Always at the Abyss
I’ve just about had enough of this:
Hundreds of people swept through the Magnificent Mile and other parts of downtown Chicago early Monday, smashing windows, looting stores, confronting police and at one point exchanging gunfire with officers, authorities said.
More than 100 people were arrested as of 9 a.m., according to Chicago Police Superintendent David Brown. Thirteen officers were injured during the unrest, including a sergeant who was hit by a bottle. A civilian and private security guard were shot and wounded.
…
It took police officers roughly four hours to get the downtown back under control, leading to finger pointing across the political spectrum and calls for the Illinois National Guard to once again help quell unrest in the country’s third-largest city.
Downtown Ald. Brian Hopkins, who said he was on Michigan Avenue from midnight to 4 a.m., described a scene in which officers were overwhelmed by looters and apparently did not have much of a plan for restoring order. He criticized Lightfoot for failing to develop an effective strategy following recent looting incidents in May and June.
The spark that lit this particular fire seems to have been the police shooting of a 20-year-old man. While I am more than willing to criticize the police when they do wrong, the initial reports are that he was shot after shooting at the police during a chase. This is not an unarmed child being killed like Tamir Rice. This is not a retreating man being executed like Laquan McDonald. A full investigation should be done — whether the chase was necessary, whether he had a chance to surrender, etc. But the initial reports do not indicate a shoot that was unjustified. Moreover, the people who pillaged downtown Chicago last night knew less than I did when I typed those words. There is simply no justification for this sort of mayhem.
Ever since protests and violence erupted after the killing of George Floyd, there has been a reluctance by politicians to condemn the worst aspects of it, lest they be perceived as attacking the ultimate goal of police reform. Even worse, the media have been reluctant to report on it, as our friend Kristin noted two months ago. Last week, the New York Times detailed some of the horrors of Seattle’s infamous autonomous zone and it’s a harrowing read:
Faizel Khan was being told by the news media and his own mayor that the protests in his hometown were peaceful, with “a block party atmosphere.”
But that was not what he saw through the windows of his Seattle coffee shop. He saw encampments overtaking the sidewalks. He saw roving bands of masked protesters smashing windows and looting.
Young white men wielding guns would harangue customers as well as Mr. Khan, a gay man of Middle Eastern descent who moved here from Texas so he could more comfortably be out. To get into his coffee shop, he sometimes had to seek the permission of self-appointed armed guards to cross a border they had erected.
“They barricaded us all in here,” Mr. Khan said. “And they were sitting in lawn chairs with guns.”
The thing I’m wondering is why is this being reported now, over a month after the Mayor broke up the CHOP after a series of fatal shootings involving the CHOP’s “security”. Even now, some business owners are afraid to speak out, lest they be targeted by the rioters and thugs, most of whom have never been punished for their acts.
This reluctance to condemn, this refusal to delineate between protesting and rioting, the occasional willingness to even justify violence and destruction bears some responsibility for what happened in Chicago last night. Not all, obviously. By failing to condemn rioting, by failing to report accurately on looting, by even justifying violence, supporters of the protests are engaging in the exact kind of thinking that has led to the riots in the first place.
Let me back up a moment and look at this from some height.
We are a critical juncture right now when it comes to policing. On the one hand, we have the police themselves and their supporters — in both parties — proclaiming that nothing is wrong. This is just a few bad apples and we need to absolutely support the police or chaos will ensue. And on the other hand, we have people saying the policing is so fundamentally broken that we need to abolish it and…well, I’m not sure what happens after that.
Reality is, as always, somewhere in between. We have very serious problems with policing in this country, mainly a lack of accountability (which I’ll get to in a moment). But as we are seeing in the massive spikes of violence this summer, from the press finally reporting on the reality of the CHOP to last night in Chicago. We still need a police presence. We cannot simply abandon our cities in the hopes that things will work out. It’s another example of how when it comes to the “necessary evil” of government, one side wants to pretend it’s never evil and the other side wants to pretend it’s not necessary. It can and often is both.
But there’s an even large point here and one that the last two decades and this year in particular have driven home for me. And that is that the veneer of civilization is much thinner than we realize. It doesn’t take much for human beings to revert to their primal nature. The problem is not just liberal wags pretending that destroying businesses and looting are a form of protest because “it’s just property”; it’s also conservatives tut-tutting about “inner city culture” (usually in thinly or not-so-thinly veiled racial terms). Because, in the end everyone is just a few steps away from looting a store. And everyone is just a few steps away from kneeling a non-compliant suspect to death. You may think that a college education, a suburban home and 2.5 kids have civilized you to the point where you’d never smash a store window and steal stuff. You may think that you’re woke enough that you’d never sit on a man’s neck for over three minutes after he stopped breathing. But it would not take much to push you out of the light. It would not take much for you to do something unspeakably violent and destructive.
I talked about the looters. And it’s easy to look at that that and see people giving in to their worst nature. But we now have hundreds of video-documented incidents of police engaging in reciprocal violence. Directed not just at looters but also at protesters, media and bystanders. We have years and years, piles and piles of complaints from people of brutality, violence and abuse. Derek Chauvin, before placing his tibia on the neck of George Floyd, had 18 different complaints filed against him. Were they all bullshit? Were they all lies? Or did they indicate something deeply wrong both with him and policing, long before he sent Floyd to oblivion?
This is one of the things people refuse to understand about the protests: it’s not just about George Floyd. Nor were the protests six years ago just about Michael Brown. Nor the protests 25 years ago just about Rodney King. It’s about a long-standing culture of law enforcement violence that has gone unchecked. You can argue that police brutality isn’t as bad as looting, sure. You can even argue that it is sometimes necessary with dangerous criminals. But looking the other way and saying, “we need to support cops” when that violence is clearly massively unjustified…it’s no different than looking at stores being destroyed and saying, “It’s just property.”
Over and over again, we see the thinness of the veneer of civilization. Let’s look even beyond policing and rioting. The Bush torture regime saw American soldiers — who had almost defined themselves by humane treatment of prisoners — literally beating people to death. And their actions were defended by many of the same people condemning the looting. Under the Obama drone program, an American citizen and his son were killed without trial. And their actions were defended by many of those who condemned torture.
What these things all have in common is not that people are bad; it’s that people are human.
My view of human nature is we are good but fallen creatures. In many ways, our nature is to be good and kind and honest and compassionate. And you’ll never need to look far to find people acting that way. But, because we are rational creatures and because we are better at rationalizing our behavior rather than questioning it, we find it easy to talk ourselves into being cruel and greedy and vicious. If we see something that we want — power, money, sex — we can easily convince ourselves to do something unethical, illegal or even violent to get it. If someone in authority tells us that our bad behavior is OK — a politician, a reporter, a parent, a commanding officer — then we find it extremely easy to put our moral sense on hold and indulge our inner medieval villager.
This is why corporations pollute rivers — the money at stake lets them convince themselves that it’s no big deal. This is why politicians engage in corruption — the money and power available lets them convince themselves the everyone is doing it. This is why people torture — the animalistic pleasure in inflicting cruelty lets them convince themselves it’s needed to get intelligence. This is at least part of why people loot — the sight of all those things they could never afford lets them convince themselves that it’s justified to get back at the Man. And its part of why cops engage in brutality — the sheer enjoyment lets them convince themselves it’s necessary to lay down the law.
What keeps our baser natures in check? Customs, rules and laws. Restraints that society places on our behavior to keep us away from our worst nature. Some of us don’t need them. Most of us rarely need them. But these things are necessary if we are to maintain the civilization we have so painfully and arduously built up.
The struggle of civilization and one of the main purposes of government is to help guide us to our better natures; to put guardrails on the road of life to keep us from letting go of the wheel until we plunge into the abyss. Government is an imperfect and deeply flawed vehicle for this. The government is, as Mencken wrote, just a collection of men and often inferior ones. But if it is necessary evil, it is a necessary evil. We need laws. We need people enforcing those laws. We need respect for the rule of law. Abandoning areas of our country to lawlessness, giving even the vaguest impression that lawlessness is acceptable, even being unwilling to call it what it is lest one be politically incorrect…these are recipes for disaster.
But when I say, “respect for the rule of law”, I mean it both ways. The government has to respect the rule of law too. For too long, we have looked the other way when cops beat, brutalize, harass and even kill. Every time the police kill someone, even when that killing is clearly unjustified, an army of commentators will emerge to defend the actions. Violations of our basic civil liberties are overlooked. People rot in jail for years awaiting trial, have their houses turned upside down on bogus warrants, watch their children get burned alive in raids and get shot to death when they mistake a mistaken midnight drug raid for a break-in. We launch anywhere up to 100,000 SWAT raids a year, most of which are not justified. This is also a form of lawlessness. We should not be holding government to a lower standard than the people; we should be holding it to a higher one.
The reason the restraints of customs, rules and laws are so important is because once we start drifting out of the lane of civilized behavior, we do not find ourselves coasting on a gentle shoulder; we find ourselves going off a cliff. If you say that some torture is OK, you can’t be surprised when a prisoner is beaten to death. If you say that some looting is justified, you can’t be surprised when entire stores are gutted. If you say sometimes police need to be rough with suspects, you cannot be surprised when the Chicago PD has a literal torture center.
This is, I will note in passing, one of my biggest problems with the Trump Administration. The Administration is gladly, cheerfully violating all kinds of norms and even laws constraining the behavior of government. And this is being cheered on by supporters because they think it offends the sensibilities of the Inside-the-Beltway Hoity-Toity Pinkies-Up crowd. But removing constraints on the awesome power of government — even silly “well, that just isn’t DONE” pearl-clutching kind of social restraints — is dangerous. Because government teeters on the abyss too. And it doesn’t take much for even the most enlightened government to veer off the road and into the abyss of tyranny.
Government is necessary to restrain the worst part of our nature. We need to remember that. Because humans, in the end, are not angels but flawed dangerous products of evolution. But rules, norms, laws and accountability are also a necessary restrain on the worst part of government’s nature. We need to remember that too. Because government, in the end, is not a tin god. It is just a bunch of equally flawed humans with power, money and guns.
The ultimate lever on behavior — whether by citizen or government — is accountability. For the citizen, that accountability comes in the form of arrest, fines and jail — probably too much accountability, to be fair. But for the government, accountability has been too long in coming. The solution to our present crisis is not to remove the accountability placed upon citizens, to justify it when they engage in violent behavior; it is to tighten down the controls upon government, to no longer let it get away with violent behavior.
The Mayor of Chicago, finally, is sounding the right notes on the looting. It will be a difficult needle to thread to quell the violence and get the police to do their jobs while also increasing police accountability. But…that’s why politicians get paid the big bucks. It’s time to quit screwing around with this and pretending that the violence erupting in certain cities is some kind of fashion statement. Excusing or forgiving violence — by police, by protesters, or by anyone — tears at the extremely delicate fabric holding society together. And it’s already pretty frayed.
There’s also the not minor point that they think they will remain in power by acting this way. They see no down side because they believe they will never be held accountable.
https://www.foxnews.com/us/chicago-mayor-lightfoot-issues-warning-to-downtown-looters-we-are-coming-for-you
Wow – sure seems like Blue City mayors can be tough on crime.Report
Trump is an authoritarian. The mass of his supporters are authoritarian or at least anti-anti authoritiarian. There are still large elements of society that believe respect and deference are something to be given, not earned and have huge chips on their shoulders about not being given the natural respect they think they deserve. You can practically hear them scream “respect my authoritahhhhh.” There are also lots of mini-Trumps around. Guys (almost but not always guys, see also Betsy DeVos) who are basically mini-Trumps. Not very bright people who inherit a business from their parents or in-laws that is almost impossible to screw up and makes them into a little feudal lord. This is a lot of the basis for Trump’s support. People who are angry that they now live in a world where they are naturally deferred to.
Look at Jerry Falwell Jr. I will be forty this year. People my age and younger, whether they were brought up evangelical or not, have very little respect for the movement and Jr is a good example of why. He is a rank hypocrite who has gotten into shady business deals with Miami pool boys, he drinks, he has affairs and sex that is possibly not completely heterosexual, and still holds the line for Trump. People like Falwell Jr are the reason a good number of Americans under 40 have turned away from religion and are not coming back.* Yet if you look at older publications like the Atlantic, there is still a weird deference/assumption that the Evangelicals are true and sincere. Bullshit. Just admit that there is nothing wrong with drinking in moderation or even getting drunk every now and then and get on with it. Same for all those other secular acts that cause them to piss their pants.
Norms can be good but the problem is without a serious enforcement mechanism is that norms can be abused, twisted, or discarded by opportunists, cynics, or people who just do not have a need for them for various reasons. In terms of the police, I agree with a lot of what you wrote but it seems to me that the police just have huge amounts of resistance to reform and things are boiling over because of it.
Report
My comment went into moderation again.Report
This is a good piece. We have so much trouble with remotely middle paths in this country accepting more than one thing can be true about a concept ( we need cops, cops need deep deep reform). So much discussion is just throwing shallow phrases or hashtags out without any depth.
I don’t agree much that we are always at an abyss. Where we have gotten to with the trump admin corruption and destruction of norms has been going on since the 90’s at least. It’s been a long slow crap show.Report
I’m generally sympathetic to this idea. People still commit crimes, revenge is generally something to be discouraged, and prison (for all its problems) might be the least bad method of punishing certain crimes. But the police seem so entrenched, so resistant to reform and accountability, that starting again from scratch might be the only solution for real reform.Report
Maybe starting from scratch in some places is best. But that needs to be fleshed out. Could be fire most/all of the current cops and rehire new ones. Fine in some places, not needed or wanted in others. But that is still having cops.Report
Speaking of the police:
https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/phoenix/2020/07/17/noise-complaint-fatal-police-shooting-ryan-whitaker/5459142002/
https://newsmaven.io/pinacnews/cops-gone-rogue/georgia-cops-open-fire-on-kids-running-home-to-get-father-after-traffic-stop-bQ55wWprLUG0uKanB5xegwReport
Its just not gonna end, is it?Report
Not until the laws change and enough of them find (at the bare minimum) their credentials permanently revoked.Report
But Oscar, don’t you see, Ryan Whitaker is white!
See? it’s not racism at all! All those BLM protestors are wrong! This proves the amount of white people that the police murder is actually proportional!
I have proved a good thing about the police there.Report
You might have noticed that, while I accept that black communities bear the brunt of police violence, etc., I don’t belabor that point.
Because I truly think we won’t get police reform until those people who are comfortable in their bedroom communities come to understand that the police will be just a violent towards them, should they have reason to interact.
So sure, if someone wants to say, “The cops kill more white innocent people!”, I’m fine with replying, “WTF is wrong with you then, why aren’t you incredibly pissed off that the police kill innocent people and walk?”Report
In my lifetime I think I’ll never need to deal with winning the lottery.
My one second search on google suggests there are more lottery winners than there are police killings of any type. Subtract suicide-by-cop, mental illness, and criminal shootouts and you get innocent people being killed. I expect that event is an order of magnitude (10x) or more less common than the lottery.
Add to that we already don’t put away all non-cop murders and that the areas which mostly need to deal with police killings also need to deal with normal killings at MUCH higher rates (multiple orders of magnitude) and this doesn’t seem like a high priority issue.
In addition, I’m not opposed to sane police reform but some of the protestors seem to believe CHOP was an improvement.Report
See Burt’s long ass comment (that I wholly sign on to).
Again, and again, and again, the problem is not, “Cops occasionally, and rarely, kill an innocent person.” When you hand a subset of humans the legal monopoly on force, this will happen. The problem is, and will always be, that when it happens, no one is held to account in any meaningful way.
That can not stand. I don’t care if it’s one dead innocent a year or 1000, those who have the power must also bear the consequences, EVERY DAMN TIME. You maim or kill someone, badge or no badge, you have to go through the same process.
Part of the reason we have the problems we do is that the UMC and above are convinced that if they interact with the police, it will be all professional, etc. And people who have bad experiences with the police bring such things upon themselves.
They need to be disabused of that notion.Report
What you said didn’t disagree with what I said. You asked why people aren’t spun up on this enough to protest, I gave my explanation.
You can and probably are, be 100% right and it could still not be a problem worth my involvement much less letting the anarchists out of their cage.
I would prefer to deal with the protests by getting more accountability and so forth, but I’m not convinced the protestors will be satisfied with that and we may end up needing to pick the lesser of evils.Report
Protesters are almost never satisfied, and they almost never get anything close to what they want.
Doesn’t mean they don’t have a legitimate grievance.
That’s the rub. Just because group A is pissed about X & wants some laundry list of pie in the sky reforms doesn’t mean that X isn’t a legitimate problem, nor does it mean A has no right to be pissed.
My goal in getting the mid to upper crust to acknowledge the issue and be a bit pissed off about it isn’t to grant BLM their every waking desire, it’s to get some kind of political movement at all.
ETA: Ergo, it is a problem worth your involvement. So get involved, because the police won’t treat you with kid gloves just because you donate to the FOP charity ball or have the LEM license plate.Report
NPR asked a black woman protesting in Seattle what she was going to do when the protests ended and she said (para) “there is no end to the struggle for equality.”
I think that’s right. Even if you attain it, you’re going to struggle to preserve it.Report
Somehow Asians surpassed whites without staging a single rally, or at least without visible ones. I mean, maybe ninjas held all kinds of protest marches, but how would anyone know? They’re ninjas.Report
This shouldn’t be the first you’re hearing about protest violence. “If it’s in the NYT, it’s true” is generally a true statement. “If it’s not in the NYT, then it’s not true” is a very different statement, and no one should believe it.Report
Generally agreed. The protesters and the looters are, by and large, different people. In my opinion the looters are vermin and parasites, like clouds of flies that buzz around a herd of animals. Conservatives/Police Reform Opponents love to point at the looting minority and try to ascribe their actions to the protesting majority. Liberals are falling into a trap when they then try to paint the looting as some kind of understandable or, heavens for-fend, laudable act (though it’s more often the anti-capitalist fringe queens who more volubly trumpet those themes).Report
Yep. This is my observation as well.Report
The problem is that the whole “Protester/Looter” isn’t a binary.
Were the people occupying the CHAZ/CHOP protesters? Or were they criminals?
Here are a couple of articles from the time.
Knowing what we know now about the CHAZ/CHOP thanks to the NYT… how badly did we misjudge the shenanigans of the CHAZ/CHOP at the time?Report
Which is the problem with “spontaneous order” that revolutionaries love so much, the idea of a spontaneous uprising which magically has a single focus and tightly ordered movements.
Saul Alinsky wrote of this, how the biggest challenge in movements is discipline, everything from overall strategy to messaging.
As I wrote at the time, CHOP seemed more like Occupy with its refusal to create an order of itself.
I think BLM needs to organize itself like the NAACP or various civil rights groups of the 1960s.Report
Only half of what I was talking about was what the CHAZ/CHOP was. The other half was our inability to tell what it was at the time.Report
In my opinion lot of journalists are detached from urban areas, and visit them like going on a safari.
Remember that for a lot of people, urban areas are Tribal Hellscapes, best viewed only from the freeway as you pass.Report
The CHAZ/CHOP was a Tribal Hellscape? That’s certainly the reporting on it now…
What’s odd is that it didn’t seem to have been reported as one at the time… I mean, not in the “we need to condemn it” sense of the term, that seems to be being reported now.
But, at the time, it was being reported as a Tribal Hellscape that was a legitimate protest.Report
Why is that odd?
You think major news organizations have a clear and accurate view of life in urban centers?Report
It depends on what we’re defining as an “urban center”.
If we’re defining “urban center” as “the place with BIPOC persons and elevated crime due to historical racism”, then… yeah. They don’t even come close to a clear and accurate view of life there.
And their reporting on the places seem to reflect that.
That said, that’s not how the CHAZ/CHOP was being reported on, really. Dig this from CNN from about a month ago, for example.Report
The CNN report sounds a lot like the NYT report.
“The CHOP was really good for a week,” said J.R.P., who did not want her name published for fear she’d be fired from her job. “The last two weeks it’s been turned into a militant cult.”
How it evolved is a case study in human nature, violence, mental illness, homelessness, and the difficulty in imagining a world without police.
Which kinda tracks with my memories of my Occupy group where at first it was all political activists, but slowly got taken over by random crazies, anarchists, and just outright drifters and criminals.Report
It’s kind of the inverse of the rule Veronica posited about making places for libertarians and racists.
If you make an area where far left ideals are being practiced, authority is suppressed and drug use is permitted you will eventually just have an area that’s nothing but drug users and gangs.Report
The Occupiers and CHOP had this in common, where they wanted to live in a peaceful civil society that was highly ordered, yet they refused to do the hard work of actually constructing one.
They never organized, coordinated, cooperated or did any of the things that even the most simple societies do.
It wasn’t just that CHOP didn’t have police; They didn’t have any sort of legitimate order whatsoever. Even the most basic requirement of a settlement- where to dispose of your waste- was handled by the legitimate city government, not CHOP.Report
legitimate order
Is this something that can be unpacked?Report
The CHOP/CHAZ was filled with criminals, not protesters.
But the narrative *FELT* like it was just a bunch of people trying to do their best in a post-capitalist farmer’s market.
Pity about the children getting shot.Report
What you’re looking at is just how much power “The Narrative” has in twisting what the media reports.Report
Your first two two sentences seem to contradict each other.
1. The media is constructing a “Narrative”, a false story about reality.
2. But somehow you know, you just know with absolute certainty, that it was filled with criminals, because…you read a media narrative.Report
I would not have put “false” in your #1. If anything, I think that truth is orthogonal to The Narrative.
As for #2, I’m basing that, pretty much, on the whole issue of the facts that emerged from the CHAZ/CHOP despite the narrative. The things that we know happened without having been spun beforehand. The murder of a child, for example. Other murders. People who lived in the area describing militant “security” forces.
Those things aren’t part of the “narrative”. They are things that happened.
(Though I understand that it’s difficult to separate the two.)Report
What does that even mean, “truth is orthogonal to The Narrative”?
That news story you read, with those facts…Were those true or not? The stories we read about people assembling peacefully in CHOP, were those true or were they not?
See, when you start going on about some “Narrative”, you seem like you’re just cherrypicking which reality you choose to believe at any given time.Report
What it means is that The Narrative does not necessarily have a relationship to Truth. Like, what actually happened? Doesn’t matter.
That news story you read, with those facts…Were those true or not?
What are the facts of the shooting that kicked off the Chicago Mostly Peaceful Protests?
Did the runner shoot at the cops before being shot by the cops or not?
The narrative seems to be that the runner shot first.
What is the truth?
See, when you start going on about some “Narrative”, you seem like you’re just cherrypicking which reality you choose to believe at any given time.
That’s a very good way to describe the narrative, yes.
If you’d like an example, here’s a tweet that describes a thing…
And here’s an example of it IRL, as the kids say:
(It’s in her open letter, not the tweet. Please read her open letter for yourself.)Report
So, is The Narrative just a stuff that some people are saying somewhere?
Like you example of news stories of the CHOP people as peaceful. So far as I can tell those stories were entirely accurate at the time they were written.
Would it be fair for me to say that The Narrative is now about how CHOP was violent?Report
The guys suing the city claim otherwise. That there were serious issues with a lack of order and with repression from the start. That the first problem wasn’t people being killed.Report
Entirely possible.
In a large scale protest, without any coherent leadership structure, many different things can be happening simultaneously.
Over here might be a peaceful drum circle, while over there someone is being shaken down, and over there still another person is skimming off the whole enterprise. And the dynamics fluctuate from moment to moment.
There isn’t really any way to make a summary judgement of it without distortion.Report
There isn’t really any way to make a summary judgement of it without distortion.
There might be a few bad apples, but that’s no reason to condemn the barrel as a whole?Report
If we’re looking at policing problems per millions of encounters and claiming that’s unacceptable, then that’s the yardstick we use to measure CHOP.
Afaict it was absurdly worse, multiple orders of magnitude. That store owner obviously has money (i.e. a store) so he’s an obvious target. He was dealing with problems every day.
Criminal acts from broken windows to murder were seriously scaled up. Multiple normal city services halted. Economic activity was seriously affected because of the lack of security. It was so bad that eventually their own political allies had to step in and shut the experiment down.Report
I remember how it took 3 days for Raz the Warlord to establish himself.
Anyway, “The Narrative just a stuff that some people are saying somewhere?”
Yes, Chip.
That’s what a Narrative is.
Narratives compete with other Narratives. Sometimes the ones connected to Facts get established.
Sometimes the ones that aren’t connected to Facts get established.
That’s what I mean when I say “truth is orthogonal to The Narrative”.Report
It sounds like The Narrative is what the oldsters called “Conventional Wisdom” back in the day.
That is, the thing that just Everybody Knows.Report
Not exactly.
This is more of an embryonic form of the same phenomenon. It allows you to watch two brothers wrestle in the womb and, perhaps, watch one absorb or devour the other.
(But, sometimes, they emerge anyway.)Report
Well I knew pretty clearly what Chaz/Chop was and I believe I said it at the time. It was just the regular lefty loonsin that area doing what they were able to do because of the chaos and, yes, appropriating BLM elements and language. They weren’t BLM, they didn’t advance BLM’s goals and they imploded and dissipated as soon as the rarified circumstances that allowed them to maintain the Chaz/Chop dissipated. I don’t think they tell us much of anything.Report
Our inability to call the Occupiers “criminals” instead of “protesters” tells us a handful of things.
But it says those things about us rather than about the CHAZ/CHOP.Report
It’s a dicey thing to distinguish because most protesters are technically criminals if you go by strict interpretations of the term criminal. They are often trespassing, staying out past curfew, violating gathering size and noise ordinances etc..
So it’s a lot more complicated than you’re acknowledging to draw the line between when their criminal acts outweigh their civic acts.Report
Isn’t this exactly the problem? Once we made an exception for these protestors to violate the law — for a good reason? — we permitted the chaos to emerge.
Trespassing and curfews serve a purpose. We need to re-establish law and order and allow the cops to do their job as we delve into abuses of power.Report
“And that is that the veneer of civilization is much thinner than we realize.”
There is a reason things like mosh pits and Burning Man exist.Report
Posited: lawless acts by governmental figures — politicians, police, Presidents — are morally and socially worse than similar lawless acts by civilians, more harmful and dangerous, and require more urgent attention by the public. Leaders lead not only by control of the use of physical force, and but also by commanding the legitimate authority of law, and also by example of their own behavior. When we see police behaving in an apparently lawless manner, that’s shocking to the conscience is a way that is absent when we see civilian criminals behaving lawlessly.
The sight of the powerful behaving lawlessly is compounded by the subsequent absence of the justice system to punish them or otherwise meaningfully call them out for sanction. This degrades respect for the law, and inspires further lawless behavior by others. This can take the form of others who also possess a degree of power, perhaps obtained by money, to also behave lawlessly in the (often correct) belief that their money and power confers upon them a degree of immunity not available to the powerless.
If my postulate is accepted, then devoting increasing urgency to calling out, prosecuting, punishing, and remedying lawless behavior when it is perpetrated by the relatively powerful as opposed to when it is perpetrated by the relatively powerless is therefore appropriate and right.
I am NOT saying “Trump cheats on his taxes and uses campaign money to pay off the porn stars he bangs, so it’s therefore okay for people to loot a Best Buy in Chicago and burn down police stations in Minneapolis.” Nothing I have written here offers the remotest bit of moral or legal succor for looters or rioters. But it may be the case that prosecuting police and politicians who misuse their power is a more urgent matter than prosecuting thieves and vandals and yes, maybe even arsonists.
The arsonist, after all, is a criminal but does not act with any claim of right or authority on behalf of the citizenry generally. The public official who steals or lies or winks approvingly at violence does act in the name of all of us.Report
I’d agree that such behaviour is worse. That’s why Dante reserves the lowest circles of Hell for dishonest public officials. (Well, that and exposure to Italian politics.) But it’s probably not more urgent. Three’s nothing more urgent than arson.Report
Three’s nothing more urgent than arson.
Is this proposition self-evident?Report
As a society, we’re very good about responding to fires, but not so good about buildings filled with rotting sacks of ammonium nitrate.
There’s a reason James Baldwin called it “The Fire Next Time.”Report
If there are people in the building, then yeah, a fire seems pretty urgent. If the building is unoccupied, and the fire seems unlikely to spread to nearby buildings, then it’s certainly not the most urgent possible thing. Many things are worse than an unoccupied building burning down.
Notice that, as much as we may despise the cops, no one looks down on firefighters. We all admire firefighters, as we should.Report
Fire fighters don’t have a history of killing a person in the process of executing their duty to fight fires.Report
So, whenever there’s a fire all other public and private activities and functions shut down?Report
Do you mean across the entire globe? Like, if there is a fire in Kathmandu, then all work must stop in Singapore? That seems extreme.
A few years back I was in a little bistro on Newbury Street. I had a window seat. It was nice. I sipped my drink and watch the people drift by. Anyhow, I was interrupted when a firetruck arrived. From the firetruck Firemen poured out. They began setting up gear on the sidewalk. One of them entered the building and told the manager everyone had to leave, despite the fact there was no obvious fire.
It was inconvenient, but that’s life.
If you’re wondering, we all quickly settled our bills.
Anyhow, it turns out there was a fire in the top floor of the building. They dragged their hoses into the building and put the fire out.
Were our lives in danger? Probably not, all the same, the firemen didn’t want to be fighting a fire in a building with people in it. Perhaps they were overcautious, but it’s easy to imagine why they set policies like that.
Note that the restaurants nearby were not affected. I suppose if the fire had turned out to be large, they would have evacuated them as well.Report
Yes, that’s right. THe proposition is that there’s nothing more important than arson. If that’s true, then a fire should mobilize the entirety of humanity to put out the flames.
But I just cut my finger man. I’m bleeding!
There are lots and lots of things that are more important than arson/fire in my mind.Report
You don’t have to pull off to the side of the road when an anti-corruption truck turns on the lights and sirens.Report
Does everyone in the country have to pull to the side of the road because a firetruck is racing down Elm Street?Report
I think maybe y’all didn’t take to the word “urgent” here in the sense that I meant it. I’m referring to setting social and governmental priorities rather than the reason why ambulances have sirens.Report
I agree with this but the problem is the concept of law itself in many ways or at least what the purpose of law is for. Both of us are lawyers and were taught to believe in the law as being as objective and neutral as possible as the grandest ideal. But in reality, there are lots of people who believe that there are groups of people that the law protects but does not bind and other groups of people who are bound by the law but not protected by it.
Unfortunately these in groups and out groups are often created on racial characteristics. Lots of people, maybe not a majority, but a decent sized minority or plurality seem to think that the role of the cop is to enforce order by all means necessary and this is order in ways that points to a use of public space that is generally quiet. Think of someone like the infamous BBQ Becky. She saw people use a public space in ways that did not comport to her concept of order and decided that the cops needed to be called to enforce her concept of order.
We use cops for things which other professionals are more trained for. We could use social workers for things like wellness checks, noise complaints, mentally ill people creating “disturbances” downtown, homeless people OD’ing on the streets. And we use cops. There are some jurisdictions trying to move away from this but not that many.
Another issue is the close relationship between cops and District Attorney offices. Even progressive reformer District Attorneys have elements of resistance to reform in their ranks. I am sure that even in SF, a lot of the ADAs moaned and groaned when Chessa Boudin won his race last year over the more establishment friendly Suzy Loftus.Report
I remember reading about life in the Soviet Union, where people would brazenly steal from any government facility, but were respectful of their neighbors and fellow citizens.
Because the government was seen as something alien and detested to which they felt no kinship or loyalty.
I thought of that the night the rioting happened in my neighborhood, where the people breaking windows and looting were not protesters, and not people of the neighborhood, but people who came from other parts of the city to a place where they felt they could act with impunity, sort of a dark Disneyland where their worst impulses could be acted out without consequence.
They don’t feel a kinship or loyalty to our neighborhood any more than the corporation that might leverage a buyout then shut down the stores; They got what they wanted and the consequences they left behind were of no consequence.Report
Yes. I’ve said it before but I live in urban Minneapolis, not terribly far from where some of the serious protesting was going on but also not right at it. The guys who knocked over the CVS under us and the liquor store across the street weren’t local. They were college bros mostly and most of them were white.
It was anarchy tourism. I bet then didn’t even bother waving a BLM poster before they went to collect free booze.Report
And yet a great many people will condemn BLM and the actual Protesters of Mr. Floyd’s death for not identifying and controlling these despicable tourists. Which in turn is then used as justification to move the narrative away from the real grievance and back to the lawless hellscape fantasy.Report
What we’re seeing is the moment the police lose the ability to step in, that power vacuum is filled by “anarchy tourism”.
If BLM can’t prevent this then they need to not take away from the police the ability to step in.Report
No – what you are seeing is the police being unwilling to do their jobs because it requires them to 1) acknowledge the legitimacy of the protests and 2) requires them to actually critically reason about who needs arresting and who doesn’t.
They managed to arrest the white guy in Nashville who set the courthouse on fire. They are supposedly pursuing the white guy who busted up the Autozone in Minneapolis. They can choose to get the folks who are doing damage, and no one from BLM or anywhere else would stop them. They just don’t want to make a nuanced choice.Report
It’s hard to be nuanced when you are constantly told that your safety is paramount and there are people everywhere who want to kill you all the time and you must be alert and ready to fight for your life from the moment you step out of the precinct until the moment you return.
Nuance is for people who are not operating on a near constant flow of adrenaline and stress hormones. And whose leadership is all about budget and power.
Maybe the first thing we need to do is implement mindfulness meditation during roll call.Report
I work for a Fortune 500. We have an HR department and an IT department. There have been lots of times when I’ve wanted to tell them that they’re able to do X, that X is easy.
I’ve decided that trying to convince someone that they’re a lot better at their job than they think and have shown probably doesn’t go well.
The police we have, as opposed to the police we want to have, have problems telling the difference between the cop-hating protestors and the cop-hating anarchists. To be fair the media seems to have the same problem.
IMHO it’s in BLM’s interests that the anarchists don’t do their thing whenever BLM does theirs.Report
To be extra cynical, the police have a strong interest in focusing their ire on cop hating protestors while they happily let cop hating anarchists do the Police’s PR work for them. I believe useful idiots is the specific term the cops have for police hating anarchists.Report
True all that… except the part about “cynical”, I’d call it “realistic”.Report
Unless and until BLM is going to get deputized police powers, its illegal for them to do anything other then report what they see to the cops. SO how you can expect BLM to do anything beyond that is lost on me.
And contra Oscar – following the white guy smashing Autozone windows and vandalizing things doesn’t take nuance. It takes giving a sh!t. You know the by now well worn “See Something – Say Something” paranoia? If you are a cop at a protest who sees a white guy breaking windows you go grab the white guy breaking windows. You see out of state or out of area license plates running around the city after curfew you go pull this people over and search them – you don’t go pepperball people sitting on their own porches. There’s nothing nuanced about that.Report
In the cities with the glaring violence problems, the police aren’t allowed to do that. The city councils have forbidden them from taking any actions against the protesters until the violence gets totally out of control.
This is contrary to almost all accepted advice about policing large demonstrations, gatherings, and riots. In my city, as soon as about a dozen protesters gathered and violated even a trivial police instruction, the leaders were arrested and booked into jail. As a result, we have calm and tranquility, and our black leaders are happy that the usual troublemakers aren’t making trouble – for everybody.
That is not the case in places like Portland and Seattle, and hasn’t been for quite some time. Long enough for groups like Antifa to realize that they can get away with almost anything. As the they pushed the boundaries, the city council had the police cede the previous boundaries, to where mass looting and vandalism don’t even draw police intervention.
This of course sends the looters, vandals, and general protesters the psychological message that looting and vandalism are acceptable behaviors, and so they push the boundaries even farther, because they’re trying to establish dominance.
As a general point, ceding most of Czechoslovakia doesn’t work.Report
I have seen protests where all the for-real protestors wear a specially colored shirt to make it clear who the players were.
They could also record exactly who the bad actors are and make it very clear they’re supplying that footage to the police for the purpose of having them arrested.
This is the total opposite of everyone wearing masks so no one can tell who is who and beating up people who dare to video tape the “protestors”.Report
I’m going to agree with Dark Matter here, that discipline is critical to politics.
Discipline in messaging, in deciding strategy and tactics, choice of targets and all that stuff Alinsky talked about makes the effort successful.
Being “leaderless” sounds great, until just any old jackass jumps in front of a TV camera and says “I’m BLM and so’s my wife!”
When I read histories of the civil rights protests, what comes across is how tightly disciplined and planned they were.
Rosa Parks wasn’t just some woman who decided on a whim to keep her seat; She was a trained activist whose action was carefully planned ahead of time, and targeted and timed for maximum effectiveness.
What was true then is true today, that the opponents of the movement will use any flaws or defects in the actions to their advantage and we have to have a way to counteract that.Report
There is no “movement”, just lots of stuff to steal and plenty of businesses to burn. 80% of blacks don’t want their police defunded, but that’s the new mission for the self-appointed liberal white saviors, who will do it regardless of how many thousands of innocent black people die as a result.
The other obvious goal of activist leaders is to get rich. Hundreds of millions have been pouring in, which then must be getting shuffled to offshore bank accounts because it’s sure not showing up in the blighted neighborhoods.
And now many Democratic officials are starting to panic because they realize they’re not in control of the protests and violence. They can’t stop the violence because the protesters have their own agendas, competing with each other for reputation, bragging rights, and Facebook fame. They’re fighting the system, and the local Democrat leaders are the system they’re fighting.
But the local leaders had long ago bought into the narrative that fueled the initial protests, and the main tool they have to maintain order, the police, are what’s under attack, much like AIDS or an auto-immune disease. The press is likewise powerless to hide the truth because everybody keeps posting the ground-truth videos on social media.
The left’s racist narrative, which the media have been pushing hard since 2013 or 2014, turns out to be civic cancer. What follows after applying Alinsky’s rule book isn’t utopia, it’s the Committee of Public Safety, Robespierre, Napoleon, Bolsheviks, Mussolini, Germans in snazzy uniforms, Tonton Macoutes, or ZANU-PF, all depending on which group of thugs re-establishes a monopoly on the use of force after the period of violent anarchy.
Already, in the absence of a police presence in some of the woke cities, suburban neighborhoods are setting up their own private militias to patrol the streets and confront “outsiders”. You won’t get “less police”, you will get gangs vying with militia warlords.
It’s likely that Democratic leaders didn’t foresee that constantly fanning the flames of division, resentment, and rebellion to try and stop Trump would bring such utter devastation to woke liberal cities. But that’s just a reason for Democrats to elect people who aren’t either stupid, insane, or both. Democrats used to elect people who were smart and wise with no problem at all. Why did they quit doing that, I wonder?Report
“Democrats used to elect people who were smart and wise…why did they quit doing that, I wonder?”
Because Obama couldn’t run for a third term.Report
Well, they’ve got Biden, and now Kamala Harris. My friends can’t stop laughing. ^_^
That’s about like picking Harvey Weinstein just as the #MeToo movement starts rolling.Report
No it’s not. It’s picking a prosecutor right as the Mostly Peaceful Protests stop being obvious examples of free speech being exercised and start being excessive examples of crime, looting, vandalism, and hooliganism.
We need a prosecutor. We need to prosecute the hell out of these people.
Trump has proven powerless in the face of these thugs. We need someone who has thrown more of them in jail than anybody.Report
The only real difference is that BLM focuses on looting stores (which is now declared to be reparations), whereas the anarchists set the stores on fire.Report
It’s temping to preserve violence as an option, especially if you think you can blame someone else.
It’s not my fault your business burned down but if you’re been with us then it wouldn’t have happened.
It’s impossible or trivially easy to tell apart the violent types from the protesters… so it’s totally the responsibility of the police to do that, we can’t do it ourselves.
It’s the mirror image of the police knowing who is violent in the dept but not doing anything.Report
Yeah I’m horrified by the rioters who are running amok as well as the cops who are running amok. I think they all should be locked up.Report
This right here is the crux of the matter.Report
A very good piece Michael.
I tend to believe that society’s get the worst governments they are prepared to tolerate. Good government requires accountability but powerful people have a tendency to dodge accountability if they can since it’s inconvenient even if you have good intentions.
It’s a bad sign when voters start to make excuses for the bad behaviour of people who have been entrusted with government power. After all, the price of freedom is eternal vigilance.Report
Black Lives Matter Chicago has issued a press release.
Part of the problem is that we don’t know if this is a “real” organization or not. Is it a bunch of fashy trolls? Or is it someone who is actually authorized to speak on behalf of Black Lives Matter? For that matter, is *ANYBODY* authorized to speak on Black Lives Matter’s behalf?
Well, assuming that this is something adjacent to the real deal, they’ve issued a press release on the police shooting and the subsequent kinetic speech acts.
This paragraph is the one I find interesting. It makes an absolutely *AMAZING* point about the feckless focus of the mayor and then a less compelling one about the so-called “looting”.
But read it for yourself:
In any case, we don’t know if this press release is legit. Maybe it’s not.
Read it for yourself, of course.Report
As for the initial reports of the young man shooting at the police and a gun being found at the scene…
Well, here’s my problem with that: Is there policecam footage?
The BLM press release says that there is none. If there is no policecam footage, what we are left with is a dead body, a bunch of cops, a gun, and the cops saying that the dead body fired the gun at some point during a chase and so, of course, the cops had to shoot back.
While I can understand wanting to take the police at their word here, I’m not sure that we can.
The Laquan McDonald shooting back in 2014 had a lot of irregularities follow including allegations of a cover-up. I have no reason to believe that the Chicago Police Department has been reformed, on any level, since then.
Note: This is not saying that the police are lying or fabricated anything… just, there’s no real reason to take their version of the story at face value.Report
It’s another wrung on our climb to post-truth society. The police account can’t be trusted. But even if they could be proven right by a perfectly placed camera I don’t think it would change the response.Report
After McDonald, there isn’t a Chicagoan alive with a lick of common sense that would take CPD’s word for it.Report
“Is there policecam footage?”
According to a just-posted Twitter thread summarizing the bond court hearing…no. The unit was, according to the processor, “too new to have bodycams”.Report
CPD is operating under a Justice Dept. consent decree, which outlines a number of reforms that need to take place before oversight is removed. A couple if months ago, the IL AG announced that a fair chunk of the milestone goals weren’t even close to being met.
I can’t really fault the cops for this, because, after all, what’s in it for them? Rather, what we are seeing is the city government’s failure to rein in the cops. Until we elect officeholders who are willing to remind our police dept. who signs their paychecks, this is the kind of policing we’ll get.Report
I have reason to believe that the local government of Chicago has some corruption problems.Report
There isn’t a city in America that hasn’t lost control of its police.
(And you’re right.)Report
Everything going on recently is a very pointed statement that the gov’t cannot and will not defend/help you. The police have no legal obligation to protect you. The only thing that’s prevented full scale vigilantism is the fantasy that some would be protected because they are in the suburbs. Now that the protests are starting to move into the suburbs and outlying areas, folks are realizing “no one is coming to save them”. How soon until those protesters are just shot? I think we’re close. Then it’s really going to get interesting.Report
On topic:
Behind the Fantasy of the 1997 Movie Cop Land
[Bilge Ebiri] It’s been evident for some time that there is a real problem with places being patrolled by people who don’t live there — and who don’t really see those places as communities but as these scary other worlds. And it’s not just a New York phenomenon.
[James Mangold] It’s also applicable to foreign wars, too. I grew up at a time when soldiers had come back from Vietnam unsure of what they had even been doing. I thought that was analogous to the way cops felt. No one felt a sense of where we’re going. What is our goal? Where are we trying to get? What am I trying to do to make the world better? And when people are denied a vision of where we’d like to get, everything everyone’s doing is just a series of Band-Aids. Everyone’s arguing over tactics, as opposed to looking at the ecosystem itself and how it’s producing this misery.
https://www.vulture.com/2020/08/the-fantasy-of-cop-land-an-interview-with-james-mangold.html?utm_source=tw
Describing cities as an ecosystem which produces the lawlessness is a pretty apt description.Report
Here’s a great local account: https://blockclubchicago.org/2020/08/11/police-shot-a-black-man-in-englewood-then-misinformation-spread-like-wildfire/
As always, we can the stupidity of social media and the thin blue line. You can judge for yourself which is more idiotic.Report
Great link.
The 15 year old is actually 20. He’s not dead. He’s been arrested for violating his probation. He has a record that includes violence. And the community activist’s solution for the miscommunication is that community activists should be contacted by the police whenever something happens.
The cops didn’t have body-cams. Supposedly they’d been summoned to deal with someone with a gun. The guy’s mother claims he told her he was unarmed.
Some traffic(?) camera supposedly caught part of the chase but idk if the video is useful or available.
I do wonder if there are first AM implications in all of this. You have people on social media claiming there’s blood in the streets apparently for the purpose of creating blood in the streets.Report
When I woke up Monday morning and heard about the looting, my first reaction was WTF. It’s still mostly WTF, but this kind of stuff doesn’t happen in a vacuum. We better work on understanding what the motivation is, or we’re in for a world of hurt.Report
“Free stuff” works fine as “motivation” for some people. There are beaches I go where if you leave anything alone it disappears.
For others you need “free stuff” plus “everyone else is doing it”. Obviously this is a range, some people will loot if they see a few people do it and others only if the entire crowd is. The larger the herd movement, the more convincing herd mentality is.
This is one of the reasons the police have a problem dealing with protests. Protests are basically small controlled fires… but it doesn’t take much for them to become large uncontrolled fires.Report
If free stuff was the prime motivator, we’d see this every day. It’s the proximate cause. We have to get to the root.Report
Without the police around, we would. The expectation of punishment for wrongdoing is needed to keep the wheels from coming off. We saw this in CHOP.
We’ve seen this in other countries too; After the fourth time a rich man was kidnaped and held for ransom by a group of communist bandits, he funded/created a death squad to deal with the situation because clearly the government wasn’t going to.Report
Wait wait wait.
We’ve gone from “young man has been killed by the police” to “legal adult has been arrested and he is not, repeat, is *NOT* dead, though, granted he *WAS* shot”?
Hey, Chip? This is what I mean what I mean when I say “truth is orthogonal to The Narrative”.Report
Ah, I see.
Narrative is just Rumor, stuff that a lot of people say which is sometimes true and sometimes not.Report
In this case, it’s just Rumor that resulted in riots and property damage and people screaming for justice.
Why were there riots in Chicago?
“Just Rumor”.
The difference is that I see the Rumor as potentially very powerful.
And you seem to see it as merely people talking to each other and saying things.Report
No, I agree rumor is a tremendously powerful thing.
Just that we should call it by its true name.
Sometimes rumor is organic, that spreads randomly.
Sometimes it is a product of deliberate disinformation by political operatives.
And sometimes it turns out to be truth.
So a bit of skepticism is usually warranted because rumor has a way of always confirming our worst priors.Report
It’s true name?
Chip, truth is orthogonal to Narrative.Report
Well, that’s just like, your narrative man.Report
This reminds me of a funny story. Some guy once called one of my trans friends a “dude,” so she responded, “Well that’s just like your opinion man,” which works on a couple levels.Report
Supposedly the police have shells fired from his piece which are different from what the police used. However this is Chicago and if the fix is in for a screw-up then we’ve got the problem of one source of information.
If social media counts then he likes posting pictures of himself posing with guns, which is an interesting fashion statement as a felon on probation.Report
I really liked this post, especially about the veneer of civilization thing. There but for the grace of god (and maybe laws?) choose I.
I do think I disagree with this:
“The Mayor of Chicago, finally, is sounding the right notes on the looting. ”
My sense is that she has been very vocal, since the beginning, that looting is wrong.Report