tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-64779413592677706602024-03-14T03:45:13.055-04:00The Blanks Slate"Only the refusal to listen guarantees one against being ensnared by the truth" - Robert NozickJPBhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16468994137056889334noreply@blogger.comBlogger597125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6477941359267770660.post-67127696553011608372016-10-17T21:14:00.007-04:002016-10-17T21:14:55.237-04:00Never Means Never<div class="MsoNormal">
<i>Disclaimer: I write this on my long-dormant personal blog for the express purpose of distancing my employer from what follows. I composed this strictly on my own time, at my apartment (or on the Metro) on my personal computer and thus should not in any way be read to be part of my professional affiliations, my employer’s tax status, or anything but one more libertarian shouting into the void of the Internet. -JPB<o:p></o:p></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I’ve never voted for a Democrat in an election.* I left the GOP years ago, but when it came down to voting in recent years, I either preferred Republican candidates, picked no candidate, voted for third-party candidates, or—on at least two occasions where I couldn’t care less who won, <a href="http://hankforsenate.com/">voted for a feline</a>—once, posthumously. That said, for spearheading criminal justice reform on Capitol Hill, I had planned to vote for Jim Webb—it helped that he was the last of the Blue Dog Dems—but he didn’t run for re-election. For similar reasons, I would vote for term-limited Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe if given the opportunity, but I won’t get it. (2013 me can’t believe I just typed that.)<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Additionally, it has become painfully obvious over time that the GOP had no interest in moving toward a real small-government platform, and the idea that there was even a plurality that cared enough about civil liberties related to anything other than abortion protests was a cruel joke. Small-L libertarians were intellectual window-dressing to a Republican party that cared much more about instituting trans-vaginal ultrasounds, maintaining barriers to social and legal benefits for homosexual couples, public bathroom rules, and fetus funerals than getting the hell out of people’s lives. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I haven’t become more of a Democrat in my almost 10 years in Virginia, but whatever the GOP says it is, it is not a party I can support at all.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
To be fair, with some very meager gains among minority voters during the years under George W. Bush, the party’s rhetoric on race had improved. Granted, it was building from the primordial ooze of Lee Atwater race double-talk, so it’s not like these guys were getting Image Awards any time in the near future, but the party leaders at least appeared to realize a strategy that built ONLY on white resentment was not a viable long-term strategy.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But now the guise of double-talk has been wholly and unmistakably discarded.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
At the head of the GOP is a hate monger. He long refused to discourage his followers who acted violently. His scorched earth strategy going into the final stretch is a nightmare of demagoguery. He is a fraud, and a reckless and dangerous man who has supporters who chant “USA! USA!” at the prospect of mob rule. Quite literally.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-CM5EBNoJi_Y/WAVzfj5FtSI/AAAAAAAADvk/e9oLg9xTMP0zZ4aoqHzBm8M0IYXX6NBjgCLcB/s1600/beckett%2Bclarke%2Busa.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="169" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-CM5EBNoJi_Y/WAVzfj5FtSI/AAAAAAAADvk/e9oLg9xTMP0zZ4aoqHzBm8M0IYXX6NBjgCLcB/s320/beckett%2Bclarke%2Busa.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<span id="goog_1578425565"></span><span id="goog_1578425566"></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In past years, I’ve argued for voting for a third party candidate <a href="https://www.libertarianism.org/columns/pay-no-attention-man-who-wont-stand-behind-voting-curtain">as an act of principle.</a> But this argument supposes emotionally and mentally stable, if equally awful, candidates who wouldn’t plunge the world into economic and political chaos. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I’m not overstating it. The stock market hit would probably eclipse the one in 2007, and that would be well before he ever took office. Because stability and reliability are the backbone of a functioning market economy—the only thing reliable in Trump’s campaign is beating the drum of ethno-religious demagoguery—we would likely see world markets tumble.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
That means retirement funds crashing. That means more people out of work. That means more people falling (back?) into poverty, here and worldwide. That means less international stability, which could lead to more wars—yes, Virginia, our foreign policy can get worse and thinking Trump gives a damn about fixing our current debacle is infuriatingly naïve.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><br /></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i>But principle!<o:p></o:p></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
There is no principle here. This is wrapping oneself in the warm blanket of immense privilege. A privilege that insulates you from crowds of people who want to deport you and your family to some place you’ve never seen. A privilege that insulates you from fearing for your life when you get stopped for the 50th time an incompetent police officer who sees violence when he sees your skin. A privilege that is made possible in large part in my social network by the unbearable whiteness of libertarianism. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
To hell with that. This isn’t a ‘heroin in vending machines’free market thought experiment. This is 11 million undocumented people and millions more who look and talk like they do that face the prospect of curtailed rights and justifiable fears for their safety. This is a country that is still racially segregated, policed separately and unequally, and whose police unions are lining up behind a racist demagogue. This is a country of immigrants who have faced attacks on mosques, Sikh temples, and just walking down the street for their families’ free choice to live here and be free—or freer, anyway. If actual freedom is your principle, then doing what you can to stop a demagogue should be high on your to-do list.<o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
I love my country. But I don't trust it.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
My vote does not convey approval for every one of a candidate’s decisions, any more than my tax dollars do. And no, my vote by itself doesn’t matter at all mathematically. <a href="https://blanksslate.blogspot.com/2008/11/why-i-voted.html">I’ve written about this before too.</a> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I understand the ramifications of losing the Supreme Court. I understand the policy implications of a neo-conservative foreign policy apparatus and, God forbid, a Democratic Senate under Chuck Schumer. It will be bad. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But the alternative is not close to equivalently bad. It is so much worse. It’s not close.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Now, because we see names on a ballot that do not belong to the two major parties or that there is a write-in line, we can pretend that we don’t face the two choices that we do. But during none of my previous votes for Bob Barr, Gary Johnson, or Hank the Cat did I think they had a legitimate shot at winning. It was my small way of saying “No.” In almost any other circumstance I can imagine, I would be full-throatedly behind a libertarian protest or preference vote.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But not this year.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Our choices are binary, whether we like the system or not. (I do not.) But this GOP has made quite clear it is unwilling and incapable of reining in a President Trump, and there’s no reason to think a Republican Congress would act on unconstitutional or impeachable offenses. He is an unmitigated disaster for the country already, and it can, in fact, be much worse.<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It’s clear my policy preferences aren’t going to win this year. That’s unfortunate, but not terribly unusual. What is different this year are the real world costs of putting a racist demagogue in power. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
I’m with Her because Black Lives Matter is more than a phrase to me, despite my reservations about her efficacy to improve the status quo. I’m with Her because I understand that a Trump win isn’t the same to millions of people across this country and this planet not as fortunate as I am. I’m with Her because, in actuality, policies that result in bad outcomes for people of color are far better than no policies, a paranoid delegitimization campaign, and overt racism from the highest office in the land. I'm with Her because my partner gets antisemitic messages because racists have been emboldened by this wretch of a man. I'm with Her because, for all her faults--faults that have and will likely result in more people dying--she's still a more reliable and less dangerous person in re: foreign policy than he is.<br />
<br />
I'm with Her because the tangible effects of the imperfect liberty this country provides mean something far more to me than an impotent stand on principle.<o:p></o:p><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i>*I did vote for Bill Euille in the recent mayoral race in Alexandria, Virginia, but technically he was a write-in candidate because he could not run for his party’s nomination as mayor because his failed in his attempt at winning the Congressional seat now held by Don Beyer.<o:p></o:p></i></div>
JPBhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16468994137056889334noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6477941359267770660.post-9841658052039457272015-08-21T10:11:00.002-04:002015-08-21T12:37:25.404-04:00Anchor Babies, Welfare Queens, and Other Gutless Euphemisms<div class="MsoNormal">
I don't usually write about immigration because it's not my specialty, but I do know a thing or two about language. Earnest People™ are asking what term they should use instead of "anchor babies" because critics (rightly) believe it is a derogatory term, but right-of-center folks want a term to describe children who are used as excuses to stay in the country. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
Here's my suggestion:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
"Greatly exaggerated phenomenon I use to express both my disdain for immigrants and signal my resentment of the continued growth of the welfare state despite the two not being closely related"<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Doesn't really roll off the tongue, does it? Okay, maybe this:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
"Undesirable brown child."<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
"Whoa, Jon. That's going too far!" you may be thinking. But it really isn't.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This continued conversation has context and that context is nativism. Nativism is and always has been closely tied to racism--<a href="http://www.vox.com/2015/8/20/9182169/trump-hate-crime">even leading to hate crimes</a>--and there's just no getting around that. You can have non-racist reasons to oppose immigration, but "anchor babies" is a loaded term and you're kidding yourself if you think otherwise.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
There is little evidence that a large number of unauthorized immigrants are coming to America with the intended purpose of having children to stay in the country legally. Yes, people have children while they're here. And sure, people have children for bad reasons all the time so I'm sure that some people do, in fact, come here with that intention. But there's nothing really to support that this is some sort of widespread scheme to do so and therefore that it warrants massive policy change. How do I know this? The law doesn't make it easy to have a kid get parents legal access to the Land of the Free: (Via <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/08/20/the-myth-of-the-anchor-baby-deportation-defense/">WaPo</a>)<o:p></o:p></div>
<blockquote>
In order to apply for such an option, the parent of a so-called anchor baby would need to do all of the following.<br />
<ul style="margin-top: 0in;" type="disc">
<li class="MsoNormal">Wait for his or her child to reach the age of 21.</li>
</ul>
<ul style="margin-top: 0in;" type="disc">
<li class="MsoNormal">Leave the United States.</li>
</ul>
<ul style="margin-top: 0in;" type="disc">
<li class="MsoNormal">Return to their home country.</li>
</ul>
<ul style="margin-top: 0in;" type="disc">
<li class="MsoNormal">Have their child begin the lengthy process of applying for a family reunification immigration request.</li>
</ul>
<ul style="margin-top: 0in;" type="disc">
<li class="MsoNormal">Clear consular interviews and a U.S. State Department background check. (One or both would very likely provide evidence that said parent, at some point, lived in the United States illegally -- long enough for that "anchor baby" to be conceived or born. And despite widespread belief to the contrary, there is indeed a penalty for that.)</li>
</ul>
If a person has lived in the United States unlawfully for a period of more than 180 days but less than one year, there is an automatic three-year bar on that person ever reentering the United States -- and that's before any wait time for a visa. So that's a minimum of 21 years for the child to mature, plus the three-year wait. </blockquote>
<blockquote>
And, for the vast majority of these parents, a longer wait also applies. If a person has lived in the United States illegally for a year or more, there is a 10-year ban on that person reentering the United States. So, in that case, there would be the 21-year wait for the child to mature to adulthood, plus the 10-year wait.</blockquote>
<br />
Our <s>immigration</s> naturalization system is explicitly set up to not be gamed...by unskilled brown people from Latin America, anyway. And if you think they're banking on American sympathy to let them stay, the tidal wave of deportations during the bulk of the Obama administration and the unabashed nativism from the GOP frontrunners undermines that naive (and likely nonexistent) assumption on their part.<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But back to my point--we've seen this before. The "Welfare Queens" of the 1970s and 1980s was a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_queen#Gender_and_racial_stereotypes">racially tinged, sexist anti-welfare moniker </a> that was, to put it mildly, wildly overstated. Yes, some people cheat Welfare. People also cheat Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, but you don't see too many politicians demagoguing about those gray haired goodfornothing bandits wreaking havoc on our national debt.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT DEADBEAT GRANDMAS<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Nah. They were blaming women, particularly black women, as a political foil. "Anchor babies" is of the exact same stripe: women and children of color living off (white) America who earned their wealth the old-fashioned way. (The GI Bill, farm subsidies, and mortgage interest deductions, of course.) But I digress.</div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
If you really want to make "anchor babies" a campaign or policy issue, then do so. But be honest about what you're saying. The problem is a broken system created and driven by the same old nativism responsible for the bulk of our counter-productive immigration laws for over a century. Racial resentment continues to drive politics in this country and the adults in the room should acknowledge that.<o:p></o:p></div>
JPBhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16468994137056889334noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6477941359267770660.post-76748098878147260792015-06-20T09:36:00.004-04:002015-06-20T09:36:47.921-04:00From the Archive: Happy Fall of Vicksburg Day!<i>Over at National Review Online, David French <s>had the audacity</s> made the poorly conceived decision to print a defense the Confederate Battle Flag in the wake of the tragedy in Charleston. I won't link it here, you can find it if you want. </i><br />
<div>
<i><br /></i></div>
<div>
<i>I thought I'd take this opportunity to re-post a piece I wrote for my college newspaper about my feelings about the Confederacy and what I think people should do with that flag. I'm happy to say I've developed more as a writer since then, but this nevertheless captures my feelings on the subject. At least the ones that aren't best expressed with expletives. --JPB</i></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
While many of you will be drunkenly commemorating the 228th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, I will be at my job, proudly wearing my American flag necktie and thinking about another glorious day in the history of this country: July 4, 1863.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
On that day, Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee began his retreat from the battle of Gettysburg, and Gen. John C. Pemberton surrendered to Union Gen. Ulysses S. Grant in the town of Vicksburg, Miss., ending a 48-day siege. These two events marked the turning point of the Civil War.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
By capturing Vicksburg, a port on the Mississippi River, Grant effectively had cut the Confederacy in two and reclaimed the mighty river -- a vital supply and transportation route -- for the Union. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Admittedly, the Union did not fight to free the slaves. Nonetheless, my ancestors enslaved in Meridian, Miss., were much closer to freedom that day because the South was losing its war to keep them. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
My motives for writing this are not merely to inform you, dear readers, about a day in our collective history. I write this to boastfully sport my American patriotism and, if you will, my "Northern Pride." <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This weekend, perhaps more than many other days here in southern Indiana, or if you are traveling southward, you are likely to see people ignorantly, arrogantly and brazenly flying the battle flag of the Confederacy on their cars, pickups and boats or wearing it on their person -- all in the name of "Southern Pride."<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Even though Indiana was a "free" state and never seceded from the Union, there were many Confederate sympathizers in this part of the state during the Civil War, and Hoosiers undoubtedly fought on both sides. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Regardless, anyone -- be they Hoosier, southerner or other -- who dons that symbol today insults the entire nation and the holiday we celebrate. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The supporters of the Confederate battle flag cite their pride of their ancestors' sacrifices for what they believed. But that relic represents the belief in barbarism, racism, treason and such an incredible greed that they would send men (most without the finances to own slaves) to die to keep fellow human beings in bondage. The actions of the illegal government for which that flag stands cost the lives of roughly 600,000 Americans. The Confederate battle flag is nothing to be proud of. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Furthermore, the true and sinister meaning behind the battle flag of "Johnny Reb'" can be easily determined by looking at its uses in more recent history. Forget that the Ku Klux Klan (founded in part by venerated Confederate "soldier" Nathan Bedford Forrest, ahem) and other white supremacist groups use it today for decor at their rallies and militia barracks. People need to only look at the many filmed images of Southern demonstrations against desegregation during the 1950s and '60s to verify its truly evil connotations. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Next to the picket signs with slogans such as "Segregation forever," "White is Right" and "Niggers go home," you very often will see the "rebel" flag proudly waving in the Southern breeze. The people carrying their beloved banner weren't Klan members; they were everyday men, women and children of the South, standing up for what they believed. (Hardly a coincidence, it was in 1956 that Georgia prominently incorporated the Confederate battle flag into its state flag. Its presence was dramatically scaled down in 2001.) "Southern Pride," indeed.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So, this weekend, if you happen to come across the aforementioned standard of sedition while camping or being otherwise outdoors, remember where you saw it in case you need toilet paper later. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
As you run away from the drunken rebels with flag-in-hand, be sure to show your Northern Pride by wishing them a happy "Fall of Vicksburg" Day. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
Have a safe and happy Fourth.<o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
JPBhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16468994137056889334noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6477941359267770660.post-10421385648109940422015-04-28T10:38:00.000-04:002015-04-28T10:56:36.121-04:00Some Thoughts on Baltimore<div class="MsoNormal">
<i>NB: Given the sensitive nature of the subject, I reiterate that this is my opinion and should not reflect the views of my employer. -JPB</i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The unrest that is afflicting Baltimore in the wake of the arrest and death of Freddie Gray is an unfortunate but predictable outcome of years of abuse and neglect. Last year’s <i>Sun</i> <a href="http://data.baltimoresun.com/news/police-settlements/">investigation of Baltimore’s police brutality cases</a> shined a light on engrained practice of tolerating and covering up police brutality. Such tactics temporarily shielded the police from outside scrutiny by media and kept Baltimore police out of the national spotlight. But those neighborhoods of Baltimoreans who knew and experienced that abuse have endured it for years with no reckoning of criminal justice.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The city has taken the positive step of making civil suit records public and searchable on a government website, but civil suits may take years to litigate and require resources the most vulnerable of Baltimoreans do not have. Without swift change in the day-to-day functions of city policing, piecemeal efforts on the back-end of reform will fail to quell the anger felt by the people of Baltimore.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Part of this problem is Maryland state law. Police personnel records—namely, their disciplinary files—<a href="http://www.oag.state.md.us/opengov/chapteriii.pdf">are generally exempt from public information</a> searches. Thus, officers who have a history of violence have no independent check on their behavior. If the Baltimore PD tolerates violent and repeated officer misconduct, as the <i>Sun</i>’s investigation showed it has, then officers are operating without any meaningful oversight <i>vis a vis</i> their interactions with the public.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Maryland is not alone in this secrecy. All but a handful of states provide considerable protections to police disciplinary records. Most Americans live under legal regimes that force them to trust police to oversee themselves. This imposed faith may work in some jurisdictions, but it is clearly failing in many others.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This widespread lack of accountability degrades the police’s relationship with the people they serve, undermining their legitimacy. As author Maurice Punch wrote<i>,</i> “[T]he crucial test for policing in a democratic system is <i>accountability</i>….For without genuine accountability, there can be no legitimacy; and without legitimacy the police cannot function effectively in democratic society.”<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
What we’re seeing in the streets of Baltimore is a criminal justice system without accountability and a police force that is suffering a foreseeable crisis of legitimacy.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Those who riot and loot should not be excused for their actions. Violence, mayhem, and theft are wrong, full stop. That does not mean, however, that the policing situation that led us to this point is excusable or without blame. When police abuse citizens with impunity and a community suffers years of abuse, the social fabric that holds communities together will unravel.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The solution is simple to say, but a challenge to implement: transparent and accountable policing. If Freddie Gray were the first man abused by Baltimore Police, we wouldn’t be watching kids throwing bricks at officers on our televisions or in our Internet feeds. The unleashed anger in Baltimore is a result of unchecked police power continuously roaming through neighborhoods and terrorizing their inhabitants. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The institutions that have protected violent officers will continue to do so and resist meaningful police reform, at their peril. The tolerance and protection of violent officers is a threat to both public and officer safety alike. Police cannot arrest their way into a restored community faith and ignoring the demands of peaceful protests will further erode police legitimacy. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The onus is on state and local governments to make police transparency a priority. Police departments must make themselves more accountable to the people they serve and take proactive steps to reassure their citizens that they will discipline or fire their officers for misconduct.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
There is simply no other way to prevent the fire next time. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i>bellum medicamenti delenda est</i></div>
JPBhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16468994137056889334noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6477941359267770660.post-5068275349253610872015-04-09T15:37:00.003-04:002015-04-09T15:37:55.008-04:00Just What You Always Wanted!ME! In your inbox!<br />
<br />
Okay, so maybe this isn't the gift of your dreams, but at least I got your attention.<br />
<br />
Last week I started <a href="https://tinyletter.com/jpblanks">publishing a newsletter</a>, <i>Taken Liberties</i>. It'll be weekly(-ish) so it's not going to be a daily thing because, first of all, I'm not that productive. Second, it would be like putting my entire twitter feed in your inbox, thus sort of defeating the whole purpose of starting something new.<br />
<br />
I wanted to compile something that's a little more personal than a blog. Whatever this blog's identity is (or was?), it wasn't particularly expressive of most of my personality. Opinions? Yes. Anger? Most definitely. But posts tended to either be rants or off-the-cuff observations, rather than a more reflective comments on what's been on my mind. My sometimes-churlish bouts of self-seriousness that peppered this blog will be absent from this new venture.<br />
<br />
I enjoyed writing here and it certainly helped me grow as a writer, but blogs aren't what they used to be. I'm not killing <i>TBS</i>, so no need to delete this from your GoogleReader substitute RSS feed, but I will be spending more effort on maintaining the newsletter than I have been keeping up with this.<br />
<br />
Anyway, if you like my writing, please sign up for the newsletter <a href="https://tinyletter.com/jpblanks">here</a>.<br />
<br />
<i>bellum medicamenti delenda est</i>JPBhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16468994137056889334noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6477941359267770660.post-83335186884515690242015-02-27T12:18:00.002-05:002015-02-27T12:20:35.172-05:00Recent and Other Relevant WritingIn the past week or so, I've written a few pieces. Also, recent events have made past writing relevant again. So, instead of starting a newsletter like a lot of writers I know and admire, I thought I'd just bring them all together in one place and you can read as you like.<br />
<br />
A recurring theme is American ignorance of history writ large. Over at <i>Rare</i>, I wrote about why<a href="http://rare.us/story/black-history-black-pride-and-american-ignorance/"> Black History is important</a>. (Hint: because it's American history.)<br />
<br />
<blockquote>
Generally speaking, the way America teaches history is deplorable. The watered-down fairy-tale version of our history can be found in our folklore, grade school textbooks, and throughout our media. Race aside for a moment, how we think about war, government, technology, religion, and nearly everything else tends to be framed in false dichotomies and trivial facts without contextualizing how and why events happened, let alone how events were perceived by those who lived through them.<br />
But in America, despite the best efforts of many, we cannot put race aside. Racism has been omnipresent in American history, but it has been far from static. Slavery and its justifications spawned a particularly awful strain of anti-black racism in America. Racism evolved to seek selfish economic ends and justify punitive unconstitutional laws. It has justified social and economic benefits to some while depriving them to others. It has allowed a tolerance of abuse by both government and private citizens. Racism has broken apart families and even the nation itself.</blockquote>
<br />
Relatedly, I wrote <a href="http://blanksslate.blogspot.com/2015/02/james-comey-cant-handle-truth.html">here at<i> TBS</i></a> about FBI director Comey's attempt to view the relationship between law enforcement and black communities historically. (He failed.)<br />
<br />
<blockquote style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: 'Times New Roman', Times, FreeSerif, serif; font-size: 14.8500003814697px; line-height: 20.7900009155273px;">
Director Comey, trying to appear magnanimous, said</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i> <span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: 'Times New Roman', Times, FreeSerif, serif; font-size: 14.8500003814697px; line-height: 20.7900009155273px;">“A tragedy of American life…is that young people in “those neighborhoods” too often inherit a legacy of crime and prison. And with that inheritance, they become part of a police officer’s life, and shape the way that officer—whether white or black—sees the world.”</span></i></blockquote>
<blockquote style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: 'Times New Roman', Times, FreeSerif, serif; font-size: 14.8500003814697px; line-height: 20.7900009155273px;">
This is circular logic at its most odious. Law enforcement, in its zeal to fight its war on drugs and crime, extracted scores of men from communities and put them into the criminal justice system. This deprived children of fathers and robbed the communities of economic resources. This,in turn, created the young black men that engender cynicism from today’s officers who “often can’t help” it.</blockquote>
<blockquote style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: 'Times New Roman', Times, FreeSerif, serif; font-size: 14.8500003814697px; line-height: 20.7900009155273px;">
While there is much to be said for back-end reforms that help former inmates return to society, the law enforcement executives who go around preaching about how to fix the men and communities they helped break in the first place tests the patience of anyone who recognizes the grotesque unfairness of our so-called justice system. It’s not all law enforcement’s fault, but they are reticent to acknowledge the role they have and continue to play in “those neighborhoods.”<br />
<a name='more'></a></blockquote>
Marijuana is quasi-legal in DC. That "quasi" bit could allow police to harass and arrest poor black residents while giving affluent white DC the official recognition of the <a href="http://rare.us/story/washington-d-c-should-protect-the-poor-by-legalizing-the-sale-of-marijuana/">de facto legalization they already enjoy</a>.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Semi-legal status adds ambiguity to the law and complicates law enforcement’s efforts to curb the still-illegal and unregulated for-profit marijuana markets. People will likely still go to prison, families will continue to be disrupted or destroyed, drug deals will continue to lurk in the shadows, and thus neighborhoods will be less safe than they should be. In a policing environment that has a history of unequal enforcement of laws and continues to tolerate civil asset forfeiture, any ambiguity invites abuse of the same people who’ve suffered under prohibition for years. More than four decades of experience should be more than enough to prove the criminal justice system is ill-suited for effective marijuana policy.</blockquote>
<br />
Ron Paul is at it again.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-M9CToNaUuHs/VPCkID-hJNI/AAAAAAAABDI/nkjgytOn-TY/s1600/Ron%2BPaul%2Bagain.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-M9CToNaUuHs/VPCkID-hJNI/AAAAAAAABDI/nkjgytOn-TY/s1600/Ron%2BPaul%2Bagain.jpg" height="209" width="320" /></a></div>
Libertarians need to ditch the racism yesterday. Paul is an embarrassment and more libertarians should say so. My two-part essay on libertarians and race <a href="http://www.libertarianism.org/columns/why-are-there-so-few-black-libertarians">here </a>and <a href="http://www.libertarianism.org/columns/looking-back-look-forward-blacks-liberty-state">here</a>.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Subsequently, libertarians have been associated with the Lost Cause, Civil War revisionism, and the politics of white resentment. The infamous Ron Paul newsletters of the 1980s dripped with racist, homophobic rhetoric in order to drum up support—and fundraising—for the Texas congressman. Separate from that, Paul has given speeches asserting the South was right in the Civil War, preposterously arguing that chattel slavery was not the catalyst for the bloodiest war in American history, and repeating the canard of “States’ Rights”—an argument often used to also support state-sponsored segregation. Paul’s ascension to standard bearer of the modern libertarian movement in recent years invariably calls into question the motivations of its adherents and their dedication to civic equality of minorities.</blockquote>
Finally, <a href="http://blanksslate.blogspot.com/2015/02/reclaiming-malcolm-x.html">it's been 50 years since Malcolm died.</a><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: 'Times New Roman', Times, FreeSerif, serif; font-size: 14.8500003814697px; line-height: 20.7900009155273px;">
People should remember Malcolm for what he was and what he stood for, not just as a symbol of scaring white people. He believed in the absolute right to self-defense and personal responsibility. He believed in small business and black empowerment. He wanted jobs and dignity for black people, and he didn’t believe the government as instituted in the United States could provide it.<span style="background-color: transparent;"> </span></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: 'Times New Roman', Times, FreeSerif, serif; font-size: 14.8500003814697px; line-height: 20.7900009155273px;">
Similar to what I wrote <a href="http://rare.us/story/america-owes-black-people-more-than-it-has-given-but-reparations-arent-the-answer/" style="color: #6699cc; text-decoration: none;">in my lengthy response</a> to Ta-Nehisi Coates’ <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2014/05/the-case-for-reparations/361631/" style="color: #6699cc; text-decoration: none;">remarkable article on reparations</a>, the fundamental divide in civil rights today shouldn’t be about desert or what America should do. Rather, the argument should be about what America could reasonably be expected to do. Just because we elected a black president does not mean the government has gotten remarkably better at delivering on the failed promises of the past two and a half centuries.</blockquote>
<i>bellum medicamenti delenda est</i><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: 'Times New Roman', Times, FreeSerif, serif; font-size: 14.8500003814697px; line-height: 20.7900009155273px;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
JPBhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16468994137056889334noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6477941359267770660.post-39067576281851216582015-02-20T14:53:00.004-05:002016-08-15T12:49:25.262-04:00Reclaiming Malcolm X<div class="MsoNormal">
This weekend marks the 50<sup>th</sup> Anniversary of Malcolm X’s assassination. Malcolm has always had a deep influence on my writing, beliefs, and intellectual life. His unflinching commitment to justice and dignity are the hallmarks of his legacy.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Oh, and scaring the hell out of white people.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But seriously, there’s nothing I’ve ever read or seen attributed to Malcolm that would put him anywhere near the Progressive Left, who tend to embrace him. The late author of his most recent major biography, professor Manning Marable, attempted to rationalize his placement in the Progressive pantheon. But there was no real link in his well-researched and well-written biography. At best, he mentioned some <a href="http://blanksslate.blogspot.com/2009_07_05_archive.html">“anti-capitalist” rhetoric</a> in speeches to colleges (text by Damon Root):</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<blockquote>
In a 1992 speech at Colorado's Metro State College, Columbia University historian Manning Marable praised the black minister and activist Malcolm X for pushing an "uncompromising program which was both antiracist and anticapitalist." As Marable favorably quoted from the former Nation of Islam leader: "You can't have racism without capitalism. If you find antiracists, usually they're socialists or their political philosophy is that of socialism."</blockquote>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><br /></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In historical context, Malcolm was living in the Cold War political dichotomy. The Soviet Union and other communist nations were pitted squarely against the United States and the capitalist countries. If United States capitalism permitted Jim Crow, backed assassinations in Africa, and supported South African Apartheid, I’d be against it too. But where politics and economics converged to the detriment of American minorities, the culprits were the American government and its tolerance and furtherance of American racism, not a system of free exchange and entrepreneurship.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Indeed, many of Malcolm’s most famous and impassioned speeches dealt with American <i>hypocrisy</i> and the national inability to respect the laws of the Constitution that supposedly guaranteed equal rights. He wasn’t judging America for its ideals or its promise of freedom, rather than its utter and undeniable failure to secure rights for black people. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I write this not to claim Malcolm for libertarians or, least of all, the American Right. His legacy belongs to black people and America writ large, if they bother to embrace it.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
People should remember Malcolm for what he was and what he stood for, not just as a symbol of scaring white people. He believed in the absolute right to self-defense and personal responsibility. He believed in small business and black empowerment. He wanted jobs and dignity for black people, and he didn’t believe the government as instituted in the United States could provide it.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Similar to what I wrote <a href="http://rare.us/story/america-owes-black-people-more-than-it-has-given-but-reparations-arent-the-answer/">in my lengthy response</a> to Ta-Nehisi Coates’ <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2014/05/the-case-for-reparations/361631/">remarkable article on reparations</a>, the fundamental divide in civil rights today shouldn’t be about desert or what America should do. Rather, the argument should be about what America could reasonably be expected to do. Just because we elected a black president does not mean the government has gotten remarkably better at delivering on the failed promises of the past two and a half centuries.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
We’re still trying to get past the very same phenomenon Malcolm was talking about in this short speech excerpt:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/qNfAFfu6VD0" width="420"></iframe></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
More than 50 years later, so much has not changed.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I don’t know what Malcolm’s macroeconomic prescriptions would be if he were alive today, and I don’t care. But Malcolm was right to be skeptical of government action. Active government aimed at bettering black lives gave us the ’94 Crime Bill, the 100:1 crack to powder sentencing disparity, Broken Windows, and Stop-and-Frisk. It will take years to repair the damage they caused in black communities, on top of the preexisting problems of poverty, ghettoization, and crumbling infrastructure.<br />
<br />
And we simply cannot undo the catastrophe they’ve inflicted on countless black lives. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Before we ask the government to do anything else, it must recognize the fundamental civil rights of black Americans. Just as Malcolm recognized, whatever the laws say doesn't mean anything if the police can abuse black people and get away with it. And it is undeniable that the police violence against blacks and others continues today through hostile day-to-day interactions, militarization, and wanton brutality.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
As <a href="http://youtu.be/L2PQ3XY_j2E?t=23s">Ossie Davis eulogized him</a>, Malcolm was our champion, and we should continue to honor him. We do this by fighting police brutality. We do this by demanding equal rights and human dignity now. And we should do this by any means necessary.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
Malcolm X, RIP</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i>bellum medicamenti delenda est</i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 107%;">**I don’t know the source for this video, and it has clearly been edited. But the segments seem to all come from the same speech and thus retain their relevance as individual parts or taken together.<i></i></span></div>
JPBhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16468994137056889334noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6477941359267770660.post-25197241334737905552015-02-13T12:56:00.000-05:002015-02-13T12:56:04.258-05:00Addendum on Comey's Invocation of Bill Bratton<i>This was originally included in my piece on Comey's speech, but it was too long as it was. That said, it's still worth noting. -JPB</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<div class="MsoNormal">
That Director Comey decided to invoke NYPD Commissioner Bill Bratton to invoke his "seeing" each other metaphor is telling. In the wake of the Garner no-bill, the shooting death of Akai Gurley, and the #BlackLivesMatter protests, Commissioner Bratton proposed a <a href="http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2015/01/29/bratton-unveils-plans-for-new-anti-terror-police-unit/">heavily armed force</a> meant to fight terrorism and manage crowd control during protest. Bratton said,</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
“[The new unit] is designed for dealing with events like our recent protests....[Those officers will] be equipped and trained in ways that our normal patrol officers are not. They’ll be equipped with all the extra heavy protective gear, with the long rifles and machine guns — unfortunately sometimes necessary in these instances.”</blockquote>
<br />
Apparently, Commissioner Bratton "sees" people exercising their First Amendment rights the same way he sees murderous terrorism. Additionally, he <a href="http://www.npr.org/blogs/codeswitch/2015/02/10/384990293/nypds-top-cop-wants-to-make-it-a-felony-to-resist-arrest">wants to make resisting arrest a felony</a>.<br />
<br />
Nota bene: Resisting arrest charges are so flimsy and widely abused, they are used by criminologists <a href="https://twitter.com/blanksslate/status/545265338984960001">to measure police violence against citizens</a>.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<br />
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; color: black; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; margin: 0px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;">
If Director Comey is relying on Commissioner Bratton for guidance to fix police relations with minority communities, the situation will get much worse before it gets better.</div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; color: black; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; margin: 0px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; color: black; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; margin: 0px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;">
<i>bellum medicamenti delenda est</i></div>
JPBhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16468994137056889334noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6477941359267770660.post-25709777296025571932015-02-13T12:42:00.000-05:002015-02-13T13:02:44.651-05:00James Comey Can't Handle the Truth<div class="MsoNormal">
Yesterday, FBI Director James Comey gave an <a href="http://www.fbi.gov/news/speeches/hard-truths-law-enforcement-and-race">impassioned speech</a> about the “disconnect” between many minority communities in America and the police officers charged with keeping them safe. He listed four “hard truths” that the police and the public need to come to terms with in order to fix the current system.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The first “hard truth” was that “at many points in American history,” law enforcement has been used to oppress ethnic and other minorities through violence, intimidation, and brutality. Well, rather, Comey said, “law enforcement enforced the status quo…that was brutally unfair.” <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This is less a hard truth than it is a watered-down history lesson. Convict-lease systems, in many respects, <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Slavery-Another-Name-Re-Enslavement-Americans/dp/0385722702">extended slavery well into the 20<sup>th</sup> century</a> by using vagrancy and other charges to incarcerate black men and sell them into dangerous industrial slavery. Police were used to enforce segregation and violently break up peaceful marches throughout the Civil Rights Era. And, throughout our history, blacks have been the victims of wanton police violence for any number of reasons from John Lewis to Rodney King to Michael Brown to Eric Garner and countless others in between. Since Emancipation, when they lost the protection as a master’s <i>property</i>, black people—particularly young black men—have had an antagonistic relationship with the police, effectively without interruption.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The second “hard truth” concerned the research that indicated “widespread…unconscious [racial] bias.” (I never thought I’d see the day when the head of the FBI quote a ribald Broadway puppet show to explain “Everyone’s a Little Bit Racist.”) <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Again, there’s nothing very hard about this truth. We live in a society in which much of our population can remember Segregation, racial-political assassinations, and other forms of white racial terrorism. Racism isn’t just the uncle who tells nigger jokes after a couple beers. We live in a society that had racism built-in to its foundation—indeed, its founding documents—and killed more than half a million of its own citizens for the right to keep a portion of them in bondage in perpetuity. These same portion of people, mind you, have had the federal government recognize their full panoply of constitutionally guaranteed rights for just over 50 years. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Of course Americans still have racial hang-ups! That a man with such power and gravitas couches the utterly obvious with vulgar puppets and “unsettling research” speaks to the mind-numbing power of American denial.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Director Comey continues, attempting to soften the blow, <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<blockquote>
“But racial bias isn’t epidemic in those who join law enforcement any more than it is in academia or the arts. In fact, I believe law enforcement overwhelmingly attracts people who want to do good for living[.]”</blockquote>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I’ve had my share of bad professors, but I don’t remember any of them ever choking any of their students to death for writing exam answers on their forearm or shooting them to death for in-class sarcasm.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The monopoly on the use of force held by police officers makes them unlike everyone else in society. If all black Americans had to deal with were clutched purses and off-color jokes from art teachers, we wouldn’t be having this absurd excuse for a “national conversation.” The fear and loathing of young black men costs too many of them their lives at the hands of police officers. <i>That</i> is the hard truth.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The third hard truth actually would be useful, if Director Comey didn’t immediately undermine himself trying to explain it. “Something happens to people in law enforcement….After years of police work, officers often can’t help but be influenced by the cynicism they feel.”<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
That police work often involves repeated encounters in minority neighborhoods using heavy handed tactics that can’t help but affect how that community views them. The community of Ferguson, Missouri—<a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2014/08/19/chart-ferguson-white-flight/">a mostly black suburb of St. Louis</a>—had nearly 33,000 arrest warrants issued for non-violent offenses in 2013, many of which stem from traffic tickets and related court fees. <a href="http://www.npr.org/2014/08/25/343143937/in-ferguson-court-fines-and-fees-fuel-anger">The town population is 21,135.</a> In the wake of recent protests, arrestees too poor to make bail found themselves in a <a href="http://www.npr.org/blogs/codeswitch/2015/02/08/384332798/civil-rights-attorneys-sue-ferguson-over-debtors-prisons">Dickensian debtors prison</a>, unable to pay for their release. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Let’s ask them about <i>their</i> cynicism.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Director Comey builds a straw-man to set up his fourth and final “hard truth”: officers aren’t racist because they don’t arrest enough “white robbers and drug dealers,” because if they were, it would be easy to fix. It’s because black people do drugs and don’t have jobs so they “become part of [an] officer’s life.” You see, repeated interaction with black people makes police officers cynical and if the black people just had jobs, we wouldn’t be in this situation.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
As the Ferguson arrest warrants show, it doesn’t seem to matter whether black people are doing the things that would normally necessitate them becoming part of an officer’s life. Being black and poor puts them in communities that experience frequent and often less-than-cordial contact with police officers. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Director Comey, trying to appear magnanimous, said</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<blockquote>
“A tragedy of American life…is that young people in “those neighborhoods” too often inherit a legacy of crime and prison. And with that inheritance, they become part of a police officer’s life, and shape the way that officer—whether white or black—sees the world.”</blockquote>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This is circular logic at its most odious. Law enforcement, in its zeal to fight its war on drugs and crime, extracted scores of men from communities and put them into the criminal justice system. This deprived children of fathers and robbed the communities of economic resources. This,in turn, created the young black men that engender cynicism from today’s officers who “often can’t help” it. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
While there is much to be said for back-end reforms that help former inmates return to society, the law enforcement executives who go around preaching about how to fix the men and communities they helped break in the first place tests the patience of anyone who recognizes the grotesque unfairness of our so-called justice system. It’s not all law enforcement’s fault, but they are reticent to acknowledge the role they have and continue to play in “those neighborhoods.”<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Even in Director Comey’s singular moment of policy sanity, when he recognized that the voluntarily reported data from state and local law enforcement on use-of-force cases is so inadequate it’s virtually useless, he said such deficiencies create space for ““ideological thunderbolts”.…that spark arrest and distrust.”<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
There were no ideologues or demagogues at the scene of Michael Brown’s body as it lay in a Ferguson street for four hours in August. The protests and outrage were immediate and visceral because of the repeated, well-understood maltreatment the public received from the Ferguson police officers. Law enforcement’s reaction to those protests <a href="http://rare.us/story/theres-no-respect-for-the-rule-of-law-in-ferguson-because-the-government-destroyed-it/">reaffirmed the animosity</a> that was present well before the national media could find Ferguson on a map.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Director Comey’s pleas for officers to “see” the people they encounter belies his assertion that it’s not about racism in law enforcement:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
“Those of us in law enforcement must redouble our efforts to resist bias and prejudice. We must better understand the people we serve and protect—by trying to know, deep in our gut, what it feels like to be a law-abiding young black man walking on the street and encountering law enforcement. We must understand how that young man may see us. We must resist the lazy shortcuts of cynicism and approach him with respect and decency.” </blockquote>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“Lazy shortcuts of cynicism” is a euphemism for “ignoring the constitutional rights of young black men.” This isn’t a small problem rectified by a gut check imagining how a black boy might see a police officer. Abuse ignores the limits placed on officers by the Constitution’s equal protection clause and the Bill of Rights. Being young, black, and male is not enough to satisfy “reasonable suspicion” and police officers have an affirmative duty to respect that. Director Comey’s “ideological thunderbolt” boogeymen aside, such unconstitutional behavior is a widespread problem in law enforcement with or without Al Sharpton’s presence. Black and minority communities know this all too well.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
As far as Director Comey’s direction that the public “give [police] the space and respect to do their work,” I would ask the director to give the police the same admonition. People should be free from interference from the police unless they are committing a crime against person or property. As the recent <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/01/07/the-nypds-work-stoppage-is-costing-the-city-lots-of-money-thats-great-for-new-yorkers/">NYPD slowdown showed</a>, it is possible to keep the peace even in a large city without issuing thousands of criminal summonses.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It is impossible to fix the chasm of distrust between the police and minorities so long as police continue to abuse blacks and other minorities in the communities in which they live. This is the one and only hard truth the police and the government need to face. The rest is just distraction.<o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
<i>bellum medicamenti delenda est</i></div>
JPBhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16468994137056889334noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6477941359267770660.post-85277265528785737142015-01-27T13:32:00.002-05:002015-01-27T16:20:03.964-05:00Some Thoughts on Chait PC PieceTwitter is predictably a-twitter with <a href="http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/01/not-a-very-pc-thing-to-say.html">Jonathan Chait's latest</a> in <i>New York</i> magazine on the scourge of political correctness.<br />
<br />
It's an okay piece, as far as it goes. To generalize social media reaction: the Right is embracing it, the Left is annoyed. My reaction is: 4,700 words, <i>really</i>?<br />
<br />
Chait conflates the censorious atmosphere and decisionmaking on many college campuses with the hyperbolic outrage that thrives in social media. He throws a lot of words trying to make them <s>the same</s> <i>similar</i>, but they're not.<br />
<br />
Mute buttons, unfollows, blocks--these are all effective, defensive weapons at the disposal of any would-be commentator on social media. Yes, yes, the Left gets in a tizzy with trigger warnings (which are fine, generally, but can be taken well beyond their practical utility) and oversensitivity to comments about sexual, gender, ethnic or other differences. Sometimes they're justified, sometimes they just need to chill out. This is all true.<br />
<br />
But say something about abortion rights or guns or God or whatever, and the Right does the same thing.<br />
<br />
Self-righteous indignation about core values that others don't share is just how this whole social media thing works. It is at once the most democratic space and freest marketplace of ideas available. And it's extraordinarily messy.<br />
<br />
Colleges that allow threats and intimidation of those who speak freely are curbing speech and they should be held accountable, but the general state of how colleges are run--from speech codes to rape investigations to how they invest their endowments--is a broader topic that I can't wade into here. Suffice it to say, caving to pressure to cancel a guest lecture is not a threat to free speech, broadly defined, and shouldn't be counted in the same category.<br />
<br />
I assume some on the Right are embracing Chait's piece because they feel attacked and defensive about what they say and don't like being shouted down.<br />
<br />
I could not care less.<br />
<br />
The possibility of getting shouted-down is the one surviving, legitimate cost of coming into the public forum. So long as opponents are not banning books and using the government to silence or intimidate people--or tolerating violence or criminal harassment--it's their right. Indeed, the voting-with-your-feet/wallet is the entire premise of social interaction that libertarians say should guide the various decisions one makes in one's life. Don't like it? Turn it off!<br />
<br />
There is a sense that self-selected social and traditional media consumption will make our (putatively) pluralistic society more fractured and segmented politically. Certainly, the decline of CNN and rises of more polarized media like MSNBC and Fox support this. I don't know if that's good or bad, or what the long term consequences of it will be on our political system--more gridlock and space between the major parties certainly seem likely--but this is what we all said we wanted: freedom (Right), democracy (Left), and the free exchange of ideas (libertarian).<br />
<br />
No one said it was going to be pretty.<br />
<br />
<i>bellum medicamenti delenda est</i><br />
<i><br /></i> UPDATE: A colleague suggested a fairer reading would say Chait was not so much feeling victimized here as he was calling for a discursive norm to reestablish itself on the political Left. I don't disagree with that, as I ascribed possible victimhood to some of the more pugnacious writers of the Right who have shared it approvingly, but I think my point holds. Lecturing the Internet on how we deal with each other is likely to have the same effect as talking at a wall.<br />
<br />
The Internet is vast and there will always be shrill commentators on all sides. I don't find this quality particularly dangerous on the web, as social norms and associations will shift as practices either change or endure. I find Chait's piece mostly harmless, but the discursive equivalent of a longread about the <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/15/AR2009041502861.html">crassness of blue jeans</a>.<br />
<br />
<br />JPBhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16468994137056889334noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6477941359267770660.post-8459875325504496842015-01-16T10:11:00.001-05:002015-01-16T10:21:19.038-05:00Justice Sotomayor on the Oklahoma Lethal Injection ProtocolLast night, the State of Oklahoma put a child killer to death by a questionable lethal injection protocol. I understand not mourning the loss.<br />
<br />
Admittedly, as I've gotten older, I have become anti-death penalty generally, but my policy preference does not trump the constitutionality of the practice. Clearly, some form of capital punishment is constitutional. However, that does not mean that all forms of capital punishment are permissible.<br />
<br />
As a nation that is to be governed by laws, and until we ban capital punishment entirely, how the state carries out these increasingly problematic executions must be examined for constitutionality--specifically the Eighth Amendment's prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment. Justice Sotomayor, joined by the three Democrat-appointed justices, makes a strong and well-reasoned constitutional argument why last night's execution should not have happened.<br />
<br />
You can read it <a href="https://www.themarshallproject.org/documents/1503562-14a761-oklahoma-scotus?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter&utm_source=opening-statement&utm_term=newsletter-20150116-93">here</a>, courtesy of the Marshall Project.JPBhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16468994137056889334noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6477941359267770660.post-40908187002450436392014-12-29T17:39:00.000-05:002014-12-29T17:39:16.059-05:00Contra the "Individual Responsibility Trumps Racism" ShibbolethI'm not a Redditor. I think I'm a tad too old or, at least, too old fashioned to utilize the medium as it is intended. However, I wanted to share a comment on a Reddit thread about poverty, racism, and individual responsibility that I think hits all the right notes. (I know the author but the comment was flagged for me by a mutual friend.)<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
An excerpt:</div>
<div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
If you were to design a situation where I maximized my true utility of choices to leave poverty, I often made bad ones. But I was given two gifts without any effort: I have a high, high, high capability for analytic intelligence and my mother was a wonderfully stable human being. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
But lots of people didn't have those: people that worked harder, people that were kinder, people that made better choices. The gravity of the situation pulled them back, given all those attributes. I will always remember a coworker of mine a McDonalds: nice girl, kind, harder working than I ever was in school. She studied every day at after-school tutorials for two years to pass a Science TAKS test - she never did. I showed up hungover, I got perfect score. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
I have earned many things in life - my analytic intelligence was not one of those.
</blockquote>
</div>
<div>
It's best taken in its entirety so please, go read it <a href="http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/2qg9yj/cmv_its_intellectually_dishonest_to_blame_the/cn5x7ri">here</a>.<br />
<br />
The excerpt above reminds me of another one, written by Ta-Nehisi Coates, that is one of my favorites:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
But the game *is* rigged. Let me tell you how I came here. I write for a major magazine and this is a privilege. I would say that it is earned, except that many people earn many things which they never receive. So I shall say that it was earned and I was lucky.(via <i><a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/07/privilege-is-like-money-reflections-from-france/277559/">The Atlantic</a></i>)</blockquote>
Yes, individual responsibility is important for people to escape unfortunate circumstances. But that doesn't mean that those who failed to get out lacked it, nor that those who did were living up to the noble ideal that fits your public policy worldview.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://rare.us/story/the-thin-line-between-mia-love-and-tim-scott/">Mia Love</a> and<a href="http://rare.us/story/stop-helping-us-more-about-reinforcing-black-stereotypes-than-finding-small-government-solutions/"> others of the economic right</a> would have you believe that the structurally protected racial inequalities that have been baked into the American system since jump are best defeated by hard work and determination <i>in lieu of </i>systemic analysis and reform.<br />
<br />
Such is a recipe for a different kind of American exceptionalism--that the exceptional <i>and lucky</i> people who succeed in spite of the myriad obstacles placed before them are the aspirational normal. Further, the continued unfairness that makes life harder for millions of marginalized Americans should be dismissed and ignored because Jim Crow is dead therefore everything is fair (enough) now.<br />
<br />
I don't know if this nonsense comes from resentment, naivete, or general ignorance, but it's nonsense nevertheless.<br />
<br />
Entrenched poverty comes from a lot of sources: the effect of broader society and preexisting public policy being two prominent among them. That neither of these typically appear in right-of-center solutions to ongoing socio-economic problems (save antipathy to demonized social welfare programs) is a big reason why the right's base is primarily old, white, and increasingly out of touch. The GOP's short-term electoral success masks a shrinking social relevance and resonance that is a demographic nightmare in the longer term.<br />
<br />
Since the days of slavery, there have been exceptions to the crushing social and economic power of the dominant American order. That didn't make any of those societies just or "good enough." That circumstances have improved over those years is not evidence that American society is fixed or has recovered from hundreds of years of prejudice, racism, and inequality.<br />
<br />
Individual responsibility is a necessary but not nearly sufficient condition for widespread social betterment. The arguments about socio-economic progress cannot continue to be simply about individual responsibility OR institutional racism, because such arguments are valid only in a world divorced from current American reality.<br />
<br />
<i>bellum medicamenti delenda est</i><br />
<br />
PS--in case you didn't click through before, <a href="http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/2qg9yj/cmv_its_intellectually_dishonest_to_blame_the/cn5x7ri">read all of the Reddit post here</a>.<br />
<br />
<br /></div>
JPBhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16468994137056889334noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6477941359267770660.post-32868321396934554812014-12-21T12:30:00.002-05:002014-12-21T12:44:56.257-05:00On the NYPD Tragedy and Its AftermathAs most people, I am horrified and saddened by the murder of the two police officers in Brooklyn yesterday. My heart goes out to the family, friends, and colleagues of officers Wenjian Lui and Raphael Ramos. <br />
<br />
But the reaction by some self-styled allies of the NYPD are nothing short of inexcusable. This sentiment may be best illustrated by former New York governor George Pataki:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-hct-sags-o8/VJb3xayqoUI/AAAAAAAAA-k/ROLgc7OSC9g/s1600/Pataki%2Brant.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-hct-sags-o8/VJb3xayqoUI/AAAAAAAAA-k/ROLgc7OSC9g/s1600/Pataki%2Brant.jpg" height="185" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
Like Eric Holder, I have immediate family that served honorably and proudly in law enforcement. To assert that people like Holder (and me) who criticize police practices and want police to be better than they are should be held responsible for the acts of a murderous lunatic is reckless and unforgivably insulting.<br />
<br />
Need the preening, self-important politicians be reminded: the United States is a country where free speech is an essential tool by which the government for, by, and of the people is held accountable. To say that those who criticize the police are responsible for the random violence inflicted upon some officers by an evidently suicidal man is to express a sentiment that is not only baseless and malicious, but fundamentally un-American in implication.<br />
<br />
Beyond the preening politicians, there have been those who would like to characterize criticism as a 'war on cops.' Admittedly, there are those people who have become so fed up with how they and their loved ones have been treated by police officers that criticism comes from a place of anger and frustration. But the police are ultimately responsible for how they treat the public and thus have considerable control over how they are perceived by that public. It is pure fantasy to believe that the outrage that has fueled the dozens of nationwide protests against police brutality has been manufactured against an otherwise beloved police force that in every case has great relationships with the communities they serve.<br />
<br />
Furthermore, the war on cops rhetoric coming from some police sources only reinforce the point made by many critics of the police that too many officers hold an "us versus them" mentality when dealing with the public. If the police believe they are working among an enemy population, their treatment of the public will undoubtedly reflect that mindset.<br />
<br />
There is no greater threat to police-public relations than a police force that holds open hostility towards the people it is charged with serving. This jeopardizes public safety not only from police-public violence, but endangers communities by undermining the legitimacy of law enforcement itself.<br />
<br />
The NYPD and its members have every right to mourn and be outraged by the actions of a lone gunman yesterday. My most sincere sympathies go out to them for their losses. However, that does not give them or anyone else <i>carte blanche</i> to abuse the citizens with whom they come into contact, nor does it require those of us concerned with improving police practices that enable that abuse to remain silent because they have dangerous jobs.<br />
<br />
The police are not our enemies, nor are the people the enemy of the police. At a time when the vast majority of reformers are expressing sympathy for the police and the sacrifices they make, self-appointed friends of the police like Gov. Pataki would serve everyone much better by not stoking police fear and resentment. To do otherwise makes everyone--police, protesters, and the general public--less safe.<br />
<br />
<i>bellum medicamenti delenda est</i><br />
<br />JPBhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16468994137056889334noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6477941359267770660.post-10181026280370096052014-12-17T12:09:00.002-05:002014-12-17T12:10:48.701-05:00Police Policy and Police Violence<div class="tr_bq">
My first installment in a series on police policy and its relationship to police violence is<a href="http://rare.us/story/to-reduce-police-violence-against-citizens-police-practices-will-need-to-change/"> live over at <i>Rare.us</i></a>. Frankly, so much of the critiques in the wake of Ferguson, Staten Island, and Cleveland focuses on niche issues, like the drug war, instead of how we allow our police agencies to be run in our name.</div>
<blockquote>
When used as a method to question someone in relation to a separate crime, whether in a car or on the street, this behavior is known as a pretextual stop. Simplifying a bit, one law (e.g., running a stop sign) is used as pretext to investigate further (e.g., looking for evidence of drug crimes) because the officer otherwise lacks reasonable suspicion or probable cause to stop a person or vehicle. Thus, if a police officer makes up his mind to stop you, even the slightest violation of a law or out of the ordinary conduct (like looking nervous when a police officer is watching you) can give him an excuse to stop you. </blockquote>
<blockquote>
Put another way, he’s certainly going to stop you.<br />
[...]<br />
One disturbing aspect in so many of these recent, high-profile homicide cases is the quickness with which violence became the method of control against Michael Brown, Eric Garner, and others. That the recent cases have all involved black males is no surprise to many observers and protesters. Even skeptical black conservative Jason L. Riley tells a story about how he was grabbed from his vehicle by police at gunpoint because he "fit the description" of a suspect.. “Fitting the description” is, in practice, often just a police euphemism for being a black male.
</blockquote>
It's a tad long, but it lays the fundamental groundwork for understanding what is actually going on during police encounters all over the United States. I also explain how some departments knowingly tolerate police violence:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Fifteen years ago, criminology professor and police researcher Jerome H. Skolnick wrote an article on police brutality in the American Prospect. He noted that, “Police executives sometimes review the ‘resisting arrest’ cases of police officers to determine whether a cop inclines toward administering vigilante justice.” </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The thinking goes, if a suspect is in custody with visible bruises or other injuries, those injuries—if caused by the arresting officer(s)—are typically justified by claims of resistance. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
WNYC News recently reviewed over 50,000 NYPD cases in which resisting arrest was among the charges. WNYC found that five percent of NYPD officers accounted for 40 percent of all resisting arrest charges since 2009, and 15 percent of officers accounted for half of all resistance charges. </blockquote>
The next installment will discuss systemic susceptibility for police perjury. Read the whole thing <a href="http://rare.us/story/to-reduce-police-violence-against-citizens-police-practices-will-need-to-change/">here</a>.JPBhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16468994137056889334noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6477941359267770660.post-90985837979169779732014-12-09T21:47:00.001-05:002014-12-09T21:47:52.125-05:00Roundup: On the Torture ReportSimply put, the CIA was counterproductive, sadistic, and incompetent.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/taking-responsibility-torture?int-cid=mod-latest">David Cole in the <i>New Yorker</i></a>.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/10/world/senate-report-raises-doubts-about-cia-claims-on-hunt-for-osama-bin-laden.html?_r=0">Charlie Savage and James Risen in the <i>New York Times</i></a>.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/12/09/the-most-gruesome-moments-in-the-cia-torture-report.html?via=twitter_page">Shane Harris and Tim Mak in the <i>Daily Beast</i></a>.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/12/cia-torture-report-abuses-rectal-feeding"><span style="background-color: white; color: #5e7185; font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', 'Bitstream Vera Serif', serif; font-size: 11.8181819915771px; font-style: italic; line-height: 16.8000011444092px;"> </span>Nick Baumann<span style="background-color: white; color: #5e7185; font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', 'Bitstream Vera Serif', serif; font-size: 11.8181819915771px; font-style: italic; line-height: 16.8000011444092px;">, </span>Jenna McLaughlin<span style="background-color: white; color: #5e7185; font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', 'Bitstream Vera Serif', serif; font-size: 11.8181819915771px; font-style: italic; line-height: 16.8000011444092px;">, </span>Patrick Caldwell<span style="background-color: white; font-size: 12px; line-height: 16.8000011444092px;"><i style="color: #5e7185; font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', 'Bitstream Vera Serif', serif;"> </i><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">and<i> </i></span></span>Mariah Blake in <i>MoJo</i></a>.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.vox.com/2014/12/9/7360359/torture-sere">Max Fisher at <i>Vox</i></a>.<br />
<br />
There is no excuse for this. None. It is absolutely maddening.<br />
<br />
What's even more galling? The only person from the CIA in prison is <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/International/cia-operative-prison-punishment-whistleblowing-torture/story?id=27474359">John Kiriakou</a>, the person who first alerted the public to the interrogation program.<br />
<br />
<i>bellum medicamenti delenda est</i>JPBhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16468994137056889334noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6477941359267770660.post-91080304023134034222014-12-05T14:23:00.001-05:002014-12-05T16:57:23.372-05:00On the Developing Implosion Controversy over the Rolling Stone UVA-Rape Story<i>UPDATED to reflect controversy/rather than implicate falseness of the statements. The points of the post are relevant whether the allegations are true or not. </i><br />
<br />
Journalism is hard.<br />
<br />
I've never been a reporter, so I'll leave the professionals and media critics to talk about the ethical and professional lapses at <i>Rolling Stone</i> that led to <s> what appears to be exaggerated, if not flat-out false gang rape allegations</s> <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/u-va-fraternity-to-rebut-claims-of-gang-rape-in-rolling-stone/2014/12/05/5fa5f7d2-7c91-11e4-84d4-7c896b90abdc_story.html">publishing a piece</a> that shook the University of Virginia.<br />
<br />
But I do know about rape victims. I've been trusted by several of my female friends with the information that they have been raped at some point in their lives. I can't explain how it feels to hear that someone you care about has been raped. As far as I know, <a href="http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2012/02/consensual_or_criminal_two_uo.html">only one of my friends</a> ever went to the police about it.<br />
<br />
I never judge the woman for making the decision not to press charges, because going through that process can be a trauma on top of the trauma of being raped. Some people think it's an ethical duty to keep that person from raping again, but I'm always much more concerned with the immediacy of my friend's emotional well-being. Granted, it was usually well after the fact that I was told, but it is nevertheless something I do not feel qualified to pass judgment on.<br />
<br />
And yes, this is something that has occurred enough times in my life that I can use the term "usually." This sickening fact is why I have no patience for people who claim that "rape culture" doesn't exist.<br />
<br />
I have also had the unfortunate experience of hearing false rape claims.<br />
<br />
Years ago, two friends and I were standing outside of a bar in Chinatown here in DC. We hear a woman yelling, mostly indistinct. She sounds angry, but it's nighttime in Chinatown, it's not particularly unusual. Then she yells "RAPE!"<br />
<br />
One of my friends, J--who takes his role as a responsible citizen more seriously than most people I know--immediately runs to her aid. My other friend, G, and I look at each other, utter some obscenities, take a deep breath, and run after our friend because we have his back.<br />
<br />
We get to this screaming woman yelling rape as she's a passenger in a parked car. Someone has already called 911, a bystander, if I recall correctly.<br />
<br />
J tries to calm her down, G and I confront the guy in the drivers seat and ask him what the hell was going on. He tries to run away, but we corner him. <br />
<br />
He explains to us that he was breaking up with her and she was upset and wouldn't get out of the car. We were hostile and skeptical at first, but he was pretty convincing. (After all, once we started running, we had to prepare for the prospect
of violence, so this wasn't the most cordial introduction.)<br />
<br />
Moreover, he says works for a prominent [then-]US senator and can't be dealing with police. We tell him that A) he needs to stick around, if for no other reason than they have his car it'll look awful to flee and B) this woman needs to come clean about what happened.<br />
<br />
We go back to ask her what happened, and she admitted that she just wanted to put pressure on him because she loved him. G asked her why she made that up. She then starts cussing him out and calling him "nigger" and I pull him away.<br />
<br />
Then the police show up. Like a dozen of them.<br />
<br />
We give our statements and say that she yelled rape and we came running (thanks to J) and that she admitted to making it up because she was upset, in addition to the verbal abuse of G. We were talking to a male officer about what happened and the look on his face was like "Oh great, another one." Two female officers a few feet away but within earshot looked very angry, as well they should have been. <br />
<br />
We were all angry. And I'm angry now.<br />
<br />
For every case like that awful woman in Chinatown, there are countless women who don't say anything for fear of ruining their own lives--risking so much without any guarantee of a conviction. This UVA case, if it falls apart as <s>the</s> some reports indicate is possible, <i>could be</i> another Tawana Brawley or Duke lacrosse case--unverified stories that opportunists (or perhaps in the case of this writer, someone too trusting) exploited for their own careers. These few instances of false claims will likely dissuade more victims from coming forward and undermine the legitimate efforts to curb rape and bring its perpetrators to justice.<br />
<br />
If innocent, the men accused at UVA ought to be fully and publicly exonerated, full stop. But it is important to believe women if and when they tell you they've been raped. The overwhelming majority of women don't make that stuff up, and they need support if they ask for it.<br />
<br />
It is almost a mathematical certainty that you know a woman that has been raped. It may have happened before they met you, or since you've known them. That you may not know speaks not only to what they suffered, but the stigma, guilt, and shame that accompanies such an intimate and scarring violation.<br />
<br />
Rape is far too common in this country, and it is an acute problem on college campuses. Collectively, we need to take it more seriously, and as individuals, we need to believe and support the women who come forward.<br />
<br />
<i>bellum medicamenti delenda est</i><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />JPBhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16468994137056889334noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6477941359267770660.post-12692017934180672082014-11-27T08:28:00.000-05:002014-11-27T08:28:05.939-05:00On the Rule of Law in FergusonAfter the grand jury decision in Ferguson and the sometimes-violent aftermath, I wrote a piece for <i>Rare </i>explaining--but not excusing--why people reacted the way they did. It's not very long, but might be summed up by a friend's comment on Facebook, "Well what did you expect to happen when you treated people like niggers?"<br />
<br />
My piece is <a href="http://rare.us/story/theres-no-respect-for-the-rule-of-law-in-ferguson-because-the-government-destroyed-it/">here</a>. If I get a chance, I'll share a roundup of some of the most poignant writing on the aftermath. <br />
<br />
I hope you have/had a wonderful Thanksgiving, or Thursday, if you don't happen to live in America.<br />
<br />
<i>bellum medicamenti delenda est</i>JPBhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16468994137056889334noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6477941359267770660.post-23722828467929756642014-11-24T15:04:00.000-05:002014-11-24T17:30:56.011-05:00Ferguson Grand Jury Announcement TodayIt has been a long time since I've been this nervous about a community's well-being, let alone one I'm hundreds of miles away from. All news reports indicate that the grand jury decision in the case of Darren Wilson's shooting of Michael Brown will be announced today.<br />
<br />
It seems the entire media is bracing for a riot. I'm hoping that whatever violent elements exist will be largely contained by the righteously angry but largely peaceful demonstration in the case of no indictment--as has generally been the case since the demonstrations began.<br />
<br />
Most people, on all sides, assume that there will be no indictment.<br />
<br />
Even if everything (including the discredited broken eye-socket story) that Wilson's supporters said about the altercation with Michael Brown was true, the result has revealed the deep and unforgivable fissures between the local police and the community.<br />
<br />
Much ado is made about the racial makeup of the Ferguson police force, and that certainly adds to the problems, but this is really about a police force that enjoys no respect or benefit of the doubt from its community. <a href="http://rare.us/story/many-black-americans-live-in-fear-of-the-police-and-something-must-be-done-about-it/">As I've written recently</a>, that blame falls entirely on the police departments, not the communities they are charged with protecting.<br />
<br />
The release of the shoplifting tape, uninvestigated grand jury leaks, police-union backed "anonymous" fundraising campaigns, outright lies, and other Wilson friendly information fed to the media compound this distrust--and that's before you even get to the aggressive, unprofessional, and explicitly hostile way the police agencies have handled the demonstrations since the shooting.<br />
<br />
Personally, I'm looking forward to going over the testimony and evidence the prosecutor presented to the jury. I'm very curious as to the actual police account of what happened--something we still have not had to date--and why, presumably, Wilson had his gun out to fight over in the first place, if indeed there was a struggle over said gun as supporters suggest. (That Brown reached inside an SUV and went for a holstered weapon could not pass the smell test.)<br />
<br />
My layman's guess is that whatever transpired between Brown and Wilson, Wilson too quickly reached for his weapon. This is something that <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/22/nyregion/new-york-police-officer-fatally-shoots-brooklyn-man.html?smid=tw-bna&_r=0">cost an innocent's life</a> in New York last week, and I'm sure it happens more often than is widely reported.<br />
<br />
Police who draw their guns as anything but a last resort demonstrate a fear and scorn of the people they are charged with protecting. Such animosity likely spills over into other, less violent encounters with police. A community that faces that animosity regularly will feel it and naturally resent it.<br />
<br />
Regardless of the grand jury's decision, police across America should
take this as a teaching moment. It is imperative that any police force
has the respect and trust of the people its policing. Otherwise, when
things go wrong--and they will--a bad situation may become exponentially
worse. <br />
<br />
My thoughts are with the people of Ferguson today. Let us all hope for some measure of justice and, above all, peace.<br />
<br />
<i>bellum medicamenti delenda est</i><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />JPBhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16468994137056889334noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6477941359267770660.post-64672751995441870882014-11-21T12:31:00.001-05:002014-11-21T13:15:45.293-05:00Some Thoughts on Procedure<div style="text-align: center;">
<img alt="http://cdn.meme.am/instances/500x/56431912.jpg" class="decoded" src="http://cdn.meme.am/instances/500x/56431912.jpg" /> </div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><i>Courtesy of<a href="http://cdn.meme.am/instances/500x/56431912.jpg"> Memegenerator.net </a>and JPB. </i></span></div>
<br />
"Procedure" is a word that evokes banality. It is the stuff of bureaucracy and litigiousness. It's the word we use to describe colonoscopies in polite company. And, if my Twitter feed is any indication, it is the last refuge of political scoundrels trying to make a point.<br />
<br />
But procedure is also the bulwark of rights in our judicial system. (ie, Due Process) Those in power must follow procedure to exercise that power in a way consistent with law and custom. Presidents, Congressmen, police officers, prosecutors, and bureaucrats all most follow procedure to maintain their legitimacy.<br />
<br />
I happen to agree with many on the Left, and <a href="http://reason.com/blog/2014/11/20/obamas-immigration-action-probably-legal">a few</a> on <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/08/08/not-everything-the-president-wants-to-do-is-illegal/">the Right</a>, that <a href="http://www.vox.com/2014/11/20/7257469/obama-immigration-order-speech">Obama's executive orders relating to immigration</a> were within the laws and customs currently on the books. Whether those laws should have exceptions that one libertarian friend said "you could drive a truck through" is another story entirely, but that's the law Congress gave him to work with.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-7lLwIkOsXPQ/VG9xW0pWz9I/AAAAAAAAA9I/hm_9xNYEuFs/s1600/Obama%2Btruck%2B2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-7lLwIkOsXPQ/VG9xW0pWz9I/AAAAAAAAA9I/hm_9xNYEuFs/s1600/Obama%2Btruck%2B2.jpg" height="213" width="320" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><i>(dis?)Courtesy of the White House</i></span></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
The Right's sky-is-falling narrative is overblown and off-base, at least in this context. Their references to a King or Emperor skirting procedure would be laughable if not so tragic, given what most of them are conveniently ignoring.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Obama has not once, but twice unilaterally sent troops to fight in civil wars that pose no existential threat to the United States nor could be construed (with a straight face) to be in line with the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorization_for_Use_of_Military_Force_Against_Terrorists">AUMF</a>
--lest we understand the text to mean the Authorization to Unilaterally Murder Foreigners. (See also: the <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/29/world/obamas-leadership-in-war-on-al-qaeda.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0">Kill List.</a>)</div>
<br />
But you see, it's much easier to rile up the Right's base by helping millions of brown people here at home than blowing up different brown people half-way across the globe. <br />
<br />
Take a moment to process that.<br />
<br />
<i>bellum medicamenti delenda est</i>JPBhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16468994137056889334noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6477941359267770660.post-82860151330614338972014-11-14T15:14:00.003-05:002014-11-14T15:14:36.636-05:00How Legal Cannabis Sales Help the PoorThe District of Columbia voted to legalize possession and non-commercial sharing of cannabis in last week's election. That's good, but the more important part of the law is the authorization of the DC City Council to vote to legalize (and regulate) the sale of marijuana if it so chooses.<br />
<br />
This further action is necessary for the people in DC who suffer most from the effects of the drug war: poor minorities.<br />
<br />
In <a href="http://rare.us/story/washington-d-c-should-protect-the-poor-by-legalizing-the-sale-of-marijuana/">my latest at<i> Rare</i></a>, I explain how marijuana for sale is better for the poor than marijuana for free. <br />
<br />
<i>bellum medicamenti delenda est</i>JPBhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16468994137056889334noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6477941359267770660.post-64806016105019068762014-11-09T12:06:00.002-05:002014-11-09T12:50:25.932-05:00On Mia Love and Tim ScottAfter last week's elections of Rep. Mia Love in Utah and Sen. Tim Scott in South Carolina, the Republican Party faces both a new opportunity in their minority outreach efforts, and a choice.<br />
<br />
Although Love and Scott are both black conservatives, they are not the same. While they both tout personal stories that highlight 'pull up from bootstraps' narratives, the differences between them are nether subtle nor meaningless.<br />
<br />
If the GOP wants to feel better about its rhetoric toward the poor and minorities without actually addressing their past transgressions, they should embrace Mia Love. If they actually want to address their relationship with black Americans, they could do much worse than Tim Scott.<br />
<br />
Neither approach will bring a tidal wave of black support to the Republican Party, but resentment politics repackaged and delivered by a black person is not the way to reach out.<br />
<br />
You can read my latest at <i>Rare </i>on this topic <a href="http://rare.us/story/the-thin-line-between-mia-love-and-tim-scott/">here</a>.<br />
<br />
<i>bellum medicamenti delenda est</i>JPBhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16468994137056889334noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6477941359267770660.post-68592282751421395192014-11-04T12:27:00.000-05:002014-11-04T12:27:44.113-05:00Libertarians: "Pay No Attention to the Man Who Won't Stand Behind the Voting Curtain"<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><br />
I already have made my <a href="http://blanksslate.blogspot.com/2008/11/why-i-voted.html">personal reasons for voting</a> clear.<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
However, my friend, colleague, and sometimes-editor Aaron Ross Powell
has an <a href="http://www.libertarianism.org/columns/voting-moral-wrong#tmhmdj:hBP">essay up today about the moral case against voting</a>. I understand where
he’s coming from, and I’ll even concede the philosophical argument he makes in
it. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But government and the elections that shape it are
practical matters, not philosophy, so I respectfully disagree with its broader message.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
There is a practical reason to vote, particularly for
libertarians as a—gasp!—collective. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Representative government is responsive to social needs,
norms, and change, albeit in a very limited way. Political parties evolve, and
respond to those whom they feel most obligated. The math certainly justifies the
individual’s decision not to vote, but collectively, voting is quite
meaningful.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I don’t understand the libertarians—some of them among the
most prominent in the nation—who insist on supporting presidential candidates
like Mitt Romney because the alternative is so much worse. Even if that were
so, it’s fundamentally absurd to dependably toe the party line in fear of the
alternative and expect that party to become more libertarian at the same time.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The incentives for libertarian acquiescence to either party
for fear of the other is a recipe for irrelevance.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I often vote for a libertarian not because I identify as a
capital “L” libertarian—I don’t—but because I want to express my displeasure
with both major parties and in a way that shows my preference for smaller
government. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Aaron writes: </div>
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div class="MsoNormal">
If you cast a vote today, there’s a pretty high chance that in morally
significant ways you’re acting just like those friends mugging the old
man. You may think there are good reasons for doing this, that a world
where you vote for violations of basic human dignity and autonomy will
be more livable—happier, freer, wealthier, more equal—than one where you
don’t. But you’re still party to countless immoralities. You’re still
expressing approval as politicians fail to live up to basic moral
standards—and as they do so in your name. </div>
</blockquote>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
By paying taxes on everything that I buy, and the income that I make, I'm already a party to these governmental immoralities. In many ways, I'm sure my money has gone to all sorts of terrible things both through taxation and participation in the market economy. My freely given or relinquished dollar does not sanction everything the recipient of that dollar does with or without my dollar. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Likewise, my marginal preference for one major candidate or another--or neither, as I'm primarily discussing here--expresses only a preference, not an endorsement. A vote in one election does not convey approval for everything that person does, and there are alternative means--writing, calling, petitioning, organizing--that can later influence the behavior of that recipient while in office. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
And the more <i>voters </i>I can sway holds a lot more weight than a bunch of libertarians who are sitting-out on philosophical principle. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Whether or not we’re in a “libertarian moment” right now
means less to me than communicating that the major parties will not, in fact,
get my vote until they start paying more attention to civil liberties and
reforming our criminal justice system. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
By myself, it’s not saying much.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But in toss-up districts and states, enough people who vote
libertarian can, by shifting the margin, change the outcome of an election. A
party that is on the losing end of that would be wise to cater to libertarian
issues in the future. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Yet, like clockwork, the libertarian corner of the Internet
is riddled with arguments against voting today and, of course, is most likely
to be read by people who agree with them. Effectively, libertarians are taking
themselves out of political consideration. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Not my idea of effective policy change.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Philosophy has its place, as it informs our beliefs and
ideals. However, removing yourself—and, more damning, those whom agree with you
most—from the election process eliminates the largest incentive for politicians
to care what you and those like you believe.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It shouldn't be this hard to explain to libertarians that incentives matter.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i>bellum medicamenti delenda est</i></div>
JPBhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16468994137056889334noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6477941359267770660.post-16133124769024726062014-10-28T10:29:00.001-04:002014-10-28T10:29:49.467-04:00"Please Stop Helping Us" ReviewSome weeks back, a book was brought to my attention by a colleague. It is called "Please Stop Helping Us: How Liberals Make It Harder for Blacks to Succeed" by Jason L. Riley. I was hoping for a sober analysis of the unintended consequences of big government policies and full of small government solutions to problems that continue to disproportionately affect African Americans.<br />
<br />
Unfortunately, what I got was the same ol' tired and worn out argument by conservatives that blacks just need to be better if they want to be treated better. More irritating, the author's disdain for American blacks--being one for the sake of the collective pronoun "us" in the title, but any shared identity is held at arm's length throughout the text of the book--is evident on what seems to be every page. I exaggerate, but not enough to be unfair.<br />
<br />
Riley manages to fit in some policy, but most of it after he rationalizes police abuse of young black men (even though he faced some of it himself) and dismisses those who object to criminalizing wearing sagging pants.His absolution of the criminal justice system by way of nonsensical "soft on crime" posturing and selective quotes of critics should undermine his credibility as a thoughtful writer on the subject, even if you remove the racial aspect entirely.<br />
<br />
"Please Stop Helping Us" could have been a damning indictment of the governmental system that purports to help people. Instead, Riley took his opportunity to air his scorn for his fellow American blacks. And that is a shame on more levels than I can explain here.<br />
<br />
You can read my review of the book at <i>Rare</i> <a href="http://rare.us/story/stop-helping-us-more-about-reinforcing-black-stereotypes-than-finding-small-government-solutions/">here</a>.JPBhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16468994137056889334noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6477941359267770660.post-82476324685540734402014-10-24T13:57:00.001-04:002014-10-24T14:00:43.659-04:00Cops on Camera Event VideoJust posting the video to the Cato panel I was on yesterday. It was covered by C-SPAN so you can find it on their website, or you can watch it here, with footage taken from (and available on) the Cato website.<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="288" mozallowfullscreen="" src="http://www.cato.org/longtail-iframe/node/54817/field_longtail_player/0" webkitallowfullscreen="" width="512"></iframe><br />
<br />
A most sincere thank you to all of my friends, family, and colleagues that have been supportive of me and this event.<br />
<br />
<i>bellum medicamenti delenda est</i>JPBhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16468994137056889334noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6477941359267770660.post-61195982485840771892014-10-21T15:57:00.001-04:002014-10-21T15:57:17.183-04:00Come See Me at Cato on Thursday<a href="http://blanksslate.blogspot.com/2014/10/the-importance-of-cameras-to-policing.html">As I've written recently</a>, the advent of small, high quality cameras that can be put on dashboards, worn by police officers, or carried in your pocket as part of your phone is changing the very nature of police encounters and police accountability.<br />
<br />
I know it's late notice--it was for me too!--but I'll be on a panel discussing cameras, technology, and policing this <a href="http://www.cato.org/events/cops-camera-tech-solutions-police-militarization-misconduct">Thursday at Cato</a>.<br />
<br />
If you can't attend the event in person, you can <a href="http://www.cato.org/events/cops-camera-tech-solutions-police-militarization-misconduct">watch it livestream here</a> or catch it when it's later posted on the <a href="http://www.cato.org/events/archives">Cato Events archives page</a>.<br />
<br />
<i>bellum medicamenti delenda est</i>JPBhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16468994137056889334noreply@blogger.com0