thenation--2020-06-12--Police Reform Won’t Fix a System That Was Built to Abuse Power

Less than a week after the murder of George Floyd in Minneapolis , the International Association of Chiefs of Police ( IACP ) released a statement addressing both his killing and the protests that have ensued .
As “ defund the police ” became a rallying cry , offering a practical step on the pathway toward the demand for abolition , the IACP instead advocated incremental reform .
Its statement gives an insider perspective on the past , present , and future of policing : While difficult to recognize right now , policing has made significant advancements in recent years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the past and have sought out community partners to build a better future .
These efforts have led agencies throughout the nation to increase transparency , revise policies to enhance procedural justice , recruit and hire officers which reflect the community they serve , significantly reduce use of force by officers and focus on eliminating police cultures that prevent officers from holding each other accountable .
Swap out a few buzzwords , and this statement is not so different from what the IACP might have said in the 1950s .
At the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the CIA and US national security state , helping autocrats across the globe update their own police forces .
Procedural reforms would help police atone for past—always past—misdeeds , both at home and abroad .
Police reform is supposed to help police improve their technical capabilities to ensure order and disarm critics who charge that governments do not care about abuse .
It is intended to increase police legitimacy , shoring up public support for the government .
But by earning this support at home , police leaders have transformed their agencies into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ legitimacy means greater ability to shape governing priorities .
The result is today ’ s larger , technologically sophisticated police department , which gobbles up increasing shares of budgets and seem to answer to no one .
When police commit an outrage , reformers step in to reject calls for reducing police power .
They offer reform as a way to maintain it .
Congressional Democrats have long supported police reformism .
Their latest bill , the Justice in Policing Act , does not deviate sharply from business as usual , offering bans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ police misconduct registry , ” among other technical fixes .
The bill ’ s greatest surprise is the absence of new spending to expand policing , though its backers have emphatically noted that it is not a defunding bill .
Nevertheless , presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden immediately responded by pledging to spend $ 300 million on policing , an amount too small to have much effect nationally , but large enough to signal that Biden remains committed to law and order .
Elected officials deserve much of the blame for believing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ policing .
But officials have been following a script police themselves wrote , as they learned to frame what they wanted as what they desperately needed .
The United States arrived at the contemporary situation of unaccountable police power because police reform has been a long-standing project , with global dimensions .
And it was through negotiations over this international cooperation project with so-called Third World countries that leaders of the IACP realized the value of speaking to a national audience as police professionals first and foremost .
Let ’ s say you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or Asia during the late 1950s , facing labor unrest or more generalized socioeconomic turmoil .
You may already have a military that is reliably strong—if perhaps a little untrustworthy , because top commanders are already eyeing your office .
Sending in soldiers to control protests could weaken your own hold on power , especially if they kill protesters .
Instead , it would make more sense to use a civilian police force .
Unlike the military , the police aren ’ t rigidly separated from the people , living in barracks .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ night , in the same neighborhoods as the protesters .
But your police force is outdated .
It lacks modern telecommunications technologies .
If the police arrest a suspected subversive , they can ’ t check his credentials against a centralized database .
What ’ s more , your officers are prone to panic and have been known to shoot on sight .
When your citizens think of the police , they think of traffic jams , jailbreaks , ill-fitting uniforms , or simply brutality .
In order to maintain your grip on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ modernize , and professionalize your police force .
It might even mean ceding some of your own power to the police .
So , you turn to the IACP for help .
From 1955 through 1962 , on behalf of the US government , the IACP coordinated visits of ranking foreign police to the United States .
Its small staff worked to make sure that police from Iran , Indonesia , Bolivia , and Thailand could engage in training operations across the country .
They visited station houses from New York to Seattle @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and riot manuals , and riding along in squad cars .
Many learned a lot about US policing customs .
A few fell in love with American women .
All learned to detest communism .
At the same time , the IACP played a domestic role .
It collected data from chiefs within the United States on the current state of policing .
It helped develop what would today be considered “ best practices.
” And members of the organization published research and spoke at conferences and workshops .
While Third World countries @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were to put down , so too was the United States convulsing .
The civil rights movement was growing , and many African Americans were becoming frustrated at the slow pace of change after Brown v. Board of Education and the Montgomery bus boycott .
Police , it turned out , were at the center of the action everywhere .
The reason to bring these foreign police to the United States was to help them learn how to undermine left-wing militancy through adept everyday police techniques , from fingerprinting to stakeouts .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ experts wondered whether visiting officers were learning enough .
The Kennedy administration decided to terminate its contract with the IACP and build a government-run training academy in Washington , D.C. As a nominally international membership organization , the IACP hoped to become the most respected voice in law enforcement at a moment of transformation .
If Southern sheriffs were harming the profession ’ s credibility by countenancing racist brutality , the IACP was seeking a way forward that would not dismantle America ’ s racial hierarchy—but also would appease liberal officials .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ A focus on reformism was the solution .
The IACP ’ s director at the time was Quinn Tamm , the organization ’ s director and editor of its monthly magazine The Police Chief .
He was ultimately responsible for the contract to help train police from overseas .
When national security officials wanted to end the IACP contract , internalize training expenses , and build a new government-run international police academy , Tamm worried that the broken contract would make the IACP look inept .
Could the IACP fulfill the mandate of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ field , setting the benchmarks for reform ?
Tamm discovered a new voice , however , in this arcane bureaucratic fight over how best to marshal police resources to fight communism .
When Tamm angrily denounced the withdrawal of the contract , he spoke as a representative of police as a whole .
He claimed this foreign policy decision disrespected American police chiefs .
( That no chief had voted for him as leader was irrelevant . )
He now realized that he could make an argument to Washington bureaucrats over spending and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were serious about law and order , then they better pony up the money for the cash-strapped chiefs Tamm represented .
Referring to themselves as professionals meant that their expertise was not to be questioned .
And if elected officials didn ’ t want to listen to a respected professional like Tamm , then a retrograde racist chief like Birmingham ’ s Bull Connor was always waiting in the wings .
By the end of the summer of 1964 , after uprisings in Harlem , Rochester , and Philadelphia , among other cities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to think about a federal program to help police .
As I show in my book , Badges Without Borders : How Global Counterinsurgency Transformed American Policing , one relevant bureaucratic model turned out to be the overseas police assistance program : deliver money and expertise from Washington to frontline police .
The United States was doing it in Africa , Asia , and Latin America .
Early in 1965 , Congress approved the Law Enforcement Assistance Act , a measure that would begin to do it from sea to shining sea .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ mobilizing a fractious constituency , chiefs unsure that it was in their best interest to support federal anti-crime legislation .
Particularly after the passage of the Civil Rights Act in 1964 , which outlawed public segregation , police were wary .
They often believed that federal intervention meant they would be told how to do their jobs .
Desegregation felt like federal overreach to many .
Police asked : Would the federal dollars come with strings attached , with outside oversight ?
Tamm helped convince the chiefs that it would not .
Instead @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Still , many IACP members “ wanted more men and equipment—not studies and innovative programs.
” But the promise of any new money was difficult for chiefs to resist .
Many police departments across the United States were as technologically backward as the Third World departments the National Security Council had decided to aid .
Alongside Tamm , IACP members testified before Congress , often using the type of tough-on-crime rhetoric that would then be adopted by elected officials themselves .
When a far more massive federal anti-crime bill came up for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ behind it .
Congress passed the 1968 Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act after four years of civil unrest , often caused by police abuse .
It created the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration , which over the next 13 years spent $ 8 billion— $ 25.9 billion today—on upgrading police forces , as well as expanding and modernizing other aspects of the penal system .
Police had learned that if they spoke with a unified voice , taking up the mantle of reform , they could get what they wanted—respect , money @ @ @ @ @ @ @ went out of its way to allay fears that a federal anti-crime bill would interfere with policing at the local level .
All it was intended to do was professionalize , often meaning adoption of the latest technologies .
For many observers , the esoteric design of the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration , reflecting the imperative to avoid federal interference , made it ineffective .
But the type of gentle reassurance Johnson offered in the 1960s , telling the IACP that no federal authority would tell them what to do on the streets @ @ @ @ @ @ @ next Democratic president to sign major anti-crime legislation , Bill Clinton , addressed the IACP , he wore a jacket that read “ America ’ s Chief ” on it .
Johnson would have been mortified .
But police chiefs across the United States knew how to interpret the message .
Clinton may have been the chief , but they were now in command .
The 1994 Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act , written by then-Senator Joe Biden of Delaware , gave chiefs what the 1968 omnibus bill did not : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The expansion of police power was sealed , and the new Department of Justice office to oversee this growth framed its work in the rhetoric of reform and technical expertise .
Three years after the 1994 bill passed , Congress authorized a new program as part of the defense spending bill .
It took its innocent-sounding moniker from the place in the legislation where it was hidden , section 1033 .
This program actually replicated and formalized something invigorated with the 1968 bill and tested by the overseas police assistance program : the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Police today are endowed with massive budgetary resources and armed with sophisticated weaponry .
This brings us back to where we began : with the question of how to quell a rebellion .
If US police professionals helped autocrats decades ago , today they have become the autocrats .
Police have behaved during these protests as if their prerogative trumps the Constitution .
Whether by attacking or arresting journalists , detaining delivery workers during curfews , or simply brutalizing innumerable protesters with tear gas , batons , and rubber bullets , police @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would not be constrained .
In response to demands to abolish police , the profession is offering the familiar acknowledgment of a need for reform .
But the long history of police reform as a response to political insurgency may be coming to a close before our eyes .
Police have held municipal budgets hostage for decades now , under the premise that without their professional expertise there would be anarchy .
After the past two weeks of police terror , once they take off their body armor and put the chemical munitions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them when they say “ Trust us ” ?
It is time to stop believing that police reform is the answer .
Reformism is what got us here .

Less than a week after the murder of George Floyd in Minneapolis, the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) released a statement addressing both his killing and the protests that have ensued. As “defund the police” became a rallying cry, offering a practical step on the pathway toward the demand for abolition, the IACP instead advocated incremental reform. Its statement gives an insider perspective on the past, present, and future of policing:
While difficult to recognize right now, policing has made significant advancements in recent years. Police leaders have acknowledged the misdeeds of the past and have sought out community partners to build a better future. These efforts have led agencies throughout the nation to increase transparency, revise policies to enhance procedural justice, recruit and hire officers which reflect the community they serve, significantly reduce use of force by officers and focus on eliminating police cultures that prevent officers from holding each other accountable.
Swap out a few buzzwords, and this statement is not so different from what the IACP might have said in the 1950s. At the time, the organization was aligned with the CIA and US national security state, helping autocrats across the globe update their own police forces. Procedural reforms would help police atone for past—always past—misdeeds, both at home and abroad. Foreign Imports Police Violence Has Brought America’s Forever Wars Home William Astore
Police reform is supposed to help police improve their technical capabilities to ensure order and disarm critics who charge that governments do not care about abuse. It is intended to increase police legitimacy, shoring up public support for the government. But by earning this support at home, police leaders have transformed their agencies into a power unto themselves. Greater police legitimacy means greater ability to shape governing priorities. The result is today’s larger, technologically sophisticated police department, which gobbles up increasing shares of budgets and seem to answer to no one. When police commit an outrage, reformers step in to reject calls for reducing police power. They offer reform as a way to maintain it.
Congressional Democrats have long supported police reformism. Their latest bill, the Justice in Policing Act, does not deviate sharply from business as usual, offering bans on choke holds and a “national police misconduct registry,” among other technical fixes. The bill’s greatest surprise is the absence of new spending to expand policing, though its backers have emphatically noted that it is not a defunding bill. Nevertheless, presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden immediately responded by pledging to spend $300 million on policing, an amount too small to have much effect nationally, but large enough to signal that Biden remains committed to law and order. Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life Chris Lehmann Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life Chris Lehmann
Elected officials deserve much of the blame for believing that appropriating money for police will fix policing. But officials have been following a script police themselves wrote, as they learned to frame what they wanted as what they desperately needed. The United States arrived at the contemporary situation of unaccountable police power because police reform has been a long-standing project, with global dimensions. And it was through negotiations over this international cooperation project with so-called Third World countries that leaders of the IACP realized the value of speaking to a national audience as police professionals first and foremost. Current Issue View our current issue
Let’s say you’re an autocrat in Latin America or Asia during the late 1950s, facing labor unrest or more generalized socioeconomic turmoil. You may already have a military that is reliably strong—if perhaps a little untrustworthy, because top commanders are already eyeing your office. Sending in soldiers to control protests could weaken your own hold on power, especially if they kill protesters. Instead, it would make more sense to use a civilian police force. Unlike the military, the police aren’t rigidly separated from the people, living in barracks. The police go home to sleep at night, in the same neighborhoods as the protesters.
But your police force is outdated. It lacks modern telecommunications technologies. If the police arrest a suspected subversive, they can’t check his credentials against a centralized database. What’s more, your officers are prone to panic and have been known to shoot on sight. When your citizens think of the police, they think of traffic jams, jailbreaks, ill-fitting uniforms, or simply brutality. In order to maintain your grip on power, you need to reform, modernize, and professionalize your police force. It might even mean ceding some of your own power to the police. So, you turn to the IACP for help.
From 1955 through 1962, on behalf of the US government, the IACP coordinated visits of ranking foreign police to the United States. Its small staff worked to make sure that police from Iran, Indonesia, Bolivia, and Thailand could engage in training operations across the country. They visited station houses from New York to Seattle, observing training exercises, studying textbooks and riot manuals, and riding along in squad cars. Many learned a lot about US policing customs. A few fell in love with American women. All learned to detest communism.
At the same time, the IACP played a domestic role. It collected data from chiefs within the United States on the current state of policing. It helped develop what would today be considered “best practices.” And members of the organization published research and spoke at conferences and workshops.
While Third World countries faced rebellious political movements that these police were to put down, so too was the United States convulsing. The civil rights movement was growing, and many African Americans were becoming frustrated at the slow pace of change after Brown v. Board of Education and the Montgomery bus boycott. Police, it turned out, were at the center of the action everywhere.
The reason to bring these foreign police to the United States was to help them learn how to undermine left-wing militancy through adept everyday police techniques, from fingerprinting to stakeouts. But the IACP program was unwieldy, and experts wondered whether visiting officers were learning enough. The Kennedy administration decided to terminate its contract with the IACP and build a government-run training academy in Washington, D.C.
As a nominally international membership organization, the IACP hoped to become the most respected voice in law enforcement at a moment of transformation. If Southern sheriffs were harming the profession’s credibility by countenancing racist brutality, the IACP was seeking a way forward that would not dismantle America’s racial hierarchy—but also would appease liberal officials. It was a difficult needle to thread. A focus on reformism was the solution.
The IACP’s director at the time was Quinn Tamm, the organization’s director and editor of its monthly magazine The Police Chief. He was ultimately responsible for the contract to help train police from overseas. When national security officials wanted to end the IACP contract, internalize training expenses, and build a new government-run international police academy, Tamm worried that the broken contract would make the IACP look inept. Could the IACP fulfill the mandate of leading the world’s law enforcement field, setting the benchmarks for reform?
Tamm discovered a new voice, however, in this arcane bureaucratic fight over how best to marshal police resources to fight communism. When Tamm angrily denounced the withdrawal of the contract, he spoke as a representative of police as a whole. He claimed this foreign policy decision disrespected American police chiefs. (That no chief had voted for him as leader was irrelevant.) He now realized that he could make an argument to Washington bureaucrats over spending and dare them to refuse.
If politicians were serious about law and order, then they better pony up the money for the cash-strapped chiefs Tamm represented. Referring to themselves as professionals meant that their expertise was not to be questioned. And if elected officials didn’t want to listen to a respected professional like Tamm, then a retrograde racist chief like Birmingham’s Bull Connor was always waiting in the wings.
By the end of the summer of 1964, after uprisings in Harlem, Rochester, and Philadelphia, among other cities, Lyndon Johnson’s aides began to think about a federal program to help police. As I show in my book, Badges Without Borders: How Global Counterinsurgency Transformed American Policing, one relevant bureaucratic model turned out to be the overseas police assistance program: deliver money and expertise from Washington to frontline police. The United States was doing it in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. Early in 1965, Congress approved the Law Enforcement Assistance Act, a measure that would begin to do it from sea to shining sea.
IACP leaders played a key role in mobilizing a fractious constituency, chiefs unsure that it was in their best interest to support federal anti-crime legislation. Particularly after the passage of the Civil Rights Act in 1964, which outlawed public segregation, police were wary. They often believed that federal intervention meant they would be told how to do their jobs. Desegregation felt like federal overreach to many. Police asked: Would the federal dollars come with strings attached, with outside oversight? Tamm helped convince the chiefs that it would not. Instead, the money would help police innovate. Still, many IACP members “wanted more men and equipment—not studies and innovative programs.”
But the promise of any new money was difficult for chiefs to resist. Many police departments across the United States were as technologically backward as the Third World departments the National Security Council had decided to aid. Alongside Tamm, IACP members testified before Congress, often using the type of tough-on-crime rhetoric that would then be adopted by elected officials themselves. When a far more massive federal anti-crime bill came up for debate, the IACP threw its support behind it.
Congress passed the 1968 Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act after four years of civil unrest, often caused by police abuse. It created the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, which over the next 13 years spent $8 billion—$25.9 billion today—on upgrading police forces, as well as expanding and modernizing other aspects of the penal system. Police had learned that if they spoke with a unified voice, taking up the mantle of reform, they could get what they wanted—respect, money, and power.
The Johnson administration went out of its way to allay fears that a federal anti-crime bill would interfere with policing at the local level. All it was intended to do was professionalize, often meaning adoption of the latest technologies. For many observers, the esoteric design of the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, reflecting the imperative to avoid federal interference, made it ineffective. But the type of gentle reassurance Johnson offered in the 1960s, telling the IACP that no federal authority would tell them what to do on the streets, eventually became unnecessary.
When the next Democratic president to sign major anti-crime legislation, Bill Clinton, addressed the IACP, he wore a jacket that read “America’s Chief” on it. Johnson would have been mortified. But police chiefs across the United States knew how to interpret the message. Clinton may have been the chief, but they were now in command.
The 1994 Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, written by then-Senator Joe Biden of Delaware, gave chiefs what the 1968 omnibus bill did not: money to hire 100,000 new officers. The expansion of police power was sealed, and the new Department of Justice office to oversee this growth framed its work in the rhetoric of reform and technical expertise. Three years after the 1994 bill passed, Congress authorized a new program as part of the defense spending bill. It took its innocent-sounding moniker from the place in the legislation where it was hidden, section 1033. This program actually replicated and formalized something invigorated with the 1968 bill and tested by the overseas police assistance program: the transfer of military hardware into police hands. Police today are endowed with massive budgetary resources and armed with sophisticated weaponry.
This brings us back to where we began: with the question of how to quell a rebellion. If US police professionals helped autocrats decades ago, today they have become the autocrats. Police have behaved during these protests as if their prerogative trumps the Constitution. Whether by attacking or arresting journalists, detaining delivery workers during curfews, or simply brutalizing innumerable protesters with tear gas, batons, and rubber bullets, police indicated throughout the current protests that they would not be constrained.
In response to demands to abolish police, the profession is offering the familiar acknowledgment of a need for reform. But the long history of police reform as a response to political insurgency may be coming to a close before our eyes. Police have held municipal budgets hostage for decades now, under the premise that without their professional expertise there would be anarchy. After the past two weeks of police terror, once they take off their body armor and put the chemical munitions back in storage, will anyone believe them when they say “Trust us”? It is time to stop believing that police reform is the answer. Reformism is what got us here.


thenation--2020-06-12--Joe Biden’s Secret Weapon Is Grief

Joe Biden’s Secret Weapon Is Grief

We all carry grief in us , but Joe Biden walks around with a much heavier burden of suffering than most .
In 1972 , after Biden had won his first Senate race , a station wagon driven by his wife , Neila , was hit by a tractor trailer .
Neila died , as did the Bidens ’ 1-year-old daughter , Naomi .
Two Biden sons , Beau and Hunter , were severely injured .
The depth of Biden ’ s despair after losing his wife and daughter is almost beyond fathoming .
As he wrote in his 2007 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ began to understand how despair led people to just cash it in ; how suicide wasn ’ t just an option but a rational option.
” But Biden persevered , first as a single father and eventually remarrying .
Beau Biden , who his father hoped would one day be president , was struck down by cancer in 2015 at age 46 .
Personal tragedies have defined Biden ’ s life—and also shaped his political persona .
In his 2017 memoir , Promise Me , Dad , which covers Biden ’ s term @ @ @ @ @ @ @ final years , Biden writes , “ I have found over the years that , although it brought back my own vivid memories of sad times , my presence almost always brought some solace to people who have suffered sudden and unexpected loss.
” Biden adds , “ When I talk to people in mourning , they know I speak from experience.
” The bereaved are Biden ’ s special constituency , the people he most easily finds a rapport with .
In pre-Covid days , he would seek them out in campaign @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them a hug or squeeze .
That last habit caused problems : Biden ’ s handsiness was becoming controversial even before it became medically unsound .
Leaving aside the more serious accusation of Tara Reade , eight women have testified that his touchiness made them feel uncomfortable or violated .
Biden ’ s personal tragedy also explains other characteristics , like the importance he gives to friendship and family .
Biden ’ s protectiveness towards his spectacularly ne ’ er-do-well son Hunter is humanly understandable—even if politically ill-advised .
Hunter is all Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ America Is Fracturing—and So Is ‘ The New York Times ’ Tom Cotton Is Preparing to Be Trump 2.0 The two best essays I ’ ve read about Biden in this election cycle have both called attention to the centrality of suffering in his life and political identity .
Writing in The New Republic in May of 2019 , the historian George Blaustein argued , “ What is distinctive about [ Biden ] is not his politics but something more elusive : the chords of grief and mourning that he plays in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ him.
” This argument was echoed and expanded upon by the Irish journalist Fintan O ’ Toole .
Writing in January 2020 in The New York Review of Books , O ’ Toole contended that “ Biden is the most gothic figure in American politics .
He is haunted by death , not just by the private tragedies his family has endured , but by a larger and more public sense of loss.
” O ’ Toole called attention to Biden ’ s frequent invocation of the Kennedys , an Irish Catholic political @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In the 1983 speech that first made him a figure notable enough to be discussed as a potential presidential nominee , Biden said , “ Just because our political heroes were murdered does not mean that the dream does not still live , buried deep in our broken hearts.
” At a fundamental level , Biden ’ s promise is that he will heal a world rent by suffering and death .
Both Blaustein and O ’ Toole expressed skepticism about how far Biden ’ s identity as a Man of Constant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it happens , events have made this identity much more politically potent than it might have seemed when Biden first launched his campaign .
Most of America , indeed most of the world , is in a state of grief .
The Covid-19 pandemic has not only infected and killed countless thousands , but it has also left the non-infected in the shadow of death .
In an added twist , the non-infected are often cruelly unable to comfort loved ones who are suffering or dying .
Even as the Covid-19 crisis continued @ @ @ @ @ @ @ erupted .
Again , the consequence was a shared trauma : Thanks to the video of a police officer kneeling on the neck of George Floyd until he died , much of the world bore witness to an atrocity .
Amid all this pain , Biden has had a chance to shine at what he does best : offering words of comfort .
In a May 30 blog post , Biden wrote : The repeated use of the phrase “ I know ” is an unobtrusive way for Biden to connect his personal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ public .
Biden is running to be a national grief counselor , someone with the empathy to understand pain and say the right words .
As he says in the blog post , “ As President , I will help lead this conversation—and more importantly , I will listen.
” The political value of emphasizing his own empathy is increased by the contrast it draws with the incumbent .
In his own way , Trump is also a master of the politics of emotions .
But Trump doesn ’ t empathize with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , nor does he have an ability to use shared suffering as a basis for building relationships of fellow-feeling .
Rather , Trump transmutes the pain of his followers into rage .
This ability to channel hurt and turn it into anger is the source of Trump ’ s political strength—but it also limits his ability to even mimic the language of unity and healing .
It ’ s hardly an accident that Biden has been surging in the polls .
A recent CNN poll had him hitting a high-water mark of 55 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Biden ’ s mastery of the language of grief might play a crucial role in winning him the presidency .
Yet the question remains whether he will then be able to govern .
His identity as a stoic sufferer has given him the gift of reaching people who might be otherwise closed to him .
It ’ s the basis of his reputation for being able to build bipartisan alliances and cross-ideological friendships .
But beyond offering comfort during a crisis , a president also has to provide political leadership in ways @ @ @ @ @ @ @ problems America faces will require a politician who is willing to make enemies as well as friends , who has the firmness to take on the entrenched interests that support police racism , a woefully unfair health care system , and a wildly unjust economy .
It ’ s unclear if Biden is up for the political battles that need to be fought .
The emphasis he gives to healing and reconciliation , which might well win him the presidency , may also undercut his ability to use the presidency to push for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ notes , “ Consolation is not social change .
Solace is not enough .
”

Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Get The Nation’s Weekly Newsletter Fridays. The best of the week. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here. Fridays. The best of the week.
Thank you for signing up for The Nation’s weekly newsletter.
Repro Nation A monthly newsletter on the global fight for reproductive freedom. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here.
Thank you for signing up. For more from The Nation, check out our latest issue
Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Support Progressive Journalism The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter. The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter.
Sign up for our Wine Club today. Did you know you can support The Nation by drinking wine?
We all carry grief in us, but Joe Biden walks around with a much heavier burden of suffering than most. In 1972, after Biden had won his first Senate race, a station wagon driven by his wife, Neila, was hit by a tractor trailer. Neila died, as did the Bidens’ 1-year-old daughter, Naomi. Two Biden sons, Beau and Hunter, were severely injured. The depth of Biden’s despair after losing his wife and daughter is almost beyond fathoming. As he wrote in his 2007 memoir Promises to Keep, “I began to understand how despair led people to just cash it in; how suicide wasn’t just an option but a rational option.” But Biden persevered, first as a single father and eventually remarrying. Beau Biden, who his father hoped would one day be president, was struck down by cancer in 2015 at age 46.
Personal tragedies have defined Biden’s life—and also shaped his political persona. In his 2017 memoir, Promise Me, Dad, which covers Biden’s term as vice president and Beau’s final years, Biden writes, “I have found over the years that, although it brought back my own vivid memories of sad times, my presence almost always brought some solace to people who have suffered sudden and unexpected loss.” Biden adds, “When I talk to people in mourning, they know I speak from experience.”
The bereaved are Biden’s special constituency, the people he most easily finds a rapport with. In pre-Covid days, he would seek them out in campaign events, bond with them, give them a hug or squeeze. That last habit caused problems: Biden’s handsiness was becoming controversial even before it became medically unsound. Leaving aside the more serious accusation of Tara Reade, eight women have testified that his touchiness made them feel uncomfortable or violated.
Biden’s personal tragedy also explains other characteristics, like the importance he gives to friendship and family. Biden’s protectiveness towards his spectacularly ne’er-do-well son Hunter is humanly understandable—even if politically ill-advised. Hunter is all Biden has left of his first marriage. More From Jeet Heer The Indigenous Roots of Robbie Robertson’s Rock and Roll Revolution August 14, 2023 Why Does This Racist Keep Getting Silicon Valley Money? August 11, 2023 When Phallocrats Go Limp August 4, 2023
The two best essays I’ve read about Biden in this election cycle have both called attention to the centrality of suffering in his life and political identity. Writing in The New Republic in May of 2019, the historian George Blaustein argued, “What is distinctive about [Biden] is not his politics but something more elusive: the chords of grief and mourning that he plays in the culture and that the culture hears in him.”
This argument was echoed and expanded upon by the Irish journalist Fintan O’Toole. Writing in January 2020 in The New York Review of Books, O’Toole contended that “Biden is the most gothic figure in American politics. He is haunted by death, not just by the private tragedies his family has endured, but by a larger and more public sense of loss.” O’Toole called attention to Biden’s frequent invocation of the Kennedys, an Irish Catholic political clan even more tragedy-wracked than the Bidens. In the 1983 speech that first made him a figure notable enough to be discussed as a potential presidential nominee, Biden said, “Just because our political heroes were murdered does not mean that the dream does not still live, buried deep in our broken hearts.” At a fundamental level, Biden’s promise is that he will heal a world rent by suffering and death. Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life Chris Lehmann Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life Chris Lehmann
Both Blaustein and O’Toole expressed skepticism about how far Biden’s identity as a Man of Constant Sorrow could carry him. Yet as it happens, events have made this identity much more politically potent than it might have seemed when Biden first launched his campaign. Current Issue View our current issue
Most of America, indeed most of the world, is in a state of grief. The Covid-19 pandemic has not only infected and killed countless thousands, but it has also left the non-infected in the shadow of death. In an added twist, the non-infected are often cruelly unable to comfort loved ones who are suffering or dying.
Even as the Covid-19 crisis continued, the global uprising against police racism erupted. Again, the consequence was a shared trauma: Thanks to the video of a police officer kneeling on the neck of George Floyd until he died, much of the world bore witness to an atrocity.
Amid all this pain, Biden has had a chance to shine at what he does best: offering words of comfort. In a May 30 blog post, Biden wrote:
I know that there are people all across this country who are suffering tonight. Suffering the loss of a loved one to intolerable circumstances, like the Floyd family, or to the virus that is still gripping our nation. Suffering economic hardships, whether due to COVID-19 or entrenched inequalities in our system. And I know that a grief that dark and deep may at times feel too heavy to bear. I know.
The repeated use of the phrase “I know” is an unobtrusive way for Biden to connect his personal grief with the trauma of the wider public. Biden is running to be a national grief counselor, someone with the empathy to understand pain and say the right words. As he says in the blog post, “As President, I will help lead this conversation—and more importantly, I will listen.”
The political value of emphasizing his own empathy is increased by the contrast it draws with the incumbent. In his own way, Trump is also a master of the politics of emotions. But Trump doesn’t empathize with the suffering of the nation as a whole, nor does he have an ability to use shared suffering as a basis for building relationships of fellow-feeling.
Rather, Trump transmutes the pain of his followers into rage. This ability to channel hurt and turn it into anger is the source of Trump’s political strength—but it also limits his ability to even mimic the language of unity and healing.
It’s hardly an accident that Biden has been surging in the polls. A recent CNN poll had him hitting a high-water mark of 55 percent as against Trump’s 41.
Biden’s mastery of the language of grief might play a crucial role in winning him the presidency. Yet the question remains whether he will then be able to govern. His identity as a stoic sufferer has given him the gift of reaching people who might be otherwise closed to him. It’s the basis of his reputation for being able to build bipartisan alliances and cross-ideological friendships.
But beyond offering comfort during a crisis, a president also has to provide political leadership in ways that go beyond displaying decency. The problems America faces will require a politician who is willing to make enemies as well as friends, who has the firmness to take on the entrenched interests that support police racism, a woefully unfair health care system, and a wildly unjust economy.
It’s unclear if Biden is up for the political battles that need to be fought. The emphasis he gives to healing and reconciliation, which might well win him the presidency, may also undercut his ability to use the presidency to push for change. As Fintan O’Toole notes, “Consolation is not social change. Solace is not enough.”


thenation--2020-06-12--Burning Down the 3rd Police Precinct Changed Everything

Calls to abolish the police are spreading .
Dozens of cities are considering cutting police budgets , and police are resigning across the country .
In Minneapolis , where the police murdered George Floyd and the insurrection first broke out , the city council is moving to disband the police department .
While this would only be a first step toward full abolition—which would require ending all forms of policing , evictions , imprisonment , courts , and racial capitalism—three weeks ago , that a major city would even consider this was unthinkable .
For many who ’ ve been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the sudden uptake of these ideas has been disorienting .
Gratifying , certainly , but also surprising and overwhelming .
Many respond with frustration , as the meaning of abolition is watered down , reduced to defunding or even less drastic reforms .
Black people in America have lived through a partial abolition before : The enslaved overthrew the regime of slavery in what W.E.B .
Du Bois called the General Strike of the Slaves , only for it to be reinstituted in all but name in convict leasing , sharecropping , Jim @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gangs , and prisons .
Abolition not accompanied by a social revolution will just be another in the long history of white supremacist “ reforms ” that allow this settler state to continue as it always has .
But even with these caveats , the question remains : How did this demand jump from a small , mostly black contingent of revolutionary thinkers to the mainstream in the span of a few weeks ?
The most obvious answer is two weeks of rioting , looting , and protesting .
That is correct , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not enough .
Rioting and looting against the police took place in Ferguson , Mo.
, and eventually across the country , following the murders of Michael Brown and Eric Garner in 2014 ; Baltimore rose up against the killing of Freddie Gray in 2015 ; and Charlotte , N.C. , saw looted and overturned semitrucks turned into burning highway barricades for Keith Lamont Scott in 2016 .
And yet the call that emerged out of that movement was for officers to wear body cameras .
The difference , this time , is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the riots , nor some other quantitative change in their ferocity or visibility .
It was , I believe , the destruction of the Minneapolis Third Precinct house on the night of May 28 , three days into the riots .
Having just completed a book on the history of anti-police rioting and uprisings in America , I can not recall another time when protesters took over and burnt down a police station .
It was an unprecedented and beautiful moment in the annals of rebellion in this country .
By seizing the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ millions of people that they could defeat the police .
For many , it finally broke through the veil of omnipotence , timelessness , and domination that kept abolition from seeming possible .
Police were returned to the realm of history .
The police are rarely imagined to have a history at all .
As Kristian Williams , a historian of the police , writes in Our Enemies in Blue , people “ seem to imagine that the cop has always been there , in something like his present capacity , subject only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the occasional technological advance.
” But what the rioters of Minneapolis demonstrated by torching the police base in their community is that cops are just people operating out of ordinary buildings .
Particularly powerful and cruel people , yes , but they ’ re individuals no more free from the forces of history than the rest of us .
The dehistoricization of the police is a long and constant project of the US state and media apparatus .
There are thousands , perhaps millions of hours of TV and movies full of mythologizing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ heroic police , conflicted police , troubled cops with a heart of gold , good cops taking on corrupt cops , slapstick cops , and genius cops .
The detective is the only profession in America that has its own wildly popular genre of novels .
And news media gives a constant and free platform to police ( often in exchange for special access ) .
And yet , none of this vast media project concerns the early history of the police .
Almost none of us learn in school about the emergence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and their role in the oppression and control of black communities .
We don ’ t learn about how they took techniques and inspiration from colonial forces in Caribbean slave colonies .
We definitely don ’ t hear that the first modern police force in the world , the Charleston South Carolina City Guard , was formed to terrorize and control the city ’ s slave quarters .
Antebellum Southern urban economies were built around the practice of enslavers “ hiring out ” laborers to other employers in town .
These enslaved workers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ most of which they would then turn over to their enslaver .
These laborers most often lived together , usually at a remove from both their employer and their enslaver , and their lives outside work unfolded mostly in black neighborhoods known as slave quarters .
These communities were spaces of relative autonomy for the enslaved , and as such were a cause of anxiety to white residents , who feared the possibility of black peoples ’ organization and rebellion .
These neighborhoods were frequently outside of white control .
They were places @ @ @ @ @ @ @ organize and trade ; where recent fugitives could hide out and Underground Railroad stations could form ; where African , Creole , and subversive Christian religious practices could flourish ; and where white people weren ’ t respected , deferred to , or welcomed .
Such communities threatened the slave order .
So Southern cities developed “ city guards , ” militarized forces of young white men whose large numbers and modern weaponry allowed them to patrol and control those quarters .
The earliest of these , in Charleston , S.C. , is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , formed in 1783 , though most other early police forces , like the NYPD , wouldn ’ t even emerge until the 1840s .
Nor do we learn that one of the main tasks of the earliest Northern police force , alongside repressing strikes and other labor unrest , was to enforce the Fugitive Slave Act .
Cops kidnapped and returned black people who escaped captivity and put down anti-slave-catcher riots and protests .
Another way standard history obscures the possibility of abolition is by erasing the role of the militant and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ freedmen in the Underground Railroad .
We don ’ t learn that prisons—places where people are held for years as punishment in and of itself , as opposed to jails or dungeons where people were held preceding trial or execution—only emerged in the 1820s .
And we don ’ t learn that because if we did , we might begin to imagine a world without them .
Wherever they appeared in the United States , police were the first urban bureaucracies .
Law enforcement provided most urban governmental services in the 19th century @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to city governments became clear and their burden grew larger and larger , did cities begin creating new departments to handle urban tasks like sanitation and transportation .
In other words , the model of bureaucratic urbanism that dominates and organizes our cities is made in the image of these anti-black police departments , in the image of slave catchers , white terrorists , and colonial officers .
It is this history that abolition seeks to break with , and why it would mean uprooting the entire anti-black system .
So how did @ @ @ @ @ @ @ serve to counter years of disinformation , miseducation , and media violence ?
Black Panther Party cofounder Huey P. Newton , in a speech called “ The Correct Handling of a Revolution , ” analyzed how rioting like what took place in Watts in 1965 was politically powerful because it could not be reinterpreted by the press .
In Watts , Newton said , “ the economy and property of the oppressor was destroyed to such an extent that no matter how the oppressor tried in his press to whitewash the activities of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and cause of the activity was communicated to every Black community.
” This kind of communication is what we saw in Minneapolis at the end of May .
Martin Luther King Jr. famously said that “ riots are the language of the unheard , ” but rioters do not address themselves to the state , the bosses , or the politicians .
Instead they speak to each other , over the heads of the media and the white establishment , with words of fire and punctuation of broken glass .
As I write @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but the movement is not slowing down .
The media , having demonized the rioters , has tried to go back to ignoring peaceful protest .
But the capture of another police precinct , this one the East Precinct in Seattle , has led to the creation of the Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone ( CHAZ ) , six blocks of rioter territory defended by barricades .
The CHAZ is such an impressive provocation that it caused Donald Trump to have one of his Twitter meltdowns , but it has also been intensely weakened @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and “ peace police , ” who refused to let the building be attacked .
Instead , it sat empty and unharmed inside the CHAZ , allowing for the police to reenter it on June 11 .
It is truly incredible that two precinct houses have fallen in the space of two weeks , and that fact has already dramatically shifted the calculus of what is possible .
But while the burning of the Third Precinct building in Minneapolis led to countrywide riots and the emergence of police abolition as a mainstream argument @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mean the movement in Seattle has much less significant long-term impact in the abolitionist imagination .
Nevertheless , events continue to unfold , and the example of creating a cop-free resistance zone is leading organizers and rioters around the country to think more boldly and openly about new tactics .
It is a real-time lesson in the wisdom of action , the power of crowds , and the diversity of tactics , strategies , and possibilities that we have when we fight together .
Most importantly , however , the seizing of two @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , against the police , against capitalism and the anti-black world it upholds .
May the blows continue to fall , until we stand side by side in a post-abolition world .

Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Get The Nation’s Weekly Newsletter Fridays. The best of the week. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here. Fridays. The best of the week.
Thank you for signing up for The Nation’s weekly newsletter.
Repro Nation A monthly newsletter on the global fight for reproductive freedom. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here.
Thank you for signing up. For more from The Nation, check out our latest issue
Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Support Progressive Journalism The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter. The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter.
Sign up for our Wine Club today. Did you know you can support The Nation by drinking wine?
Calls to abolish the police are spreading. Dozens of cities are considering cutting police budgets, and police are resigning across the country. In Minneapolis, where the police murdered George Floyd and the insurrection first broke out, the city council is moving to disband the police department. While this would only be a first step toward full abolition—which would require ending all forms of policing, evictions, imprisonment, courts, and racial capitalism—three weeks ago, that a major city would even consider this was unthinkable.
For many who’ve been fighting for police abolition for years, the sudden uptake of these ideas has been disorienting. Gratifying, certainly, but also surprising and overwhelming. Many respond with frustration, as the meaning of abolition is watered down, reduced to defunding or even less drastic reforms. Black people in America have lived through a partial abolition before: The enslaved overthrew the regime of slavery in what W.E.B. Du Bois called the General Strike of the Slaves, only for it to be reinstituted in all but name in convict leasing, sharecropping, Jim Crow, vigilante white terrorism, chain gangs, and prisons. Abolition not accompanied by a social revolution will just be another in the long history of white supremacist “reforms” that allow this settler state to continue as it always has.
But even with these caveats, the question remains: How did this demand jump from a small, mostly black contingent of revolutionary thinkers to the mainstream in the span of a few weeks? The most obvious answer is two weeks of rioting, looting, and protesting. That is correct, of course, but it’s not enough. Rioting and looting against the police took place in Ferguson, Mo., and eventually across the country, following the murders of Michael Brown and Eric Garner in 2014; Baltimore rose up against the killing of Freddie Gray in 2015; and Charlotte, N.C., saw looted and overturned semitrucks turned into burning highway barricades for Keith Lamont Scott in 2016. And yet the call that emerged out of that movement was for officers to wear body cameras.
The difference, this time, is not simply in the national character of the riots, nor some other quantitative change in their ferocity or visibility. It was, I believe, the destruction of the Minneapolis Third Precinct house on the night of May 28, three days into the riots. Having just completed a book on the history of anti-police rioting and uprisings in America, I cannot recall another time when protesters took over and burnt down a police station. It was an unprecedented and beautiful moment in the annals of rebellion in this country. By seizing the cops’ home base, rioters showed millions of people that they could defeat the police. For many, it finally broke through the veil of omnipotence, timelessness, and domination that kept abolition from seeming possible. Police were returned to the realm of history. Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life Chris Lehmann Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life Chris Lehmann
The police are rarely imagined to have a history at all. As Kristian Williams, a historian of the police, writes in Our Enemies in Blue, people “seem to imagine that the cop has always been there, in something like his present capacity, subject only to the periodic change of uniform or the occasional technological advance.” But what the rioters of Minneapolis demonstrated by torching the police base in their community is that cops are just people operating out of ordinary buildings. Particularly powerful and cruel people, yes, but they’re individuals no more free from the forces of history than the rest of us.
The dehistoricization of the police is a long and constant project of the US state and media apparatus. There are thousands, perhaps millions of hours of TV and movies full of mythologizing stories about the police. There are heroic police, conflicted police, troubled cops with a heart of gold, good cops taking on corrupt cops, slapstick cops, and genius cops. The detective is the only profession in America that has its own wildly popular genre of novels. And news media gives a constant and free platform to police (often in exchange for special access).
And yet, none of this vast media project concerns the early history of the police. Almost none of us learn in school about the emergence of the police in the 19th century and their role in the oppression and control of black communities. We don’t learn about how they took techniques and inspiration from colonial forces in Caribbean slave colonies. We definitely don’t hear that the first modern police force in the world, the Charleston South Carolina City Guard, was formed to terrorize and control the city’s slave quarters. Current Issue View our current issue
Antebellum Southern urban economies were built around the practice of enslavers “hiring out” laborers to other employers in town. These enslaved workers earned a wage from their bosses, most of which they would then turn over to their enslaver. These laborers most often lived together, usually at a remove from both their employer and their enslaver, and their lives outside work unfolded mostly in black neighborhoods known as slave quarters. These communities were spaces of relative autonomy for the enslaved, and as such were a cause of anxiety to white residents, who feared the possibility of black peoples’ organization and rebellion. These neighborhoods were frequently outside of white control. They were places where the enslaved and free alike could organize and trade; where recent fugitives could hide out and Underground Railroad stations could form; where African, Creole, and subversive Christian religious practices could flourish; and where white people weren’t respected, deferred to, or welcomed.
Such communities threatened the slave order. So Southern cities developed “city guards,” militarized forces of young white men whose large numbers and modern weaponry allowed them to patrol and control those quarters. The earliest of these, in Charleston, S.C., is history’s first modern police force, formed in 1783, though most other early police forces, like the NYPD, wouldn’t even emerge until the 1840s.
Nor do we learn that one of the main tasks of the earliest Northern police force, alongside repressing strikes and other labor unrest, was to enforce the Fugitive Slave Act. Cops kidnapped and returned black people who escaped captivity and put down anti-slave-catcher riots and protests. Another way standard history obscures the possibility of abolition is by erasing the role of the militant and often riotous urban vigilance committees of black freedmen in the Underground Railroad. We don’t learn that prisons—places where people are held for years as punishment in and of itself, as opposed to jails or dungeons where people were held preceding trial or execution—only emerged in the 1820s. And we don’t learn that because if we did, we might begin to imagine a world without them. Related Article In Defense of Destroying Property R.H. Lossin
Wherever they appeared in the United States, police were the first urban bureaucracies. Law enforcement provided most urban governmental services in the 19th century. Only slowly, as their utility to city governments became clear and their burden grew larger and larger, did cities begin creating new departments to handle urban tasks like sanitation and transportation. In other words, the model of bureaucratic urbanism that dominates and organizes our cities is made in the image of these anti-black police departments, in the image of slave catchers, white terrorists, and colonial officers. It is this history that abolition seeks to break with, and why it would mean uprooting the entire anti-black system.
So how did one moment of direct action in Minneapolis serve to counter years of disinformation, miseducation, and media violence? Black Panther Party cofounder Huey P. Newton, in a speech called “The Correct Handling of a Revolution,” analyzed how rioting like what took place in Watts in 1965 was politically powerful because it could not be reinterpreted by the press. In Watts, Newton said, “the economy and property of the oppressor was destroyed to such an extent that no matter how the oppressor tried in his press to whitewash the activities of the Black brothers, the real nature and cause of the activity was communicated to every Black community.” This kind of communication is what we saw in Minneapolis at the end of May. Martin Luther King Jr. famously said that “riots are the language of the unheard,” but rioters do not address themselves to the state, the bosses, or the politicians. Instead they speak to each other, over the heads of the media and the white establishment, with words of fire and punctuation of broken glass.
As I write this, the riots have receded, but the movement is not slowing down. The media, having demonized the rioters, has tried to go back to ignoring peaceful protest. But the capture of another police precinct, this one the East Precinct in Seattle, has led to the creation of the Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone (CHAZ), six blocks of rioter territory defended by barricades. The CHAZ is such an impressive provocation that it caused Donald Trump to have one of his Twitter meltdowns, but it has also been intensely weakened by nonviolence advocates, local politicians, and “peace police,” who refused to let the building be attacked. Instead, it sat empty and unharmed inside the CHAZ, allowing for the police to reenter it on June 11.
It is truly incredible that two precinct houses have fallen in the space of two weeks, and that fact has already dramatically shifted the calculus of what is possible. But while the burning of the Third Precinct building in Minneapolis led to countrywide riots and the emergence of police abolition as a mainstream argument, the hesitation in the CHAZ may mean the movement in Seattle has much less significant long-term impact in the abolitionist imagination. Nevertheless, events continue to unfold, and the example of creating a cop-free resistance zone is leading organizers and rioters around the country to think more boldly and openly about new tactics. It is a real-time lesson in the wisdom of action, the power of crowds, and the diversity of tactics, strategies, and possibilities that we have when we fight together.
Most importantly, however, the seizing of two police precincts is a blow against whiteness, against the police, against capitalism and the anti-black world it upholds. May the blows continue to fall, until we stand side by side in a post-abolition world.