Thanks. I do want to say that I really agree with a lot of your points, regarding policing, prison, and the socio-economic focus there.
This is not happening in other countries. This is a uniquely American problem, and I urge you to stop normalizing it. This is NOT okay. I would argue that the only reason so many whites have been silent about it is because it is seen as a "black problem" and not pertinent to them. This is one of the many ways race is used to separate people with common interests and make them fight each other instead of joining forces to fight for what benefits them all.
The part that I highlighted here is one that I find to be extremely important, and one of my main problems with the rallying cry of BLM. I have always been a fan of separate, hyper-focused activist groups/movements, that then support each others work where alignments exist.
There are a LOT of folks who fall into the right/trump/tea/libertarian/etc range of things that would absolutely support a push to cut down on militarization of police, prison-industrial-complex, and so on... if it wasn't the the fact that currently jumping on that bandwagon seems to require accepting/agreeing to a lot of extremely left/socialist/marxist/intersectional assumptions & beliefs.
Have you ever heard of Dale Brown and the Threat Management Centers in Detroit?
I know, it's Berwick and he's a sleeze-ball, but Dale doesn't do a lot of interviews
He's new to me. Will check him out.
What you're describing is the very problematic "all or nothing" viewpoint that tends to be more prevalent on the left than on the right. It's like you can't work together unless you are in 100% agreement about everything, which is going to necessarily be a small percentage of people. Meanwhile there are issues the needle could be moved on where there is agreement by like 80% of the population, but it just doesn't happen because of this all or nothing mindset. Both sides of the ideological divide do it, but it happens more on the left.
I think it would be impossible for far left and far right to work together on anything at this point. I see anarchists as something else entirely though, and hope to see alliances with the left there.
Thanks. I do want to say that I really agree with a lot of your points, regarding policing, prison, and the socio-economic focus there.
The part that I highlighted here is one that I find to be extremely important, and one of my main problems with the rallying cry of BLM. I have always been a fan of separate, hyper-focused activist groups/movements, that then support each others work where alignments exist.
There are a LOT of folks who fall into the right/trump/tea/libertarian/etc range of things that would absolutely support a push to cut down on militarization of police, prison-industrial-complex, and so on... if it wasn't the the fact that currently jumping on that bandwagon seems to require accepting/agreeing to a lot of extremely left/socialist/marxist/intersectional assumptions & beliefs.
Have you ever heard of Dale Brown and the Threat Management Centers in Detroit?
He's new to me. Will check him out.
What you're describing is the very problematic "all or nothing" viewpoint that tends to be more prevalent on the left than on the right. It's like you can't work together unless you are in 100% agreement about everything, which is going to necessarily be a small percentage of people. Meanwhile there are issues the needle could be moved on where there is agreement by like 80% of the population, but it just doesn't happen because of this all or nothing mindset. Both sides of the ideological divide do it, but it happens more on the left.
I think it would be impossible for far left and far right to work together on anything at this point. I see anarchists as something else entirely though, and hope to see alliances with the left there.