Just a week after Texas voters approved billions of dollars to build new gas-fired power plants, the state’s education board will decide if it wants schools using science textbooks that acknowledge that burning fossil fuels warms the planet. The Texas Board of Education could vote as early as next Tuesday on whether it will recommend […]
Yes, and leaving out nuance will lead to dumb blanket solutions like “defunding the police” instead of careful police, justice, and social reform. It isn’t surprising to me that phrases like “ACAB” alienate families with people who’ve honorably served in our military/police force/other first-responder positions.
First, mixing disparate groups like police and firefighters/paramedics and to a lesser degree military (who aren’t first responder except by the greatest stretch of the imagination) is disingenuous because as a general rule people don’t have a bad opinion of them. Even for the military, “Thank you for your service” has gotten to the point of cliche rather than sarcasm.
Second, police idly standing by or actively helping to cover up or protect bad actors from the consequences of their wrongdoings is a key part of the problem. The police unions don’t do the shitty things they do because the majority of police voted against them. And after half a century of increasingly bad behavior (or better reporting on their bad behavior) it’s no surprise that people move towards phrases like ACAB and “defund the police”. They’re just sick of their pets and young children getting shot for existing in the presence of police.
Now, if we want to talk about nuance, perhaps you shouldn’t have made the incredibly general statement of “Well, it’s not like the whole state agrees with this, just the ones who vote” and instead explained why it’s so hard for people to vote, such as voting districts with fewer polling stations than the average, no statutory paid day off for voting, restricted operating hours for polling stations, and it being illegal to give water to people who are waiting in line (often for hours). That would be nuance.
First, mixing disparate groups like police and firefighters/paramedics and to a lesser degree military (who aren’t first responder except by the greatest stretch of the imagination) is disingenuous because as a general rule people don’t have a bad opinion of them. Even for the military, “Thank you for your service” has gotten to the point of cliche rather than sarcasm.
This very much is true, but I’m viewing this issue from the lens that we will need support from the good apples within the bunch to root out corruption. I honestly don’t know what the best solutions are for dealing with these issues are, but it seems unlikely that we can dismantle and reassemble every police department in this country, so it seems like decent change must come from within these police departments.
Second, police idly standing by or actively helping to cover up or protect bad actors from the consequences of their wrongdoings is a key part of the problem. The police unions don’t do the shitty things they do because the majority of police voted against them. And after half a century of increasingly bad behavior (or better reporting on their bad behavior) it’s no surprise that people move towards phrases like ACAB and “defund the police”. They’re just sick of their pets and young children getting shot for existing in the presence of police.
This is fair. However, I personally think that better messaging would get more cops to do the right thing and punish bad actors. Even if it doesn’t influence cops, I think it would influence politicians more effectively since it will inherently be a less political issue.
Now, if we want to talk about nuance, perhaps you shouldn’t have made the incredibly general statement of “Well, it’s not like the whole state agrees with this, just the ones who vote” and instead explained why it’s so hard for people to vote, such as voting districts with fewer polling stations than the average, no statutory paid day off for voting, restricted operating hours for polling stations, and it being illegal to give water to people who are waiting in line (often for hours). That would be nuance.
This is a fair point. I did end up doing so slightly when another person replied to my comment. However, I don’t think the person I replied to cares about any nuance because their first instinct was to resort to hatred without asking questions. They also complain about how voters are doing nothing about our power situation when the article that is literally linked by OP mentions how we passed a measure that creates a new statewide energy fund.
Yes, and leaving out nuance will lead to dumb blanket solutions like “defunding the police” instead of careful police, justice, and social reform. It isn’t surprising to me that phrases like “ACAB” alienate families with people who’ve honorably served in our military/police force/other first-responder positions.
First, mixing disparate groups like police and firefighters/paramedics and to a lesser degree military (who aren’t first responder except by the greatest stretch of the imagination) is disingenuous because as a general rule people don’t have a bad opinion of them. Even for the military, “Thank you for your service” has gotten to the point of cliche rather than sarcasm.
Second, police idly standing by or actively helping to cover up or protect bad actors from the consequences of their wrongdoings is a key part of the problem. The police unions don’t do the shitty things they do because the majority of police voted against them. And after half a century of increasingly bad behavior (or better reporting on their bad behavior) it’s no surprise that people move towards phrases like ACAB and “defund the police”. They’re just sick of their pets and young children getting shot for existing in the presence of police.
Now, if we want to talk about nuance, perhaps you shouldn’t have made the incredibly general statement of “Well, it’s not like the whole state agrees with this, just the ones who vote” and instead explained why it’s so hard for people to vote, such as voting districts with fewer polling stations than the average, no statutory paid day off for voting, restricted operating hours for polling stations, and it being illegal to give water to people who are waiting in line (often for hours). That would be nuance.
This very much is true, but I’m viewing this issue from the lens that we will need support from the good apples within the bunch to root out corruption. I honestly don’t know what the best solutions are for dealing with these issues are, but it seems unlikely that we can dismantle and reassemble every police department in this country, so it seems like decent change must come from within these police departments.
This is fair. However, I personally think that better messaging would get more cops to do the right thing and punish bad actors. Even if it doesn’t influence cops, I think it would influence politicians more effectively since it will inherently be a less political issue.
This is a fair point. I did end up doing so slightly when another person replied to my comment. However, I don’t think the person I replied to cares about any nuance because their first instinct was to resort to hatred without asking questions. They also complain about how voters are doing nothing about our power situation when the article that is literally linked by OP mentions how we passed a measure that creates a new statewide energy fund.