to Netflix, Youtube, Hulu, and Facebook to entertain us in our downtime.
All this means that the internet is more than just a tool; it's often an inseparable part of our lives. Our deftness with it is often our most marketable job skill. It is our source of entertainment and socialization.
That said, you should understand why we bristle when our ability to freely and fairly access the internet sites we use is threatened by those who'd like to end Net Neutrality. And we get defensive when our (relative) privacy on the web is threatened by the NSA which is constantly collecting and sifting through our personal communications. It's amazing how fast people switch from a place of apathy about domestic spying (because "hey, I'm not a terrorist") to being adamantly against it when they find out that NSA workers are passing around the photos we send to our loved ones.
Trump is firmly opposed to Net Neutrality under the misguided belief that it will censor conservative web content (spoiler alert: Net Neutrality actually allows unrestricted access to conservative punditry). While Clinton has come out with lukewarm favor for Net Neutrality, she continues to support an unchecked NSA. For two people whose ages 70 and 68 respectively, it doesn't make sense that people who primarily represent a demographic that doesn't even know what HTML is and struggle to use their smartphones for anything but making phone calls should be in charge of setting policy for the internet and technology of the next generation.
GAY? Fine by me
Although gay marriage has officially had it's day in the Supreme Court and won, people like Kim Davis, bakeries in Colorado, and (for awhile) the collective legislative body of the state of Alabama have still been know to fight against it. As Millennials, we think they're nuts. The vast majority of us either strongly believe that marriage equality is a civil rights issue or are apathetic enough to know that allowing two dudes to don tuxes and say "I do" isn't going to bring about the apocalypse. In every state that legalized gay marriage before the Supreme Court decision, you better believe we were the ones that allowed it to happen.
We grew up knowing people that were gay and transgender and loving them as our brothers and sisters. We're less likely to take Leviticus literally (check out all our tattoos! And boy do we love bacon...). We we grew up knowing that not all queer people have HIV and that it can't be transferred through fist-bumps.
You want to married to the person you love? Great! You want to use a bathroom that fits your gender identity? Go ahead. But it's time to end the culture war in our state legislatures and on the House floor, deal?
Conclusion
These are things we tend to agree on. This list isn't exhaustive, nor is in some magical order of how much we care about each issue. But as far as we can tell, these are also the issues most neglected by the two people most likely to be sitting in the Oval office a year from now. Let me know what you think of this list. Is there anything I missed? Anything that is more nuanced than I made it sound? Leave your comments below.
 |
| Can we call for a redo? |
 |
| Thank you for that ringing endorsement TIME! |
WHO are we?
While defining clear generational bounds is never an exact science, the best way I have to define Millenials is the generation that was in grade school (K-12) at the turn of the millennia. That means that when I refer to Millennials, I'm roughly talking about people who are now between the ages of 21 to 35.
Economically, many of us grew up in the light of 90's prosperity and in the shadows of 00's recessions after the bursting of the internet bubble, 9/11 (yeah, we remember 9/11), and the bursting of the housing bubble. This economic whiplash has given us this weird sense that free market capitalism is both the best system for prosperity but also one with dangerous and inherent flaws and painful side-effects.
Socially, we've grown up in the most diverse America... ever? We are the most likely of any generation before us to have friends and partners of a different race, nationality, sexual orientation or religious affiliation. And that has made us more than simply tolerant of people who don't look, sound, or think like us; it means that we care deeply for them and it turns our stomachs when politicians use policies to marginalize a minority group as wedge issues.
There's more to our story but I think it's best told in response to issues we care about. Here are those issues:
WAR: What is it good for?
Millennials tend to be the generation most skeptical of foreign military interventions since the Vietnam War and for good reason. Our country was at war in Iraq and Afghanistan for almost half of our entire lives with little fruits to show from it. And we're tired. We're fatigued. We learned the hard way that there is no amount of lives, time, and money that can be invested into a military campaign to completely eradicate terrorism. The post-9/11 military interventions didn't work as well as we'd hoped. You see the devastation in a failing and flailing Afghani government and in the rise of ISIS in Iraq and Syria. That makes us extremely skeptical when Clinton wants to continue the Korean and Vietnam era military strategy of "containment and deterrence". Clinton would also have us continue to arm rebel groups that have a precarious history of either turning on us or letting those arms fall into the hands of our enemies. And let's just say that we're horrified by Trump's suggestion that we ought to use our military not just to kill suspected terrorists but kill their wives and children, too.
We love having the best and most well-equipped military in the world and understand it's necessity. We know there are times that we need to use it. But you'll have to forgive us that we've only witnessed the limits of our military power as a hammer in a world that isn't made up of nails. We think it's a waste to continue to spend more and more money on a military that is already funded better than the next ten highest countries combined when we're running huge deficits and struggling to maintain the efficacy of programs that benefit our most vulnerable in our society.
So when we call for less military intervention, less spending, and more diplomacy, understand that we are not trying to torpedo our security. We are simply trying to be pragmatic knowing full-well the realities and limitations of even the strongest military in the current state of the world.
 |
| For better or worse, this is us. |
MONEY: Times have been tough and that's made us simultaneously fiscally conservative and revolutionary
We are the generation that felt the brunt of the Great Recession. Most of us were just cracking into the labor market after the housing bubble popped and sent waves throughout the world and essentially tanked the global economy. It meant that many of us faced conditions in which we were laid off from our first jobs or were forced to compete with people with more experience for entry-level pay. It meant that the privileged among us had to take unpaid internships to get our foot in the door. And for those of us that couldn't afford to not to get paid, we took jobs making coffee, delivering pizzas, or waiting tables even after getting a four year degree. But worse of all, for those of us that didn't go to or finish college, Millennials were often forced to compete for unskilled work with people who were way overqualified.
We tend to be more conservative with our money as it's often been tight for us. Thus, we tend to recoil at a government that overspends it's means and seeks to raise taxes on the lower and middle class. We're the best savers since our grandparents who grew up in the shadow of the Great Depression and expect as much from our government.
We've seen the wealth in our nation rebound but are angry that this new wealth is not reflected in increased wages for the common people. The wealth of the top 1% of income earners has soared while those in the lowest quartile of our economy are poorer than the previous generation (see Occupy Wall Street movement). To be concise, "trickle down economics" was a bold faced lie that many of us that are conservative and still vote Republican refuse to believe anymore.
Even those of us that hate the thought of new taxes are not so ready to oppose raising taxes on the wealthy (or at the very least closing their multitude of tax breaks). Millenials have experienced a business culture in which people are compensated as minimally as possible and treated like assets and not compensated generously as family like many of our grandparents were. Too many large employers seek to squeeze water (profits) from stones (employees) and have forgotten the lesson of Henry Ford who raised wages for his factory employees knowing the duality we possess as producers and consumers.
We know communism doesn't work but our nation is forcing many of us to embrace some of the tenants of democratic socialism (see Bernie Sanders). We have learned the hard way through all these economic whiplashes that we will never share in their prosperity, but will always share in their misery.
EDUCATION: The tuition is too damn high!
That's not to say anything yet of the enormous amounts of debt it took many of us to get our educations. College tuition has risen at nearly triple the rate of inflation (but has suspiciously not been going to professors). So unlike our parents, it was nearly impossible to pay for college by working at the same time. The average Millennial graduated with anywhere from $15,000 to $30,000 in student loan debt. Most of us didn't buy into Bernie Sander's "free college" promise, but you better believe it resonated as a significant issue for many of us. As post-secondary education becomes as necessary in our economy today as finishing high school was for our parents generation, we're willing to talk about how we might increase investment in higher ed.
CLIMATE CHANGE: It's happening, okay?
We are a generation that loves science and respects scientists. We are a generation that grew up on Bill Nye and we follow Neil DeGrasse Tyson on Twitter. We're just as likely to have read Charles Darwin as Charles Dickens. That means we know what the Greenhouse Effect is and know that man-made carbon dioxide emissions are contributing factors. We know that every decade since the 60's has been warmer than the last and unless there is another major volcanic eruption that pores sulfur into the air, that trend will continue. We trust when 97% of climate scientists say: Yeah, it's a thing.
 |
| Bill! Bill! Bill! |
We do hate the hyperbolic ways in which the issue is debated on both sides, but that doesn't make it any less concerning. No, we don't believe Miami will be underwater by 2025. No, we don't all believe that every bad weather event is linked to climate change. Yes, Al Gore is an idiot. But it isn't helpful when our grandparents say, "So much for global warming, eh?" every time a snowflake hits the ground.
Here is what's real. The earth is warming on a decade by decade basis. Glaciers are disappearing. The ice caps are melting. Droughts are more frequent. Heat related deaths are on the rise in countries around the world.
So hopefully you understand our palpable frustration when coal, gas, and electric companies lobby politicians to thwart efforts to make renewable energy sources more accessible and prevalent. Most of us don't believe that we should instantly ban coal and gas, but coal mining and gas extraction techniques like fracking are doing irreparable harm to our environment. We don't think it is asking too much to see them curbed. And yes, we do believe those that contribute the most pollution should have to pay for it even if that means instituting a carbon tax.
We are open to a discussion on how to strike a balance between environmental regulations and pro-business policy options/economic trade-offs. But what we do know is that our current state does not reflect that balance.
SOCIAL JUSTICE: Immigration and Policing
Remember when I said we're the most likely generation to have friends and partners that don't look like us? Well, that's because 40% of us are non-white meaning that almost all of us have either experienced institutional racism at the hands of law enforcement or are friends with someone who has. That means we're turned off by the heavy-handed policies of ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) and we're generally in favor of greater accountability of our law enforcement when they shoot civilians
Over 70% of us believe that immigration is good for our economy and our society. We've met undocumented people and don't see them as any less American than we are. Don't get me wrong, we want people to come here legally. But we also understand that's not a likely reality for those who are not white or well-educated. The demand for people to come here for opportunity is magnitudes higher than the amount of people they let come here legally. Therefore, we can't blame people for trying to work around the system. We believe it's time for true immigration reform that allows more people to come and with lower barriers to entry. We also desperately favor a change in the rate in which our neighbors and friends are deported.
Suffice it to say, Trump's entire campaign is based on being the antithesis to these ideas. But at least he is transparent with his ideals. While Clinton's rhetoric has indicted she'd like to see a pathway to citizenship and keep even undocumented families that are here together, her record in public service has indicated the opposite. While she was Senator, she voted along with the majority for an expensive and ineffectual border fence (fence... wall... big difference, right?). And as Secretary of State, she used none of her influence in the administration to curb the increasing rate of non-criminal deportations.
As for our police force, everyone wants to feel safe, secure and protected. But the common occurrence of officers killing civilians (often unarmed) without consequences disturbs and enrages us. The names Trayvon Martin, John Crawford, Sandra Bland, Eric Garner, Freddy Gray, Walter Scott, Alton Sterling, Philando Castile, and Tamir Rice are burned into our hearts. We're still divided in our support for the Black Lives Matter movement, but we're more likely to support their policy recommendations including demilitarizing our police forces, changes to our judicial system such that police are not given carte blanche to use force, and seeing a necessity to have community oversight of precincts.
INTERNET: It's our lifeblood
We have been called the first generation of "digital natives". We have had greater access to computers at a younger age than any generation before us. For example, we were taught to look up books at the library on the computer and not on index cards. We grew up having to type out our papers on Microsoft Word and learning to source our English papers with web media. We learned to socialize on AOL instant messenger and Facebook (who doesn't remember this heavenly sound?). Many of our first jobs included titles such as "web designer" and "social media coordinator". We look to Netflix, Youtube, Hulu, and Facebook to entertain us in our downtime.
All this means that the internet is more than just a tool; it's often an inseparable part of our lives. Our deftness with it is often our most marketable job skill. It is our source of entertainment and socialization.
That said, you should understand why we bristle when our ability to freely and fairly access the internet sites we use is threatened by those who'd like to end Net Neutrality. And we get defensive when our (relative) privacy on the web is threatened by the NSA which is constantly collecting and sifting through our personal communications. It's amazing how fast people switch from a place of apathy about domestic spying (because "hey, I'm not a terrorist") to being adamantly against it when they find out that NSA workers are passing around the photos we send to our loved ones.
Trump is firmly opposed to Net Neutrality under the misguided belief that it will censor conservative web content (spoiler alert: Net Neutrality actually allows unrestricted access to conservative punditry). While Clinton has come out with lukewarm favor for Net Neutrality, she continues to support an unchecked NSA. For two people whose ages 70 and 68 respectively, it doesn't make sense that people who primarily represent a demographic that doesn't even know what HTML is and struggle to use their smartphones for anything but making phone calls should be in charge of setting policy for the internet and technology of the next generation.
GAY? Fine by me
Although gay marriage has officially had it's day in the Supreme Court and won, people like Kim Davis, bakeries in Colorado, and (for awhile) the collective legislative body of the state of Alabama have still been know to fight against it. As Millennials, we think they're nuts. The vast majority of us either strongly believe that marriage equality is a civil rights issue or are apathetic enough to know that allowing two dudes to don tuxes and say "I do" isn't going to bring about the apocalypse. In every state that legalized gay marriage before the Supreme Court decision, you better believe we were the ones that allowed it to happen.
We grew up knowing people that were gay and transgender and loving them as our brothers and sisters. We're less likely to take Leviticus literally (check out all our tattoos! And boy do we love bacon...). We we grew up knowing that not all queer people have HIV and that it can't be transferred through fist-bumps.
 |
| MJ got the memo about fist-bumps being okay. |
Conclusion
These are things we tend to agree on. This list isn't exhaustive, nor is in some magical order of how much we care about each issue. But as far as we can tell, these are also the issues most neglected by the two people most likely to be sitting in the Oval office a year from now. Let me know what you think of this list. Is there anything I missed? Anything that is more nuanced than I made it sound? Leave your comments below.
Friday, March 4, 2016
Re: Re: Republican Caucus
You raise some excellent points Mike and I'd like to touch down a few of them for clarification from my first novel of a post.
1) "Rather, they are voting for him because they feel that GOP leadership has not done enough to fulfill their promise to stop Obama." -- That mentality is the entire problem with the current GOP! That statement alone is my entire argument. Their entire platform is to repeal Obama's work without offering ANY viable solutions. And what exactly is the GOP trying to stop? This is where I need you, my conservative friend, to explain WHAT Obama has done that is so horrific that it needs to be rectified. Because in my eyes we've had economic growth for the last eight years that EXCEEDS the Republican golden boy, Reagan, who's widely considered the best modern economic president of our time. He has implemented the Affordable Care Act, although imperfect, is up and working and has successfully decreased the uninsured rate to below 10%. The USA has not entered into any more wars during his tenure and has even removed troops from countries we had previously been occupying. Not to mention the enormous social justice strides our nation has taken under his presidency in regards to the BGLTQ community. And if nothing else, he will surely be renowned as the best historical President in regards to climate change.
2) "Anxieties of conservatives are more legitimate than you'd like to admit." -- You talked about the rise of ISIS, the Benghazi attack, and the Iran nuclear deal. First off, the fact that Obama didn't get more praise for his handling of the nuclear deal is beyond me. Here's a quick "too long, didn't read" (TL;DR) of the deal that NPR published. So should the US really be worried about the Iran nuclear deal? The short answer is no, we shouldn't be. Secondly, the threat of ISIS attacking civilians on US soil is far smaller than the chance of the US killing civilians in Iraq. Since 2003 our presence in Iraq has caused the death of over 150,00 citizens and the displacement of over 2.8 million families. So to think the damage/turmoil we have caused in the region didn't play a role in the growth of ISIS would be incredibly naive. Conversely, less than 3,000 US civilians have died from Iraqi related terrorism on US soil. So if conservatives are really worried about being attacked by terrorists on US soil, it's a good thing their representatives have protected their second amendment rights so well so that they can defend themselves. I feel far more sympathy for the Iraqi/Syrian families that have actually had to go through trauma than I do for the Republican voters that have to get a prescription for Xanax for their terrorist anxiety. That came off harsher than intended, but you understand the point.
3) "A libertarian challenger is certainly not the answer." -- Okay, you got me here, but if there was a year for a younger version of Ron Paul to run and actually have his ideas heard, it would be this year! We already had over 10 candidates in the primaries, what's one more?!
1) "Rather, they are voting for him because they feel that GOP leadership has not done enough to fulfill their promise to stop Obama." -- That mentality is the entire problem with the current GOP! That statement alone is my entire argument. Their entire platform is to repeal Obama's work without offering ANY viable solutions. And what exactly is the GOP trying to stop? This is where I need you, my conservative friend, to explain WHAT Obama has done that is so horrific that it needs to be rectified. Because in my eyes we've had economic growth for the last eight years that EXCEEDS the Republican golden boy, Reagan, who's widely considered the best modern economic president of our time. He has implemented the Affordable Care Act, although imperfect, is up and working and has successfully decreased the uninsured rate to below 10%. The USA has not entered into any more wars during his tenure and has even removed troops from countries we had previously been occupying. Not to mention the enormous social justice strides our nation has taken under his presidency in regards to the BGLTQ community. And if nothing else, he will surely be renowned as the best historical President in regards to climate change.
2) "Anxieties of conservatives are more legitimate than you'd like to admit." -- You talked about the rise of ISIS, the Benghazi attack, and the Iran nuclear deal. First off, the fact that Obama didn't get more praise for his handling of the nuclear deal is beyond me. Here's a quick "too long, didn't read" (TL;DR) of the deal that NPR published. So should the US really be worried about the Iran nuclear deal? The short answer is no, we shouldn't be. Secondly, the threat of ISIS attacking civilians on US soil is far smaller than the chance of the US killing civilians in Iraq. Since 2003 our presence in Iraq has caused the death of over 150,00 citizens and the displacement of over 2.8 million families. So to think the damage/turmoil we have caused in the region didn't play a role in the growth of ISIS would be incredibly naive. Conversely, less than 3,000 US civilians have died from Iraqi related terrorism on US soil. So if conservatives are really worried about being attacked by terrorists on US soil, it's a good thing their representatives have protected their second amendment rights so well so that they can defend themselves. I feel far more sympathy for the Iraqi/Syrian families that have actually had to go through trauma than I do for the Republican voters that have to get a prescription for Xanax for their terrorist anxiety. That came off harsher than intended, but you understand the point.
3) "A libertarian challenger is certainly not the answer." -- Okay, you got me here, but if there was a year for a younger version of Ron Paul to run and actually have his ideas heard, it would be this year! We already had over 10 candidates in the primaries, what's one more?!
Thursday, March 3, 2016
RE: Republican Caucus
I know you set me up for a similarly inspired rant about the Democratic Caucus (and I'll get there), but there is far too many things in your previous post that need to be addressed first.
Yes, Donald Trump is the front-runner. And yes, the math is on his side as most likely to win the nomination. As someone who participated in the Republican Party caucuses this past Tuesday as a vocal leader of the #NotTrump coalition, I understand and share your frustration with Trump's candidacy. However, I think you deeply and fundamentally misunderstand the conservative mind-set which has led to his front-runner status.
If Trump supporters are voting for him because they believed the GOP failed during the era of President Obama, it is not because of a lack of ingenuity or smart policy ideas. Rather, they are voting for him because they feel that GOP leadership has not done enough to fulfill their promise to stop Obama. Just look at who is running just behind Trump in the delegate count. How else can you explain Senator Ted Cruz being the closest person to ascending past Trump? Cruz's signature achievements are his failed attempts to shutdown the entire government over Planned Parenthood funding and funding for the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare).
During the past four years, Republicans have watched the rise of ISIS, the attacks on Paris, an attack on American consulate (Benghazi), and a nuclear deal with Iran happen. All of these events have resurrected post 9/11 anxieties about the security of our country. On the domestic front, people have felt threatened by illegal aliens and riots/police protests. And economically, people's wages are still largely stagnant. And Obama's signature achievement, while granting some people with healthcare who were shut out of the market ten years ago, has done nothing to stem the skyrocketing costs that the majority of Americans are paying for health insurance. You may accuse the GOP of fear mongering, but the anxieties of conservatives are more legitimate than you'd like to admit.
Loyalty and trust are paramount to values voters. And the general mood is that the majority of GOP establishment figures are now seen as liars, promise breakers, and co-conspirators for their inability to stem the tide of these trends and quell these anxieties. In the current political paradigm, reasonable policy-positions that makes the base uncomfortable (Rubio's Gang of 8 Immigration Bill, Kaisich's Medicare Expansion, Boehner's Debt Ceiling and Shutdown Stopping Deals, Huntsman's embrace of Climate Science ect) is magnified as heresy. In the meantime, absurd rhetoric like claims that illegal aliens are mostly rapists and murders (Trump) and that we ought to carpet-bomb the Middle East until the sand glows in the dark (Cruz) are not seen as gaffes but as resolute leadership if the base agrees with the general sentiment. And lacking a sense of "political correctness" is seen as a positive because it is a sign of authenticity.
I wish there was a simple solution, but there is not. As much as Trump might embarrass the GOP establishment, they are not quick to criticize him. His core positions (deep tax cuts, border security, a slowdown of immigration, and a strong military response to ISIS) are consistent with the rest of the conservative movement.
A libertarian challenger is certainly not the answer. While I greatly admire Representative Amash, I think Ron Paul proved the absolute ceiling of libertarian support in the GOP is around 20%. His son Rand, who had the most libertarian-ish convictions this time around, was resoundingly defeated in the primaries. While many people hold libertarian views, not many people self-identify as libertarian. A classic libertarian position of being skeptical of foreign interventions in the Middle East and a desire to reign in wasteful military spending are non-starters in today's GOP. Senator Lindsey Graham even ran for president specifically to thwart a possible Rand Paul bid saying his presidency would be a threat to national security. Furthermore, libertarians as a whole are not an ideologically consistent faction. Most people who supported a mix of Ron Paul or Gary Johnson in 2012 elections defected early to supporting Trump, Cruz, or Sanders rather than supporting Rand. That's because the so-called "libertarian coalition" was made up of a rag-tag bunch of social liberals skeptical of big government, Ayn Rand readers, anti-government crusaders, Koch Brother anti-regulation businessmen, and pro-gun/anti-drug war misfits.
I know that's not a very hopeful place to end but the disappointment is not done, yet. Next up... the Democratic Caucus!
Yes, Donald Trump is the front-runner. And yes, the math is on his side as most likely to win the nomination. As someone who participated in the Republican Party caucuses this past Tuesday as a vocal leader of the #NotTrump coalition, I understand and share your frustration with Trump's candidacy. However, I think you deeply and fundamentally misunderstand the conservative mind-set which has led to his front-runner status.
"This was a better idea than Trump steaks!"
If Trump supporters are voting for him because they believed the GOP failed during the era of President Obama, it is not because of a lack of ingenuity or smart policy ideas. Rather, they are voting for him because they feel that GOP leadership has not done enough to fulfill their promise to stop Obama. Just look at who is running just behind Trump in the delegate count. How else can you explain Senator Ted Cruz being the closest person to ascending past Trump? Cruz's signature achievements are his failed attempts to shutdown the entire government over Planned Parenthood funding and funding for the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare).
During the past four years, Republicans have watched the rise of ISIS, the attacks on Paris, an attack on American consulate (Benghazi), and a nuclear deal with Iran happen. All of these events have resurrected post 9/11 anxieties about the security of our country. On the domestic front, people have felt threatened by illegal aliens and riots/police protests. And economically, people's wages are still largely stagnant. And Obama's signature achievement, while granting some people with healthcare who were shut out of the market ten years ago, has done nothing to stem the skyrocketing costs that the majority of Americans are paying for health insurance. You may accuse the GOP of fear mongering, but the anxieties of conservatives are more legitimate than you'd like to admit.
Loyalty and trust are paramount to values voters. And the general mood is that the majority of GOP establishment figures are now seen as liars, promise breakers, and co-conspirators for their inability to stem the tide of these trends and quell these anxieties. In the current political paradigm, reasonable policy-positions that makes the base uncomfortable (Rubio's Gang of 8 Immigration Bill, Kaisich's Medicare Expansion, Boehner's Debt Ceiling and Shutdown Stopping Deals, Huntsman's embrace of Climate Science ect) is magnified as heresy. In the meantime, absurd rhetoric like claims that illegal aliens are mostly rapists and murders (Trump) and that we ought to carpet-bomb the Middle East until the sand glows in the dark (Cruz) are not seen as gaffes but as resolute leadership if the base agrees with the general sentiment. And lacking a sense of "political correctness" is seen as a positive because it is a sign of authenticity.
(Cruz's Foreign Policy Platform)
I wish there was a simple solution, but there is not. As much as Trump might embarrass the GOP establishment, they are not quick to criticize him. His core positions (deep tax cuts, border security, a slowdown of immigration, and a strong military response to ISIS) are consistent with the rest of the conservative movement.
A libertarian challenger is certainly not the answer. While I greatly admire Representative Amash, I think Ron Paul proved the absolute ceiling of libertarian support in the GOP is around 20%. His son Rand, who had the most libertarian-ish convictions this time around, was resoundingly defeated in the primaries. While many people hold libertarian views, not many people self-identify as libertarian. A classic libertarian position of being skeptical of foreign interventions in the Middle East and a desire to reign in wasteful military spending are non-starters in today's GOP. Senator Lindsey Graham even ran for president specifically to thwart a possible Rand Paul bid saying his presidency would be a threat to national security. Furthermore, libertarians as a whole are not an ideologically consistent faction. Most people who supported a mix of Ron Paul or Gary Johnson in 2012 elections defected early to supporting Trump, Cruz, or Sanders rather than supporting Rand. That's because the so-called "libertarian coalition" was made up of a rag-tag bunch of social liberals skeptical of big government, Ayn Rand readers, anti-government crusaders, Koch Brother anti-regulation businessmen, and pro-gun/anti-drug war misfits.
I know that's not a very hopeful place to end but the disappointment is not done, yet. Next up... the Democratic Caucus!
Republican Caucus
I'm sure if one were to go back through my Facebook postings, previous blog writings, talk to my friends, or even spend 5 minutes discussing politics with me it would become very obvious what side of the aisle I tend to lean towards. Thus, it is of complete objectivity that I would like to comment on the Republican Caucus and my esteemed colleague Mike Skunes can comment on the Democratic Caucus so our party bias can hopefully be removed.
What is now common knowledge is this: Donald Trump is the front runner. Not only that, but he is crushing his opposition. He has almost 100 more delegates than Cruz and over 200 more than Rubio after Super Tuesday. He has won 10 of 15 states and doesn't show any signs of slowing down. Which begs the question: how? How is an independent businessman that has histrionic personality disorder tendencies and is drawing consistent comparisons to Hitler continuing to win the GOP primary?
Here's my opinion, he's winning not because he's a great candidate, but because the GOP has failed during the Obama presidency. Obama was a shoe-in during the 2008 election because of the disaster we call the GWB presidency, so it wasn't a surprise that McCain lost, even though I admire him and think he would have been a fine president. The GOP's real mistake was their reaction to this loss. The GOP split with the dawn of the tea party in 2009 which had basically one mission: stop Obama. This was the beginning of the decline for a party that previously had roots in fiscal responsibility and conservative values/rights. So eventually they put forth a Romney/Ryan campaign four years later trying to bridge the two sides of the party. It failed and they haven't recovered since.
Since that time the party has become less about ingenuity and improving what we have and more about repealing what's already in place. The most prominent idea the party has put forward in the last eight years is the Keystone pipeline. An issue that really resonates with millennials because of the consequences and implications it will have on climate change. Other than that the only thing we get from the GOP lately is rhetoric, fear mongering, and sound bites. Yes, individual republican minded people can be very smart and have great ideas, but the party leaders and the face of the GOP has not shown that. Thus, this leadership has caused one undeniable fact: their loyal voters aren't putting up with the candidates that have put them in this situation over the last eight years.
Cue Trump.
In all reality Trump isn't saying anything different than the other candidates. More fear mongering about refugees, more rhetoric about fixing the country with no actual plans, and the premise of kicking people out of our nation and surrounding us with an impenetrable wall. Oh yeah, and we can keep our guns...ya know, the things that the democrats haven't really ever waged war against, but republicans pretend there's a war on our second amendment rights to get votes in the south. So why is he winning? Because he's not associated with the system. It's as simple as that. The long time republicans (and to a large extent Americans in general) are sick of what's happening in Washington, so they're THIRSTING for anything different. It's a perfect storm and Trump is capitalizing.
If the GOP really wanted to fix this "Trump problem" the solution is simple: throw a libertarian into the mix *paging Justin Amash* - Libertarians present solutions for the future that have roots in history and statistics, they respect and understand science, and they're basically the conservative equivalent of Bernie Sanders and look how much he's stirred up the Democratic Caucus...oh wait, that's not for me to talk about it...okay Mike, I guess that's your cue.
What is now common knowledge is this: Donald Trump is the front runner. Not only that, but he is crushing his opposition. He has almost 100 more delegates than Cruz and over 200 more than Rubio after Super Tuesday. He has won 10 of 15 states and doesn't show any signs of slowing down. Which begs the question: how? How is an independent businessman that has histrionic personality disorder tendencies and is drawing consistent comparisons to Hitler continuing to win the GOP primary?
Here's my opinion, he's winning not because he's a great candidate, but because the GOP has failed during the Obama presidency. Obama was a shoe-in during the 2008 election because of the disaster we call the GWB presidency, so it wasn't a surprise that McCain lost, even though I admire him and think he would have been a fine president. The GOP's real mistake was their reaction to this loss. The GOP split with the dawn of the tea party in 2009 which had basically one mission: stop Obama. This was the beginning of the decline for a party that previously had roots in fiscal responsibility and conservative values/rights. So eventually they put forth a Romney/Ryan campaign four years later trying to bridge the two sides of the party. It failed and they haven't recovered since.
Since that time the party has become less about ingenuity and improving what we have and more about repealing what's already in place. The most prominent idea the party has put forward in the last eight years is the Keystone pipeline. An issue that really resonates with millennials because of the consequences and implications it will have on climate change. Other than that the only thing we get from the GOP lately is rhetoric, fear mongering, and sound bites. Yes, individual republican minded people can be very smart and have great ideas, but the party leaders and the face of the GOP has not shown that. Thus, this leadership has caused one undeniable fact: their loyal voters aren't putting up with the candidates that have put them in this situation over the last eight years.
Cue Trump.
In all reality Trump isn't saying anything different than the other candidates. More fear mongering about refugees, more rhetoric about fixing the country with no actual plans, and the premise of kicking people out of our nation and surrounding us with an impenetrable wall. Oh yeah, and we can keep our guns...ya know, the things that the democrats haven't really ever waged war against, but republicans pretend there's a war on our second amendment rights to get votes in the south. So why is he winning? Because he's not associated with the system. It's as simple as that. The long time republicans (and to a large extent Americans in general) are sick of what's happening in Washington, so they're THIRSTING for anything different. It's a perfect storm and Trump is capitalizing.
If the GOP really wanted to fix this "Trump problem" the solution is simple: throw a libertarian into the mix *paging Justin Amash* - Libertarians present solutions for the future that have roots in history and statistics, they respect and understand science, and they're basically the conservative equivalent of Bernie Sanders and look how much he's stirred up the Democratic Caucus...oh wait, that's not for me to talk about it...okay Mike, I guess that's your cue.
Friday, May 15, 2015
What's the Appropriate Response?
John,
I think you've hit the mark that the source of polarization in issues with policing communities of color revolves around trust. These communities that are out protesting in the streets have lost trust in their local police departments to the point that the presence of police officers actually destabilizes the community's sense of security rather than allaying their fears. On the flip side, I think that conservatives tend to put a lot of faith in the police as the guardians of order and safety in their communities and are willing to give them the benefit of the doubt when they clash with citizens. Part of why right-leaning folk chafe at being dismissed at racists for opposing these protests is that most believe they would still back law enforcement if the races of the officers and the deceased were reversed, because they fundamentally support the institution of law enforcement.
But to respond to the questions you posed at the end of your post, here they are again:
1) What is the appropriate response for outraged communities?
2) How do we seek an appropriate solution for these situations?
First, as a white-male who grew up in predominately suburban area and has not had anything but banal encounters with police officers, I neither have the liberty or arrogance to propose an "appropriate response" for these outraged communities. For the most part, I think the protesters have responded with more dignity and grace given their circumstances than the national media is willing to give them credit for. However, it shouldn't be controversial that the leeway for appropriate responses ends when protesters stoop to retributive violence. To lash back violently at law enforcement is not only unethical (justice is never satiated by more violence) but it also lacks pragmatism. If protesters yield the moral high ground back to the government, then their "movement" will be remembered just as unfortunately as the LA riots in the early 90's. The heartbreaking assassinations of officers Ramos and Liu in Brooklyn in response to the Eric Garner case derailed the good-will afforded those protesting in New York in what seemed like a clear case of police brutality. Actions in Baltimore are threatening to do the same.
As for solutions that these communities can seek, that's where we can be a little more concrete. My first suggestion is to advocate that their sons and daughters become police officers. Unfortunately, because of the rough relations these communities have had with local law enforcement, the profession of law enforcement has substantially lower prestige than similar service professions like firefighting and the military. The line "be the change you want to see in the world" could not be more poignant than now.
My second suggestion is: Get Political. If you want things to change, these communities need to lobby their local officials with concrete demands, vote out any bums, and have people run for office that they trust. The only problem with public policy solutions is that for every good idea posed, a counter-example seems to quickly arise to squash the hopes. If you'll let me be a little wonky, I'll spend the rest of my post detailing some of the proposed solutions that people should fight for, even if there are still problems.
Ready? Here we go...
I think you've hit the mark that the source of polarization in issues with policing communities of color revolves around trust. These communities that are out protesting in the streets have lost trust in their local police departments to the point that the presence of police officers actually destabilizes the community's sense of security rather than allaying their fears. On the flip side, I think that conservatives tend to put a lot of faith in the police as the guardians of order and safety in their communities and are willing to give them the benefit of the doubt when they clash with citizens. Part of why right-leaning folk chafe at being dismissed at racists for opposing these protests is that most believe they would still back law enforcement if the races of the officers and the deceased were reversed, because they fundamentally support the institution of law enforcement.
 |
| Reuters-Lucas Jackson |
But to respond to the questions you posed at the end of your post, here they are again:
1) What is the appropriate response for outraged communities?
2) How do we seek an appropriate solution for these situations?
First, as a white-male who grew up in predominately suburban area and has not had anything but banal encounters with police officers, I neither have the liberty or arrogance to propose an "appropriate response" for these outraged communities. For the most part, I think the protesters have responded with more dignity and grace given their circumstances than the national media is willing to give them credit for. However, it shouldn't be controversial that the leeway for appropriate responses ends when protesters stoop to retributive violence. To lash back violently at law enforcement is not only unethical (justice is never satiated by more violence) but it also lacks pragmatism. If protesters yield the moral high ground back to the government, then their "movement" will be remembered just as unfortunately as the LA riots in the early 90's. The heartbreaking assassinations of officers Ramos and Liu in Brooklyn in response to the Eric Garner case derailed the good-will afforded those protesting in New York in what seemed like a clear case of police brutality. Actions in Baltimore are threatening to do the same.
As for solutions that these communities can seek, that's where we can be a little more concrete. My first suggestion is to advocate that their sons and daughters become police officers. Unfortunately, because of the rough relations these communities have had with local law enforcement, the profession of law enforcement has substantially lower prestige than similar service professions like firefighting and the military. The line "be the change you want to see in the world" could not be more poignant than now.
My second suggestion is: Get Political. If you want things to change, these communities need to lobby their local officials with concrete demands, vote out any bums, and have people run for office that they trust. The only problem with public policy solutions is that for every good idea posed, a counter-example seems to quickly arise to squash the hopes. If you'll let me be a little wonky, I'll spend the rest of my post detailing some of the proposed solutions that people should fight for, even if there are still problems.
Ready? Here we go...
Wednesday, May 13, 2015
A response to "why is the public so polarized about these incidents?"
I think the polarization of this issue comes with a fairly obvious answer that most people will point to and say "race." But I'd like to take it a step further and say
that these issues transcend race and become more about an issue of trust.
John Dalberg-Acton coined the phrase, "power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely." In this situation I fear we've found ourselves in a scenario where people are no longer trusting in regards to the people that are in place to 'protect and serve.' In the case of Tamir Rice a blogger for daily kos wrote a great piece (albeit very opinionated) about police corruption in Cleveland and the murder that ensued. And I'm sure many people in Ferguson, Cleveland, NYC, Baltimore, Detroit, et cetera don't even feel safe in their own homes at times. Charlie LeDuff did a great report with a lot of humor mixed in to such a serious topic about this problem in Detroit. And when you strip someone of their feeling of safety you're depriving people of a basic need. According to Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs safety is just above physiological needs. I would be inclined to agree with that sentiment and when you're talking about large populations feeling unsafe, it's only a matter of time before that unrest translates into problems for the community, the people of authority, and a movement for policy change.
Do not mistake my previous paragraph as defending the people that are rioting and looting local businesses, that is MUCH DIFFERENT than peaceful protests. In fact, I would even go as far as saying that these actions is causing a larger problem instead of a solution. But that begs the question Mike, what is the appropriate response for outraged communities? Or, if you prefer, how do we seek an appropriate solution for these situations?
that these issues transcend race and become more about an issue of trust.
John Dalberg-Acton coined the phrase, "power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely." In this situation I fear we've found ourselves in a scenario where people are no longer trusting in regards to the people that are in place to 'protect and serve.' In the case of Tamir Rice a blogger for daily kos wrote a great piece (albeit very opinionated) about police corruption in Cleveland and the murder that ensued. And I'm sure many people in Ferguson, Cleveland, NYC, Baltimore, Detroit, et cetera don't even feel safe in their own homes at times. Charlie LeDuff did a great report with a lot of humor mixed in to such a serious topic about this problem in Detroit. And when you strip someone of their feeling of safety you're depriving people of a basic need. According to Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs safety is just above physiological needs. I would be inclined to agree with that sentiment and when you're talking about large populations feeling unsafe, it's only a matter of time before that unrest translates into problems for the community, the people of authority, and a movement for policy change.
 |
| Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs |
Thursday, May 7, 2015
Why is the Public Polarized About Issues with the Police?
John,
Because we didn't start this thing to talk about petunias or tulips, let's start with an issue that has (figuratively and at times literally) been burning since August of 2014. Michael Brown, John Crawford, Tamir Rice, Eric Garner, Freddie Gray, and Walter Scott are just a few of the names of black males (here are more names) whose deaths at the hands of law enforcement have sparked nationwide unrest and city-closing protests by communities who feel these incidents occur too often and with too little accountability.
Ferguson, New York City, and Baltimore are just a few of the cities in which the reaction to these events has resulted in sustained protests with bursts of boiling tension and opportunistic looting and vandalism.
While each of these specific incidents have been tragic, what is perhaps most disheartening is that there is little chance anything meaningful will be done prevent these events in the future because public opinion has split decisively along stereotypical partisan lines. With liberals lining up behind the victims and protesters and conservatives quickly coming to the defense of law enforcement, there threatens to be gridlock in addressing public policy reforms. But the debate has gone off the rails with some liberals going as far as defending the vandals and looters as simply "expressing their grief" to conservatives creating online fundraising campaigns to financially support the officers who took the lives of these men.
So my question is: why is the public so polarized about these incidents?
~Mike
Because we didn't start this thing to talk about petunias or tulips, let's start with an issue that has (figuratively and at times literally) been burning since August of 2014. Michael Brown, John Crawford, Tamir Rice, Eric Garner, Freddie Gray, and Walter Scott are just a few of the names of black males (here are more names) whose deaths at the hands of law enforcement have sparked nationwide unrest and city-closing protests by communities who feel these incidents occur too often and with too little accountability.
Ferguson, New York City, and Baltimore are just a few of the cities in which the reaction to these events has resulted in sustained protests with bursts of boiling tension and opportunistic looting and vandalism.
 |
| Chip Sommerville-Getty Images |
While each of these specific incidents have been tragic, what is perhaps most disheartening is that there is little chance anything meaningful will be done prevent these events in the future because public opinion has split decisively along stereotypical partisan lines. With liberals lining up behind the victims and protesters and conservatives quickly coming to the defense of law enforcement, there threatens to be gridlock in addressing public policy reforms. But the debate has gone off the rails with some liberals going as far as defending the vandals and looters as simply "expressing their grief" to conservatives creating online fundraising campaigns to financially support the officers who took the lives of these men.
So my question is: why is the public so polarized about these incidents?
~Mike
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)