This is the basic theory behind the idea of defunding the police. There's only one problem with the theory, it's wrong. Simply put: Blacks don't want fewer cops. Here's the scoop from Newsweek:
Why isn't this on the front-page of the New York Times?"A majority of Black Americans have said they want police presence in their area to either remain the same or increase, despite recent protests over police brutality, according to new polls.
A Gallup poll conducted from June 23 to July 6 surveying more than 36,000 U.S. adults found that 61 percent of Black Americans said they'd like police to spend the same amount of time in their community, while 20 percent answered they'd like to see more police, totaling 81 percent. Just 19 percent of those polled said they wanted police to spend less time in their area.
Black Americans' responses to the question were nearly on par with the national average, in which 67 percent of all U.S. adults said they wanted police presence to remain the same and 19 percent said they wanted it to increase." ("81% of Black Americans Don't Want Less Police Presence Despite Protests — Some Want More Cops: Poll", Newsweek)
Well, because the facts don't jibe with the media's political agenda, right? From the very beginning, the only people supporting this crazy idea have been the lying media and their wacko-BLM allies. As you can see, the idea has no base of support among the black community because the majority of blacks are no different than the majority of whites. They want to be safe in their homes and in their neighborhoods. They want to know that they can walk to the corner grocery store without be beaten senseless with a 2×4 or shot-dead by some junkie gangbanger who needs money for his fix. The average guy is not worried about "systemic racism", that's way above his pay-grade. The average guy just wants to be safe. That's it. That's not my conclusion, that's the opinion of the more than 80% of the blacks who took the survey and stated they wanted as much or more "police presence" as they have now.
So, the matter is settled. The majority has spoken and democracy should prevail, right?
Wrong. Because BLM is led by fanatics that have no regard for the will of the people. And why should they, after all, they know better than everyone else. And they can count on the help of their mainly-white supporters in Seattle, Portland and Minneapolis, to ignore the majority opinion and push ahead with their nutso "defunding" agenda.
In Seattle, the Mayor actually allowed part of the city to be taken over by the mob and turned into its own sovereign state called CHOP (Capitol Hill Occupied Zone). The liberal mayor figured this new "police free" zone would signal the beginning of another "Summer of Love" like Haight-Ashbury in the 1960s. Unfortunately, CHOP was plagued with violence from the very get-go and three people were shot dead in violent encounters in the first two weeks. In other words, Seattle has already experimented with "police free" zones and they have incontrovertible proof that they don't work. No matter. Seattle is moving ahead with its defunding idea regardless. After all, facts don't matter to these people. What matters is ideology, liberal ideology.
And you wonder why we call them fanatics?
In Minneapolis- another bastion of liberalism- the City Council just created "a department of community safety and violence prevention," with a director who would have "non-law enforcement experience in community safety services, including but not limited to public health and/or restorative justice approaches."
"Restorative justice"? In other words, the department will be staffed with over-educated social workers in thick-rim glasses who 'll be dispatched to domestic violence scenes where they'll engage the bloody couple in "crystal" therapies and chanting? And this is supposed to move us all closer to racial justice?
Wouldn't it be easier to reform the system? Wouldn't it make more sense to simply remove the overly-aggressive or racist cops and let the rest do their jobs? Do we really need to reinvent the wheel? Let's remember, the vast majority of African Americans want to be safe and secure. Not one of the 36,000 adults that were surveyed asked for "restorative justice" which is clearly a remedy that emerges from that bottomless wellspring of white guilt. That's not what ordinary people want. They don't want to be patronized; they want security. Check out this excerpt from an article by Thomas Friedman:
See? Even Tom Friedman "gets it", so why is this an issue?"Among those opposing this change (in Minneapolis) is a budding coalition of Black and white community leaders from North Minneapolis, the historical home of the Minneapolis Black community. They are unnerved by the notion of dismantling the police force for a vague alternative at a time when their neighborhood has experienced a surge in gang shootings, lootings and drug dealing...
On Aug. 18, this coalition — four Black and four white families from North Minneapolis — filed suit against the City Council and the mayor, Jacob Frey, to compel them to maintain the legal minimum of police officers on the Minneapolis force. The families contend that the Council's actions have driven out too many police officers and curtailed the hiring of replacements, endangering their neighborhood....
The State Legislature, they also argued, "must change arbitration rules that too often demand bad cops be rehired after being fired for abusive policing."
But they added: "We will not sacrifice the safety of our community in the pursuit of the City Council's lofty goals with no plan to back them up. In the months since George Floyd's murder, we have seen an explosion in crime and homicides....
This is the bottom line: "By charter the Council must maintain a per capita force in the mid-700s of active duty officers. While this is not enough for our needs, we worry that the Council's naïve intent is to take us well below this number. And we are not having it. If the leadership of the city cannot muster the wisdom to keep us safe, it must muster the compliance to obey the law that is designed to do so."...
"We have to be able to say both that Black lives matter and that protests that turn violent cannot be allowed to tear up our city"...("For Biden to Win, Listen to Minneapolis", New York Times)
It's an issue because BLM has made it an issue, so the Democrats and media are playing along. The Dems don't want to alienate a core constituency this close to the general election so they're going along with this farce. Are you surprised? Heck, it took Joe Biden three months to even speak out against the rioting, looting and arson. That tells us that Biden puts politics above everything, even public safety. Which is why his public approval ratings have been falling like a stone. Check out this article from the Washington Times:
True, the Times does suggest that Trump's surge among black voters has more to do with the Republican convention, but his approach to the BLM riots have certainly helped him. Unlike Biden, Trump does not check the direction of the wind before he makes a decision. He displays the type of moral clarity and strength that people expect from their leaders in times of crisis. Trump has never vacillated on his offer to deploy the National Guard to Democrat-run cities to quell the rioting and violence. Like him or hate him, Trump is a resolute leader who is willing to use an iron-fist to reestablish order. Many people believe that those harsher measures are now necessary to keep the country from slipping deeper into the abyss of anarchy and ruin. In fact, steps should have been taken long ago. We should never allow our cities to be incinerated by hooligans. Check out this excerpt from USA Today:"President Trump's approval rating among Black voters jumped by 60% during the Republican National Convention even as Democrats and progressives sought to brand the Republican president as racist.
A HarrisX-Hill poll released Friday showed Mr. Trump's net approval with Black voters from Aug. 22-25, which included the first two days of the RNC, rose to 24%, up from 15% in the pollster's Aug. 8-11 survey.
The poll also found his approval rating among Hispanic voters during the same period increased slightly from 30% to 32%, while his support among White voters decreased by the same margin, ticking down from 54% to 52%." ("Trump's approval rating with Black voters soars by 60% during RNC: poll", Washington Times)
And, then there's this from Politico:"Riots are turning people off to BLM...
Democrats may have hoped that the national reckoning on race would be a favorable issue for 2020. But the street violence has overwhelmed their reform message....The Civiqs tracking poll is particularly interesting for understanding the dynamics at play. Net approval for the Black Lives Matter movement peaked back on June 3 and has fallen sharply since. This was just over a week after George Floyd was killed in Minneapolis, when riots had begun to sweep major cities.
Among whites, net approval is already negative and headed downward. And while Democrats and Republicans are as polarized on the issue as one would expect, white Independents have shown a dramatic falloff in BLM support, going from a net 24% in early June to net 3% now, which is lower than before Floyd was killed. Of course, BLM is not synonymous with rioting, but this trend may show the extent to which the issues have been conflated in the public mind.
"Defund the police" has lost its luster as a political issue, if it ever really had any. Some cities have cut police budgets and reallocated funds to social programs, but positive buzz about this on the national level has vanished" ("Rioting is beginning to turn people off to BLM and protests while Biden has no solution", Yahoo News)
Bottom line: Trump's public approval is rising just as BLM's is falling. Are you surprised?"Voters' favorable views of the Black Lives Matter movement has dropped by 9 percentage points since June, including a 13-point dip among Republicans, according to new POLITICO/Morning Consult poll...the POLITICO/Morning Consult poll shows more voters trust former Vice President Joe Biden over Trump to handle public safety, 47 percent to 39 percent." (Politico)
You shouldn't be, nor should you be surprised that BLM burst onto the scene precisely 6 months before the general election. Pretty good timing, don't you think? Clearly, the Democrats engineered this coup so they could confront Trump on an issue on which they think he is vulnerable: Race. The Democrats also want to energize their black base to make sure they vote in greater numbers than they did in 2016 when dwindling turnout among African Americans cost Hillary the election. The Dems want to make sure that doesn't happen again which is why they have been kowtowing to black voters for the last three months. It's all part of the campaign strategy: Black Lives Matter... until November 3, that is. Then it's back to business as usual.
But now we see that BLM activists are being shuttled from one riot-torn city to the next by deep-pocket contributors who are using them to burn our cities and obliterate the middle class. In an interview with Fox's Laura Ingraham on Monday, Trump discussed this very issue. He confirmed that activists had been flown in to Washington DC for the Republican convention to cause trouble and harass attendees. He said these demonstrators were bankrolled by "some very stupid rich people." Here's more from the same article:
Is this true, are the activists part of some broader conspiracy to inflame racial antagonisms and incite violence around the country?"The money is coming from some very stupid rich people [who] have no idea that if their thing ever succeeded, which it won't, they will be thrown to the wolves like you've never seen before," he said....
The president added that "people you've never heard of, people in the dark shadows" may be facilitating much of the left's activism....We had somebody get on a plane from a certain city this weekend, and in the plane it was almost completely loaded with thugs wearing these dark uniforms, black uniforms with gear and this and that." "Trump suggests 'some very stupid rich people' are funding protest groups, rioters at RNC and across US", Fox News)
Senator Rand Paul seems to think so. Paul - who was viciously attacked following the GOP convention last week - had this to say in an interview with Fox News:
Trump was harshly criticized in the media for saying that a plane "loaded with thugs" was sent to DC to cause trouble. The New York Times dismissed Trump's claims as a "conspiracy theory", but — in the same article - the Times suggests that Trump was right. Here's an excerpt from the article in Thursday's edition:"If the cops had not been there, we would have been drug to the pavement, and kicked and stomped until we were bleeding from our ears like the people in Portland ..This needs to stop...
We need to put these people away until we find out who is funding them, how they are getting there (to the protests)...They are staying in $600 to $1,000 dollar a night hotels. They fly on planes to get here. ...Some of the people we picked out in the footage of the group attacking us, are from other cities and we have seen them in riots in other cities. So, we now see the people that are flown from Portland, to Minneapolis, to DC to these riots.. It is not your first amendment right to trap people, terrorize them and threaten to kill them. That is not your first amendment right."
Fox Interviewer- "Who is funding them?"
Senator Rand Paul - "We need to look at their financial records, see where the money's coming from, we should subpoena airline records ...of the people that are accused of a crime ...And it is a crime to threaten people and to incite a riot." ("Rand Paul on Surviving an Attack of the Mob (8.31.20)" Lew Rockwell)
So, Trump was right, after all. The rioting is organized and it is a conspiracy. What other explanation could there be?"(Attorney General William) Barr said the Justice Department had received reports that people from the West Coast and other parts of the country had flown to Washington to exploit protests for racial justice as opportunities to attack law enforcement and damage property.
"We received numerous reports of individuals coming from Portland, Washington — Seattle — and several other cities to come into Washington for the specific purpose of causing a riot," Mr. Barr said in an interview with CNN. "I think there were many on planes."
His comments echoed remarks made by Mayor Muriel Bowser of Washington, who said in a recent news conference that violent clashes had occurred over the weekend between the police and protesters, and that outsiders who had come to Washington to fight with law enforcement were largely to blame.
"What we saw were agitators who descended on the city," Ms. Bowser said. "It sounds like many of them came on Wednesday and Thursday armed for battle with fireworks, baseball bats, laser pointers, and they were looking for the police to confront. They set fire to local newspaper boxes, accomplishing absolutely nothing."
Mr. Barr's response... reinforced the president's comments about agitators, primarily on the political left, working to turn Washington, D.C.; Portland, Ore.; Kenosha, Wis.; and other cities into dangerous battlefields between anti-government extremists and law enforcement." ("Planeload of 'Thugs'? Barr Skirts Trump's Claim but Suggests Rioters Targeted D.C." New York Times)
Besides, BLM's funding stream is part of the public record. The organization is lavishly supported by corporations and foreign oligarchs who obviously believe that burning our cities and destabilizing the country is in their long-term interests. Transporting arsonists and other troublemakers to hotspots around the country fits perfectly with their broader political strategy of exterminating the middle class, reducing the US to a smoldering third-world shithole, spreading misery and destitution evenly across the country, and toppling the man who had the audacity to beat crooked Hillary Clinton. Sounds like a plan to me.
But why would these corporations choose BLM, after all, BLM professes to be a "Marxist" organization which means they will eventually use their power to overthrow their "evil bourgeois" masters, right?
It's all bunkum. BLM is not going to turn on its masters because BLM is the evil spawn of these masters.
Look: If BLM was a Marxist group, do you really think they'd accept cash from some of the world's richest and most exploitative capitalists? Do you think they'd focus all their attention on race instead of class? Do you think they take aim at the cops instead of the people who control "the means of production"?
The whole thing is a fraud. BLM is actually a smokescreen for a corporate-funded domestic insurgency that has conducted operations in over 2,000 American cities, is supported by "174 major corporations", receives contributions that amount to "more than $1.5 billion", and boasts the most extensive and effective social media network of any activist organization in history. Check out this clip from an article at the World Socialist Web Site:
BLM is perfectly suited for its present task which is to provide the shock troops in a hybrid war aimed at sowing division across the country. The goal is to set brother against brother and father against son. The globalist puppet-masters want to split the country into warring factions that will fight each other to the death. They want to create a crisis so huge and so terrible it will shatter the state itself creating an opening for scheming oligarchs to terminate democracy, eviscerate the Constitutional Republic and impose their own tyrannical Superstate built on the wretched tenets of balanced budgets, the free movement of Capital, and open borders. That's what they want. BLM is merely a tool for achieving their objectives."The Ford Foundation, one of the most powerful private foundations in the world, with close ties to Wall Street and the US government, recently announced that it is overseeing the funneling of $100 million over six years to several organizations that play leading roles in the Black Lives Matter movement....
" The contribution of such an immense sum of money ... will bring the movement greater influence through campaign contributions and integrate it even more closely with the Democratic Party and the corporate media....
The Ford Foundation has for years maintained close ties to US military and intelligence agencies. A British historian of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), Frances Stonor Saunders, described the Ford and Rockefeller Foundations ... as "conscious instruments of covert US policy..."
A leaked document from an October 2015 board meeting of the Soros-funded US Programs/Open Society revealed that the organization provided $650,000 "to invest in technical assistance and support for the groups at the core of the burgeoning #BlackLivesMatter movement."...
The agenda of these organizations, as underscored by the support of groups like the Ford Foundation, has nothing to do with the real social and economic grievances of millions of workers and young people of any race or ethnicity. They speak for highly privileged sections of the middle class who are fighting over the distribution of wealth within the top 10 percent of the population." ("Billionaires back Black Lives Matter", World Socialist Web Site)
Reader Comments