2014
Does the Peaceful Streets Project Work With or Against Law Enforcement?
The Peaceful Streets Project works with and supports many victims of police abuse and violence, and many of the communities we are trying to empower are comprised of high numbers of victims of police abuse and violence. As such, the Peaceful Streets Project seeks to ensure a safe and secure environment for these victims by refusing to allow law enforcement agencies, officials or their representatives from participating in Peaceful Streets Project actions or events. Further, the Peaceful Streets Project will ensure the trust of the victims of police abuse by not working with or supporting any coalitions involving law enforcement agencies, officials or their representatives acting in their official capacity. While we acknowledge there may be some potential benefits to working with law enforcement on select initiatives, we are not willing to risk the safety or psychological security of those we are trying to serve.
Further, we made the strategic decision to focus on direct action tactics as opposed to political action for two primary reasons. First, we felt that we could best influence culture by working directly within communities, as opposed to trying to fix or reform the system (which could include working with law enforcement). Second, we felt that there were plenty of organizations that were already working with law enforcement to try to reduce the incidence of police abuse and criminality, and that replicating their efforts would be a poor use of resources.
The Peaceful Streets Projects attempts to avoid taking a position that is either for law enforcement or against law enforcement. We actively oppose police officers who abuse their authority and commit crimes against the public, and given the rate of such crimes we can easily spend all of our time working against those elements of law enforcement. At the same time, we will eagerly provide moral support for and rally behind those police officers who have the courage to stand up to the thin blue line (the fraternity of police officers) and hold police officers who commit crimes accountable for their actions.
I think the Peaceful Streets Project is heroic, and precisely the kind of thing that Philip Zimbardo has been promoting with his “heroic imagination project.” Zimbardo, as the literate may remember, was the psychologist who created the Stanford Prison Experiment, and popularized Stanley Milgram’s findings in “Obedience to Authority: An Experimental View.” If we don’t train ourselves to be more empathic, we will soon be the mere playthings of politically-organized sociopaths.
So let me comment on the above comments, specifically:
PSP wrote: “The Peaceful Streets Project works with and supports many victims of police abuse and violence, and many of the communities we are trying to empower are comprised of high numbers of victims of police abuse and violence.”
This amounts to a recognition of the truth: the drug war is racist, and police have become trained by their disrespect of property rights to abuse political minorities. Why? Because they are predators on people, and voting minorities cannot reliably defend themselves via the vote. This allows them to be targeted from a distance, as by police seeing their darker skin from behind a windshield.
“As such, the Peaceful Streets Project seeks to ensure a safe and secure environment for these victims by refusing to allow law enforcement agencies, officials or their representatives from participating in Peaceful Streets Project actions or events. Further, the Peaceful Streets Project will ensure the trust of the victims of police abuse by not working with or supporting any coalitions involving law enforcement agencies, officials or their representatives acting in their official capacity. While we acknowledge there may be some potential benefits to working with law enforcement on select initiatives, we are not willing to risk the safety or psychological security of those we are trying to serve.”
I think an exception should be made for heroic police like NH’s Bradley Jardis, in the very rare event that they aren’t summarily fired for standing up for what is right.
“Further, we made the strategic decision to focus on direct action tactics as opposed to political action for two primary reasons.”
I agree with your conclusion, but I think there are better reasons for arriving at that conclusion, which are difficult for most people to recognize.
“First, we felt that we could best influence culture by working directly within communities, as opposed to trying to fix or reform the system (which could include working with law enforcement).”
I strongly agree that this is the most effective pathway for you to take. Direct action (done right) actually immediately increases individual freedom, without postponing (til after an election, for instance) the freedom-expanding actions. It places no hope on future chance, especially small future chances.
“Second, we felt that there were plenty of organizations that were already working with law enforcement to try to reduce the incidence of police abuse and criminality, and that replicating their efforts would be a poor use of resources.”
Maybe. However, one might well be more critical of such organizations. Not a single one of them has had any effect on law enforcement, because they don’t criticize the foundational problems (the incentives) that create corrupt law enforcement.
I would offer a third reason for why direct action is optimal: both politicians and police officers are power-seeking individuals. This power-seeking has long been recognized as an indication of corruption, a “filter” that selects for corruption. In the absence of countermanding filters, the corrupt occupy positions of authority. Who determines who or what is “corrupt”? Well, for that, we look to another filter: the filter of sociopathy. Several psychological studies indicate that sociopaths comprise 2-4% of the population. There are only 535 seats in congress, and each state has only one governnor, and one attorney general. So, that’s 637 of the most powerful politicians in the nation, all of whom have the ability to reverse course on the destruction of the country. …But none of them do. They are all corrupt. They are all sociopaths who don’t mind the suffering of innocents that is caused by their unconstitutional policies.
“The Peaceful Streets Projects attempts to avoid taking a position that is either for law enforcement or against law enforcement. We actively oppose police officers who abuse their authority and commit crimes against the public, and given the rate of such crimes we can easily spend all of our time working against those elements of law enforcement. At the same time, we will eagerly provide moral support for and rally behind those police officers who have the courage to stand up to the thin blue line (the fraternity of police officers) and hold police officers who commit crimes accountable for their actions.”
This “direct action structure” seems to be the best possible structure for your organization. I am very glad that you exist. The Peaceful Streets Project is a collection of heroes.
A friend of mine in AK used to hand out cards to people offering to be a witness at their trials, since the police always claim to be infallible, and the judges encourage servility among the jury, because they’re stealing money for the same boss (which is “a legal conflict of interest,” BTW).